# Hatf-VIII Ra'ad II (ALCM) | Updates, News & Discussion



## WarFariX

Raad 2 makes debut on Pakistan day parade 2017 .
Air Launched Cruise missile
Status : Unknown
Range 550 km
Payload :Classified as of now













RAAD2



__ WarFariX
__ Mar 23, 2017

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
4 | Like Like:
27


----------



## WarFariX

@Oscar @Bratva han bhai   2 + rating 

@Horus @Sulman Badshah @Tipu7 @Windjammer @waz @Narendra Trump

A week after neighbours succesfully fired brahmos ER and having a pleasant time , PAK military lauches a psychological disease in the minds of indians of getting pissed off every time they do something good for themselves

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
32


----------



## MJaa

BrahMos range is 500 to 600 km only if it flies at 15000 m while that of Raad 2 is at very very low altitude

Pakistan Displays Hatf-VIII Ra'ad II 550 KM Air Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Basel

Gregor Clegane said:


> Pretty short range for a subsonic ALCM.
> 
> 
> 550 km is not enough to hit all strategic targets in India but 600 km BrahMos is enough to hit all strategic targets in a narrow & small country like Pakistan.



You forgot its ALCM while our LACM can go beyond 700km so don't worry we can reach all your key locations which need to be taken out in a war.

To hit beyond that with precision Pakistan can use Shaheen-1 BM with 900km range.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Basel

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> Raad 2 makes debut on Pakistan day parade 2017 .
> Air Launched Cruise missile
> Status : Unknown
> Range 550
> Payload :Classified as of now


 
Pakistan may soon declare that it can hit ships too. 



Gregor Clegane said:


> All our strategic locations are more than 1500-2000 km from Pakistan which is beyond the reach of any Pakistani cruise missiles.
> 
> Whereas almost all of Pakistan's strategic locations are within 400-500 km of our borders.



Please increase your knowledge about war, all strategic location are not hit until they pose serious threat and beyond 1200 km all your location are not strike worthy until MAD is in place.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## graphican

RAAD-II - Advanced Air Launched Cruise Missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## WarFariX

graphican said:


> RAAD-II - Air Launched Cruise Missile.
> 
> View attachment 385778
> 
> 
> View attachment 385779
> 
> 
> View attachment 385777
> 
> 
> View attachment 385781


haaaa thnx very much for the pics...i was expecting someone to post them


----------



## Basel

Gregor Clegane said:


> So you admit Pakistan doesn't have the ability to target many Indian strategic facilities.
> All our military production units of tanks, aircraft, missiles, nuclear facilities are located 1500-2000 km from Pakistan.



Pakistan don't need to, although it can hit those, because those are hit in longer conflicts not in short wars of 2 weeks or may be a month.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## maximuswarrior

Wow. Awesome. Waiting for more details to follow.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## graphican

Gregor Clegane said:


> Pretty short range for a subsonic ALCM.
> 550 km is not enough to hit all strategic targets in India but 600 km BrahMos is enough to hit all strategic targets in a narrow & small country like Pakistan.



550 KM is what cruise missile can fly on its own - but it is carried by an aircraft which can take it as far as needed. But once RAAD-II is launched, because if its very low flight, there is good chance that it stays hidden from your radars and defensive systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## graphican

Gregor Clegane said:


> Same is the case for BrahMos ALCM.



You miss the point mate. BrahMos is not invisible to radars as it flies fairly high from the ground. It is fast but visible. RAAD-I and RAAD-II as well as Babur-I, Babur-II and Babur-III on the other hand are terrain hugging missiles and stays invisible to radars.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## maximuswarrior

Awesome news concerning RAAD-2. What a pleasant surprise.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## abdulbarijan

For those who missed the parade ..

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## graphican

Gregor Clegane said:


> Brahmos skims at 5-10m from ground before hitting target.



They have to get low or they might miss the target because of their speed. Its not a stealth quality but a requirement to reduce the angle of attack and increase chance of hitting. During standard flight, it will be tracked by the radars.

Now there is a reason why all of American air-launched cruise missile are sub-sonic. Examples AGM-129, AGM-86 and AGM-158 JASSM. Americans know value of terrain hugging missiles and despite having ability to build super sonic missles, they made them sub-sonic low flying missiles, and so are Babur-I, Babur-II, Babur-III and RAAD-I and RAAD-II.

Pakistan also has super sonic anti-ship missiles namely CM-400 and C-802. India is only trying to build its first sub-sonic, terrain hugging missile called Nirbhay which India is failing to make over and over again, while Pakistan has 5 variations of this cruise missile and is now producing version-IIs. This shows you how advanced Pakistani missile technology is as compared to India. The only missile India operates (BrahMos) is also co-produced by Russia and India. India on its own is yet to build any cruise missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## WarFariX

Just made a comparison image RAAD 1 VS RAAD 2 ..cant figure out much @Bilal Khan (Quwa) ....

RAAD 2 seems a bit lenghtier however the warhead size looks similar indicating not much of an increment in payload

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> View attachment 385787
> 
> Just made a comparison image RAAD 1 VS RAAD 2 ..cant figure out much @Bilal Khan (Quwa) ....
> 
> RAAD 2 seems a bit lenghtier however the warhead size looks similar indicating not much of an increment in payload


Yes it looks like emphasis was placed on extending the range. With its main function to deliver a nuclear warhead, increasing room might not have been a priority. I do hope they work on making it compatible with precision-guided sub-munitions, would enable the Ra'ad/II to take on multiple targets in an area.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

In Pak's arsenal - old or young - nothing is useless!!! They're making 50 year-old mirages - with all hip/knee replacement and heart/lungs/kidney transplants surgeries, and Hollywood-class make-overs - fire these flying cobras!!!! With 550km ground hugging top-class piloting maneuvers, carrying miniaturized warheads and evading radars, over the deserts and plains directly into the enemy's hearts and lungs!!!!! What's left????? I see no options other than "Hanuman" and the "Last Afgan" (basically two sides of the same coin)!!!!!! Doval the Devil, a bad cop by training, knows all the thugs in the neighborhood and makes quite a use of them...

Reactions: Like Like:
26


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

Basel said:


> Pakistan don't need to, although it can hit those, because those are hit in longer conflicts not in short wars of 2 weeks or may be a month.


Can they move Delhi, Agra, Ahmedabad etc. >2K km away too???
By the by, they should have done it 1K years back....
Or, Ram should have settled in Lanka after defeating Ravana...

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## ziaulislam

Gregor Clegane said:


> Again failed.
> http://www.brahmos.com/content.php?id=10&sid=10
> 
> Pakistan has nothing in its inventory capable of intercepting BrahMos.
> 
> 
> Only reasons America does not use supersonic missiles is because of range restrictions.
> But as India's enemy Pakistan is right next door and is a small country a range of 600 km is sufficient.
> Also your HN-1B cannot be air launhed.



i think someone needs to educate you
as soon as you launch a supersonic missile you are stuck with a dilemma? range or stealth
you cant chose both, India choose range, so it will be visible like 500km away for every air defense system,
and it will be awaiting for it and could launch it counter at maximum range

e.g the LY 80 has a range of 70km but could easily launch when broughams is at 130-140 km and intercept it at 50 km, will even have chance to launch multiple missiles to intercept it

on the other hand a low altitude cruise missiles is difficult to detect earlier on by any ground system unless you have a good AWEC in air, how many does india have, i doubt india can even keep 1 running at all times(if you have 4 systems, only 1 at best could be operational all time, and may 2 at war time)

honestly instead of a costly bhramous i would prefer launching a dozen of glide bombs from fighter jet

RAAD is mostly a strategic N missle, part of N triad

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Muhammad Omar

550 KM Range   Ra'ad II

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Safriz

Mrc said:


> Brahmos is an anti ship missile blown out of proportion by indians...
> 
> Raad 2 can carry nukes... brahmos cant


Also Brahmos 450 Km version is as of yet only launched from Ground launchers.
Raad with 550 Km range is air launched and practically can be launched from anywhere the aircraft can reach.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## ziaulislam

Gregor Clegane said:


> *As Pakistan does not even have anything close to capable of intercepting BrahMos stealth is unimportant.*
> 
> Also in today's parade your Army admitted your LY-80 vs a range of only 40 km also LY-80 being a command guided missile will never be able to intercept supersonic LACM.


parade people are idiots every body knows that, range parameters are dependent upon multiple things
official quoted range is 70km

Spada has a range of 25-40km purchased a decade ago
LY 80 was suppose to medium to long range missle
"*As Pakistan does not even have anything close to capable of intercepting BrahMos stealth is unimportant."*
even after reading your statement 10 times i dont understand what you mean
we have four layered defense, LY 80, spada, fm90, even the radar guide AAG shown today can intercept super sonic targets

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## ziaulislam

to me range increase is useless, i just want to know what is going to replace the mirages for RAAD
i thought it would be redesigned smaller variant for thunder, instead they increased the size 
are they getting something bigger than?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Congrats

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## ziaulislam

Gregor Clegane said:


> Only reasons America does not use supersonic missiles is because of range restrictions.
> But as India's enemy Pakistan is right next door and is a small country a range of 600 km is sufficient.
> Also your HN-1B cannot be air launhed.


no country uses supersonic missiles because it is a detetcted as soon as it launched, much easier to detect due to its high altitude flight, missles need to fly low(but you cant fly fast low) so even if missles do you supersonic version they are usally just end stage, just like chinese systems
you need to educate yourself

only india uses it, and was conned by Russia to fund and buy it LOL

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## graphican

Gregor Clegane said:


> Good to see you admit Pakistan does not produce indigenous missiles.



You have serous comprehension problems my friend. I said its fair (from my point of view) if you refuse to see reality and reality is that Pakistan operates 5 missiles and all are made in Pakistan. Now you can say they are not and it wouldn't change anything for Pakistan. 

Follow the path of this ostrich. There is no danger when you refuse to see it.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## graphican

Gregor Clegane said:


> India's counter to Ra'ad (Torgos) is not brahmos but KH-59MK2 ALCM.
> Here's a nice pic of KH-59MK2 of IAF:



So you are hitting an air-launched cruise missile with another air-launched cruise missile?

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## abdulbarijan

Gregor Clegane said:


> Pakistan is yet to build its own indigenous cruise missile. Torgos & HN-1B are not Pakistani products Pakistan cannot even canisterize its ballistic missiles or even build a 10 km SAM



Forget the fact that most of the population of the subcontinent would be *taken out *in the event of a nuke war, those who survive will be exposed to the *fall out* ... and we might be looking at a *nuclear winter* along with a multitude of problems ranging from habitability to most likely famine ...

_*but forget all that irrelevant stuff ...atleast in the midst of such catastrophe ... Indian friends will have the peace of mind and heart in knowing .... that your rear end is being torched by an "imported missile" ... right ? *_

Reactions: Like Like:
17


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

AUz said:


> No test, no official confirmation, no stats on payload etc.
> 
> I'd wait before celebrating. Decreasing the payload would increase range as well. So lets not jump our guns


It was officially confirmed at the parade. It said Ra'ad II and the PTV announcer said the range was 550 km.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sine Nomine

Gregor Clegane said:


> Babur cannot even be used in mountainous terrain whereas BrahMos can be.


The Babur's guidance system uses a combination of inertial navigation systems(INS), terrain contour matching (TERCOM)and GPS satellite guidance. The guidance system reportedly gives the missile pinpoint accuracy. GPS access is not guaranteed under hostile conditions so the latest production models have also reportedly incorporated the Russian GLONASS. Future software and hardware updates could include the European Union's GALILEO and China'sBeidou navigation system. An upgraded variant tested on the 14 December 2016 included upgraded avionics where now the missile is able to accurately hit land and sea based targets without the aid of GPS. Also the missile is able to hit targets more accurately

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SHAH820

Gregor Clegane said:


> As Pakistan does not even have anything close to capable of intercepting BrahMos stealth is unimportant.
> 
> Also in today's parade your Army admitted your LY-80 vs a range of only 40 km also LY-80 being a command guided missile will never be able to intercept supersonic LACM.
> 
> 
> Good to see you admit Pakistan does not produce indigenous missiles.


lol please watch the parade brahmos can be intercept easily with any air to air defence cause it can only fly straight and it path can easily be predicted but how?
using AEWACS and radars which are use to locate artillery (counter battery radars)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ziaulislam

Gregor Clegane said:


> BrahMos can only be intercepted by some active homing SAMs like Barak 8 & SM6 But Pakistan does not have a single active homing SAM.


wow, man you need to at least read on basics of SAMs
get some amateurish knowledge before commenting
please read on patriot and thaad systems
no point in talking to a person who even lack the most basic knowledge

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SHAH820

Gregor Clegane said:


> Torgos is an ALCM:
> https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/south-africans-put-torgos-on-display-58572
> Also the tomahawk which crashed in Pakistan was totally destroyed:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


so what is this 




(see the shadow on the ground and babur first test was completely done in a mountainous area and its shows how it was able to adjust its altitude and path )

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## AUz

Interesting tid bid btw

A Pakistani aircraft flying over Lahore or in the deserts surrounding Bahawalpur could launch a nuclear strike on Delhi via Ra'ad II  

Very solid stand off capability for Pakistan Air Force.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## graphican

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> D-bag, PK CMs are terrain hugging,smart weapons not supersonic dumb missiles.
> 
> RAAD I test, flying a feets over land.
> 
> View attachment 385852



I never liked this video because from the video, you can measure height of trees (shrubs) and then height of missile from the shadow. But looks like it is about 30-50 meters which is mind boggling.

I read few stories about 1965 war and how pilots used to fly to "tree heights" to avoid detection. I do now know if they were flying at his height or is this height even lower. But Pakistani engineers have done one freaking job and they deserve standing aviation and all the gratitude we have at heart for doing this marvellous job. May Allah grant them honour in two worlds.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Gregor Clegane said:


> Just search Torgos & HN-1B kid.



Torgos, short ranged and never produced:







HN-1







RAAD 1 ALCM

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Nefarious

I wonder what else is cooking, these surprises keep coming.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SHAH820

Gregor Clegane said:


> Rofl.
> Another fail a$$hat.
> Ihs Jane's air launched weapons confirmed that Raad is actually Torgos.


man 




RA'AD





now tell me what are similarites hmmmmmmmm non

second raad is only few of it kind (only USA and PAKISTAN have this tech) and you are claiming thats SAF have it man show me video thats torgos is flying as low as raad

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Gregor Clegane said:


> A$$hat we do:
> http://m.timesofindia.com/india/Tes...-mountains-a-success/articleshow/47218846.cms


Where does it say it was tested in KKH???? east india is jungle.
Specially Andaman islands where it was tested from.




> Raad is torgos:
> http://thediplomat.com/2015/02/pakistan-tests-new-air-launched-cruise-missile/
> 
> 
> Irbms are useless in conventional roles


Proposed 300 km ranged Torgos- never produced:






Tactical ranged MUPSOW:





On which H series SOWs (130+ km ) were based:






RAAD 1 ALCM

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Gregor Clegane said:


> Rofl.
> Eastern sector is arunachal Pradesh i.e. south tibet:
> http://www.ibtimes.co.in/china-concerned-over-indias-brahmos-missile-near-arunachal-pradesh-border-691690



Deployment of a ground launched russian yakhont on border is different than testing in KK&H.. 


8th may 2015:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/brahmos-test-fired-from-the-andaman-islands-hits-bulls-eye.374088/


> As Saaf never needed Torgos PAF did the rest of the funding to Denel to develop Torgos.



So PAF funded Denel who still didnt produce it and than PAF got several other variants magically?

How does Torgos resemble RAAD though? 

Raad different structure,moveable inbody fins,etc, longer range, a warhead twice heavier than a missile that never even left the drawing board etc



pakistanipower said:


> you'r better than US and Russsia i Admit that


Has now resorted to posted from indian papers and forums.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Gregor Clegane said:


> Different test.


Read the post. Its about possible indian deployment of yakhont on chinese border.




> It resembles Torgos on every way it uses the same turbofan


Which way though? enlighten us. 









RAAD :

Much heavier conventional and nuclear warhead.
Different structure, fins,exaust etc that pop out during flight.
Long ranged.
Different lenght,mass,dia etc.

Torgos :

Never tested.
No production.
Denel never produced any ALCM.
Small conventional warhead/proposed.
Fixed fins,wings etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Daghalodi

Congratulations Pakistan on raad 2!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kompromat

Indians ridiculed as usual when i posted a hint that we are building a medicine for their air defense systems. Mate this with an Anti-Radiation warhead and youve forced the Indians to pull back their defenses, therefore reducing their capabilities.

Reactions: Like Like:
18


----------



## SHAH820

Gregor Clegane said:


> Raad has no similarity with Babur.
> Nowhere does your link say HN-1B is not terrain hugging.
> 
> 
> Anti radiation warheads do not work on cruise missiles.


wait man my link has nothing to do with military
lol you have send an link about hn-1b and as far as i know no one mention what a missile cant do in its introduction but if you check wiki its clearly stated that babur is an terrain hugging cruise missile which is similar to tomahawk


*Features[edit]*
The missile have a high degree of maneuverability, allowing it to "hug" the terrain, and "near-stealth" capabilities.[13] Terrain hugging ability helps the missile avoid enemy radar detection by utilizing "terrain masking", giving Babur the capability to penetrate enemy air defence systems undetected and survive until reaching the target.[2]

More advanced versions of the Babur are under development. Later versions are planned to have a range of 1000 km[5][14] and be capable of being launched from Pakistan Navy submarines such as the Agosta 90B _Khalid_ class.[3][15]

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Gift for 23rd March is Raad-II.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dazzler

Gregor Clegane said:


> Actually sensible Pakistanis will agree with me that Pakistan's doesn't have an indigenous cruise missile



Man, you know zilch about Pakistani missile program so better not comment on things you have no clue about. 
and you Calle Raad torgos , did you know that it entered service before torgos? 

Oh I know, the pain is too much to bear.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## graphican

SHAH820 said:


> More advanced versions of the Babur are under development. Later versions are planned to have a range of 1000 km[5][14] and be capable of being launched from Pakistan Navy submarines such as the Agosta 90B _Khalid_ class.[3][15]



The part in red is a gem. If Babur-III can strike 1000KM deep, entire Indian land is under its range, even the deepest regions which India thought were too deep for Pakistani missiles to reach. 

For some reason, I am inclined to think that recent "un-named" coastal land based anti-ship missile has a similar 1000KM range. Why would you not want to target enemy ships at least that deep? I don't know as fact, but if this is true, boy o boy, Indians will cry through every possible pore in their body. Their imagined Mastic Navy would be a gold mine of "free metal" for future sea scrap collectors.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SHAH820

During its March 23 Pakistan Day Parade, the Pakistan Strategic Plans Division (SPD) officially revealed the Ra’ad 2 (“Thunder 2”) air-launched cruise missile (ALCM).

Described as an improved and extended-range of the 350 km Ra’ad ALCM, which was introduced by Air Weapons Complex (AWC) and the National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM) in 2007, the Ra’ad 2 has a stated range of 550 km.

*Notes & Comments:*

With its low-detectable design and terrain-hugging capability, the sub-sonic Ra’ad ALCM series is regarded as a key piece of the Pakistani military’s deterrence strategy, specifically its second-strike ability. The Ra’ad and Babur land-attack cruise missiles (LACM) are capable of delivering miniature nuclear warheads.

External differences between the Ra’ad and Ra’ad 2 appear to be minimal, suggesting that an emphasis was made on extending the range more so than increasing payload (albeit an increase in the latter cannot be ruled out).

Although Pakistan did not yet announce tests for the Ra’ad 2, it used the end of 2016 and beginning of 2017 to announce the tests of the Babur-2 LACM and Babur-3 submarine-launched cruise missile (SLCM) respectively. These were joined by the test of the Ababeel multiple independent re-entry vehicle (MIRV)-capable medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM).

The Ra’ad ALCM-series is deployed from the Pakistan Air Force’s (PAF) Mirage III/5 aircraft.

While it aimed for strategic purposes, the Ra’ad could have the potential to serve in a conventional role. Like other conventional munitions, it can carry a conventional high-explosive warhead, which could prove useful for reinforced targets.

In the long-term, there are other ALCM-related possibilities. For example, precision-guided sub-munitions such as the BLU-105 enable the AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) to engage multiple targets in an area, such as armoured formations, air fields, air defence sites, and dockyards, among others. An analogous solution could be a next-step for the Ra’ad.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

Gregor Clegane said:


> Actually sensible Pakistanis will agree with me that Pakistan's doesn't have an indigenous cruise missile



So if it's not indigenous what is it's origin?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Eagle

Surprise as usual. The calmness in few quarters wasn't meaningless but there are always tricks yet to be played but when needed. What a day to remember.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bratva

@Quwa @The Deterrent @MarvellousThunder@PDC Length of RA'AD II seems to have been increased. I don't think Mirage or any aircraft can carry this large missile under its belly and hence the reason it was unveiled in parade instead of launching it via Mirage. 

Considering America extended the range of JASSM from 370 KM to 1000 KM with just an efficient engine and efficient fuel with large volume. Original JASSM is 4.27 meters and ER would be around 4.5, 4.6 meters. 

Which means Ra'ad engine efficiency is extremely bad and also the fuel quality. If they improve both plus use composites, Ra'ad could be carried on wing pylons like JASSM on F-16

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mangus Ortus Novem

Just brilliant!!!!

And the Great Reveal also happens to be on Pak National Day. 

Whats going on Pak Friends....your strategic Full Spectrum Deterence is growing like there is no tomorrow.


*No one can accuse SPD of Pak of not having a sense of humour! 
Pak trolling indiaa at every turn. Wicked!!!*


By the look of things Pak is on the rollllllll

Or is it that you, Pak Friends, like smashing indiaanz illusions...shattering their dreams of Asian empire. 

Whichever way, I am just happy that there is one more nail in the coffin of born-dead, cold start.

Keeping killing indiaanz war dreams!

*A very happy Pak National Day to all Pak Friends!!!!*

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## The Deterrent

Bratva said:


> @Quwa @The Deterrent @MarvellousThunder@PDC Length of RA'AD II seems to have been increased. I don't think Mirage or any aircraft can carry this large missile under its belly and hence the reason it was unveiled in parade instead of launching it via Mirage.
> 
> Considering America extended the range of JASSM from 370 KM to 1000 KM with just an efficient engine and efficient fuel with large volume. Original JASSM is 4.27 meters and ER would be around 4.5, 4.6 meters.
> 
> Which means Ra'ad engine efficiency is extremely bad and also the fuel quality. If they improve both plus use composites, Ra'ad could be carried on wing pylons like JASSM on F-16


Um if it wasn't possible for it to be delivered by any aircraft, then why develop the _Air_-launched cruise missile? You are exaggerating a bit, I'm sure there will be no problem in its integration with both Mirage & JF-17.

Pakistan doesn't have the resources or the advanced R&D comparable to the US, so don't expect anything extraordinary. 

Either the PAF was too hasty to show off its new toy being developed or it was paraded as a statement, a reply to India extending the range of BrahMos; both of which are stupid reasons IMO.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bratva

The Deterrent said:


> Um if it wasn't possible for it to be delivered by any aircraft, then why develop the _Air_-launched cruise missile? You are exaggerating a bit, I'm sure there will be no problem in its integration with both Mirage & JF-17.
> 
> Pakistan doesn't have the resources or the advanced R&D comparable to the US, so don't expect anything extraordinary.
> 
> Either the PAF was too hasty to show off its new toy being developed or it was paraded as a statement, a reply to India extending the range of BrahMos; both of which are stupid reasons IMO.



Let me exaggerate a bit more, for P-3 perhaps ? because we have been hearing Ra'ad can strike targets on ground and at sea both

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Akasa

If the missile's length could be kept below 5-5.5 meters, the Ra'ad II could be a potent addition to the FC-31 fighter. Two could be carried in the internal weapons bay.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

I think when the SPADA missile came in after Chinese SAM , I thought it was a new purchase , had to watch it again to hear the announcer mention it was the SPADA missile being displayed

The 3 Barrel Babur Cruse Missile looked fantastic as well







The commentator also mentioned the Shaheen "Alpha" new model was on display so that was something new according to commentator

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Dazzler

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> I think when the SPADA missile came in after Chinese SAM , I thought it was a new purchase , had to watch it again to hear the announcer mention it was the SPADA missile being displayed
> 
> The 3 Barrel Babur Cruse Missile looked fantastic as well



yep.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Would have been nice to see

1- Twin Seat Thunder on Display
2- New APC , Hamza 10 Units
3 - Mi-35 Choppers

The Chinese delegate was fantastic , and the Turkish Band stole the show for me to see a part of history happen a band formed in 12th century perform in Pakistan

But lot of new goodies in the show 

1- Raad v2 
2- Babur Cruise Missile delivery system (3 barrel) 
3- Shaheen "Alpha"

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue Marlin

its just a lengthened ra'ad? can the mirage even carry it?


----------



## Mrc

Blue Marlin said:


> its just a lengthened ra'ad? can the mirage even carry it?




I think its meant for jf


----------



## The Deterrent

Bratva said:


> Let me exaggerate a bit more, for P-3 perhaps ? because we have been hearing Ra'ad  can strike targets on ground and at sea both


Nope, Ra'ad is for the fighters alone.
Its too early to say that it _can_. But its in the works.


AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> But lot of new goodies in the show
> 
> 1- Raad v2
> 2- Babur Cruise Missile delivery system (3 barrel)
> 3- Shaheen "Alpha"



2. Babur's same Multi-tube TEL has been paraded for the past two years, this time the tubes were elevated with missile mock-ups protruding.
3. Shaheen-IA has also been paraded last year (a badly made mockup though)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## graphican

Blue Marlin said:


> its just a lengthened ra'ad? can the mirage even carry it?



Currently Mirage is the only jet which is carrying Ra'ad missiles. It has to be able to carry it or Pakistan would have no use of this missile.


----------



## The Deterrent

Blue Marlin said:


> its just a lengthened ra'ad? can the mirage even carry it?


Its not '_just_' a lengthened Ra'ad. The length extension alone does not contributes to 200km range extension.
Similar process has been already applied to Babur-I (500km) to get Babur-II (700km), which still has the same length.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## graphican

The Deterrent said:


> Nope, Ra'ad is for the fighters alone.
> Its too early to say that it _can_. But its in the works.
> 
> 
> 2. Babur's same Multi-tube TEL has been paraded for the past two years, this time the tubes were elevated with missile mock-ups protruding.
> 3. Shaheen-IA has also been paraded last year (a badly made mockup though)



Its actually better to shwocase disproportionate mock-ups. Your enemy would not be able to know their actual specs (width/height/radius) etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Basel

The Deterrent said:


> Nope, Ra'ad is for the fighters alone.
> Its too early to say that it _can_. But its in the works.
> 
> But Raa'd can be mounted on C-130 & P-3's wing pylon if need arise.
> 
> 2. Babur's same Multi-tube TEL has been paraded for the past two years, this time the tubes were elevated with missile mock-ups protruding.
> 3. Shaheen-IA has also been paraded last year (a badly made mockup though)



But Ra'ad can be mounted on wing pylons of C-130s or P-3s if need arise.


----------



## The Deterrent

graphican said:


> Its actually better to shwocase disproportionate mock-ups. Your enemy would not be able to know their actual specs (width/height/radius) etc.


Not sure what the enemy would gain by knowing those specs, when high-res photos of launched systems are already available.



Basel said:


> But Ra'ad can be mounted on wing pylons of C-130s or P-3s if need arise.


1. That need won't arise anytime soon because Ra'ad is primarily a strategic system, it will take a lot of time before we can see it deployed in conventional roles.
2. That need _can't _arise, because of the integration restrictions with P-3C and C-130.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mrc

graphican said:


> Its actually better to shwocase disproportionate mock-ups. Your enemy would not be able to know their actual specs (width/height/radius) etc.




Chinese stopped.parading actual missiles when they realized (probably through hacking cia) that americans were trying to calculate missile weight by distortion of tyres of carrying vehicles...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Basel

The Deterrent said:


> Not sure what the enemy would gain by knowing those specs, when high-res photos of launched systems are already available.
> 
> 
> 1. That need won't arise anytime soon because Ra'ad is primarily a strategic system, it will take a lot of time before we can see it deployed in conventional roles.
> 2. That need _can't _arise, because of the integration restrictions with P-3C and C-130.



Then Y-9 / C235 may also be able to carry it and no issue of integration and I m talking about worst case TNW use against IN CBG in blue waters.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## graphican

Mrc said:


> Chinese stopped.parading actual missiles when they realized (probably through hacking cia) that americans were trying to calculate missile weight by distortion of tyres of carrying vehicles...



Missile can be re-produced to know their dimensions and radar signatures from the distance. Pakistan should not let go any part of their potential to prying eyes.

Some time ago Pakistan has released images taken from Burraq and soon after it hit terrorist using Burq Missile - and those images still had height of the UAV listed on the screen. Was that the maximum height, we don't know but why should there be any leak of any information which can help your enemy detect/track or expect our UAVs flying at those altitudes?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Deterrent

Vengeful One said:


> Then what is Pakistan's standoff weapons for conventional roles?


H-2/4 (licensed Denel Raptor-I/II) SOWs and Glide bombs.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## graphican

The Deterrent said:


> H-2/4 (licensed Denel Raptor-I/II) SOWs and Glide bombs.



Even those should be tipped with a "little boy".  But now Pakistan has glide bomb kits (Takbir) which make almost every dumb bomb a glide and stand-off weapon.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mrc

Iranian have given a very valid concept recently by placing an anti radiation seeker in hormuz 2 ballistic missile...

Most of modern missiles are based on very powerfull radars... that is some thing pak shud explore for both for cm and bms...especially in green pine s 400 scenarios

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ziaulislam

I expect that raad 2 will be carried by mirage 5. I only thought they will end uo redesigning or decresdibg the size, which they didnt.
So now i am confused what is going to be next fighter to carry this? Jf-17 but the size increase is confusing? or some new fighter, not the f16 obviously


----------



## Salza

If you have it than why not flaunt it. Seems like we are quite confident about the new version and it's specs that we paraded it even with out any test or perhaps the test is imminent in nearby future. A test will confirm whether mirage can carry it or not else no point having such version. Though unlikely, if missile is dedicated for bigger plane like j31 than what's the point of showing it now unless we know our existing plane can fire it.


----------



## IceCold

The Deterrent said:


> Nope, Ra'ad is for the fighters alone.


I have a question. Since Raad II is apparently an upgrade over the existing platform, so why is the design not changed in terms of its size considering JF-17 does not have the same ground clearance as that of Mirage? After all all mirages will eventually be replaced by JF-17 hence it only makes sense if modern weapons are made keeping JF-17 in mind.


----------



## Blue Marlin

The Deterrent said:


> Its not '_just_' a lengthened Ra'ad. The length extension alone does not contributes to 200km range extension.
> Similar process has been already applied to Babur-I (500km) to get Babur-II (700km), which still has the same length.


well its would be difficult to understand why they did it if they can add 200km to the babur with out lengthening it.
but at 5.25 meters length (estimated) its near the length of the kepd350 and the storm shadow which are 5+ meters


----------



## JamD

The Deterrent said:


> Its not '_just_' a lengthened Ra'ad. The length extension alone does not contributes to 200km range extension.
> Similar process has been already applied to Babur-I (500km) to get Babur-II (700km), which still has the same length.


To add to your excellent point that most people are missing out on:
A crucial system on any cruise missile is the inertial navigation system. The range may not just be limited by fuel quantity, fuel type, or engine fuel consumption, but also by the acceptable drift in INS (in a gps jammed environment) over the "maximum range". This increase in range of babur and raad could be a reflection of an improvement of sensors and filtering (among other things).

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## The Deterrent

I'm not aware of any limitations w.r.t. dimensions Ra'ad has regarding its integration with JF-17. AFAIK Ra'ad-I was in process of being integrated with JF-17.


IceCold said:


> I have a question. Since Raad II is apparently an upgrade over the existing platform, so why is the design not changed in terms of its size considering JF-17 does not have the same ground clearance as that of Mirage? After all all mirages will eventually be replaced by JF-17 hence it only makes sense if modern weapons are made keeping JF-17 in mind.


Exactly, why would AWC design a weapon that wouldn't be compatible with the PAF 10-15 years down the line? I'm not sure where you guys are getting the idea that Ra'ad is too big to be integrated with JF-17. I believe you guys are missing something out, but then again I'm not very well informed on JF-17's central hard-point limitations.


Blue Marlin said:


> well its would be difficult to understand why they did it if they can add 200km to the babur with out lengthening it.
> but at 5.25 meters length (estimated) its near the length of the kepd350 and the storm shadow which are 5+ meters


Babur has a lot more volume than Ra'ad, which allows for stuff to be 'adjusted' hence increase range without changing the power-plant. That said, both CMs have inefficient turbojets so unfortunately the range is not going to be extended anymore unless some major upgrades are made.


Mrc said:


> U guys do realise it was a mock up displayed??


There's that too, actual Ra'ad-II might not be a lengthened version at all and might have the same form factor and dimensions.


JamD said:


> To add to your excellent point that most people are missing out on:
> A crucial system on any cruise missile is the inertial navigation system. The range may not just be limited by fuel quantity, fuel type, or engine fuel consumption, but also by the acceptable drift in INS (in a gps jammed environment) over the "maximum range". This increase in range of babur and raad could be a reflection of an improvement of sensors and filtering (among other things).


Um no thats not the case. Pakistan is advanced enough in the INS domain now to ensure strategic precision in a GPS-denied environment, and surgical precision with integrated GNSS corrections.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Mrc

The Deterrent said:


> There's that too, actual Ra'ad-II might not be a lengthened version at all and might have the same form factor and dimensions.




Actually whole idea of displaying a mock up wud b not to have a faithful representation of design and size... otherwise why to bother at all

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue Marlin

The Deterrent said:


> Babur has a lot more volume than Ra'ad, which allows for stuff to be 'adjusted' hence increase range without changing the power-plant. That said, both CMs have inefficient turbojets so unfortunately the range is not going to be extended anymore unless some major upgrades are made.
> 
> .


why not procure engines on the black market, iran did and they ended up with the noor/c802 
theres the
ms400
36-mt (same engine on the nirbhay)
tri-60 
and the various chinese options too and belarus too?
or more realistically what about turkey???

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Deterrent

Mrc said:


> Actually whole idea of displaying a mock up wud b not to have a faithful representation of design and size... otherwise why to bother at all


I suggest that we wait for a test flight which should be soon. And of course hope that ISPR releases high-res images.


Blue Marlin said:


> why not procure engines on the black market, iran did and they ended up with the noor/c802
> theres the
> ms400
> 36-mt (same engine on the nirbhay)
> tri-60
> and the various chinese options too and belarus too?
> or more realistically what about turkey???


Why go to all that trouble when you can easily do _shaapiing _at the _Chayna Markeeet_. 
I didn't say it can't be done, it just may take a while. And of course only if Pakistan believes that strike capability of up to 1500 km is an absolute necessity. The capability Pakistan has right now (550 stand-off, 700 surface-launched) isn't _that_ bad. Of course something needs to be done about the SLCM (450 land-attack).

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Blue Marlin

The Deterrent said:


> I suggest that we wait for a test flight which should be soon. And of course hope that ISPR releases high-res images.
> 
> Why go to all that trouble when you can easily visit the _Chayna Markeeet_.
> I didn't say it can't be done, it just may take a while. And of course only if Pakistan believes that strike capability of up to 1500 km is an absolute necessity. The capability Pakistan has right now (550 stand-off, 700 surface-launched) isn't _that_ bad. Of course something needs to be done about the SLCM (450 land-attack).


if you think something needs to be done to the slcm then why do they think differently?

i personally dont get it, india is a massive country and can be safe from pakistani attack by keeping important assets 1000km away from the border.

as for raad it could have been near to the agm-159 due to its size and weight but it is more even bigger than its european counterpart.


----------



## IceCold

The Deterrent said:


> I'm not aware of any limitations w.r.t. dimensions Ra'ad has regarding its integration with JF-17. AFAIK Ra'ad-I was in process of being integrated with JF-17.
> 
> Exactly, why would AWC design a weapon that wouldn't be compatible with the PAF 10-15 years down the line? I'm not sure where you guys are getting the idea that Ra'ad is too big to be integrated with JF-17. I believe you guys are missing something out, but then again I'm not very well informed on JF-17's central hard-point limitations.



Ok the first time RAAD was fired from Mirage, there was a debate of the integration of RAAD on JF-17 on the JF-17 thread, a comparison made of Mirage and JF-17 by a member using some tools i dont remember showed that RAAD was rather too wide to be accommodated underneath the JF-17 which means either the landing gear would had to be redesigned or perhaps redesign the entire missile. If not than the wing structure had to be strengthen so that RAAD can be accommodated on one of the hard points. Now i might have mixed a few things up because it was really an old debate so the details are a bit sketchy but overall its what i stated. I hope you understand. 



> That said, both CMs have inefficient turbojets so unfortunately the range is not going to be extended anymore unless some major upgrades are made.


How far are Chinese turbojet engines and cant we utilise that expertise to make our engines a bit more efficient?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

Blue Marlin said:


> if you think something needs to be done to the slcm then why do they think differently?


They don't think differently, its just their first try at an indigenous SLCM. Bear in mind that Agosta-90Bs are the current choice of platform, that will change soon and the range will accordingly catch up.


Blue Marlin said:


> i personally dont get it, india is a massive country and can be safe from pakistani attack by keeping important assets 1000km away from the border.


Not really, majority of Indian military assets are in strike range of Pakistan's cruise missiles. Only the strategic nuclear missiles will be out of range of Pakistan's cruise missiles, which doesn't matters anyway.


IceCold said:


> Ok the first time RAAD was fired from Mirage, there was a debate of the integration of RAAD on JF-17 on the JF-17 thread, a comparison made of Mirage and JF-17 by a member using some tools i dont remember showed that RAAD was rather too wide to be accommodated underneath the JF-17 which means either the landing gear would had to be redesigned or perhaps redesign the entire missile. If not than the wing structure had to be strengthen so that RAAD can be accommodated on one of the hard points. Now i might have mixed a few things up because it was really an old debate so the details are a bit sketchy but overall its what i stated. I hope you understand.


I see, well I suppose that some assumptions must have been made in that analysis.


IceCold said:


> How far are Chinese turbojet engines and cant we utilise that expertise to make our engines a bit more efficient?


The Chinese use turbofans, and the transfer of that expertise might make Uncle Sam very upset so...for now Pakistan is stuck with whatever it can get its hands on. But hey, its been working out so far so I wouldn't be much concerned. _Jugaad _is our national thing, runs in the blood.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

Don't know about others, but in my office RAAD-II has provided a hit!!! Indian folks are talking about it in groups in the cafeteria!!! Little they know that I am a _PDF JASUS_!!!?!!??



The Deterrent said:


> They don't think differently, its just their first try at an indigenous SLCM. Bear in mind that Agosta-90Bs are the current choice of platform, that will change soon and the range will accordingly catch up.
> 
> Not really, majority of Indian military assets are in strike range of Pakistan's cruise missiles. Only the strategic nuclear missiles will be out of range of Pakistan's cruise missiles, which doesn't matters anyway.
> 
> I see, well I suppose that some assumptions must have been made in that analysis.
> 
> The Chinese use turbofans, and the transfer of that expertise might make Uncle Sam very upset so...for now Pakistan is stuck with whatever it can get its hands on. But hey, its been working out so far so I wouldn't be much concerned. _Jugaad _is our national thing, runs in the blood.


I think the latest visit of Pak chief brought out the news that they want to mass produce these staffs like _bunnies _(not the one in Beverly Hills though!!)....

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
14


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

Vengeful One said:


> That's about a truthful as you claiming to be a Turk.


Why? A Turkish folk doesn't understand English?????



ziaulislam said:


> to me range increase is useless, i just want to know what is going to replace the mirages for RAAD
> i thought it would be redesigned smaller variant for thunder, instead they increased the size
> are they getting something bigger than?


Bull's eye!!!!



The Deterrent said:


> I'm not aware of any limitations w.r.t. dimensions Ra'ad has regarding its integration with JF-17. AFAIK Ra'ad-I was in process of being integrated with JF-17.
> 
> Exactly, why would AWC design a weapon that wouldn't be compatible with the PAF 10-15 years down the line? I'm not sure where you guys are getting the idea that Ra'ad is too big to be integrated with JF-17. I believe you guys are missing something out, but then again I'm not very well informed on JF-17's central hard-point limitations.
> 
> Babur has a lot more volume than Ra'ad, which allows for stuff to be 'adjusted' hence increase range without changing the power-plant. That said, both CMs have inefficient turbojets so unfortunately the range is not going to be extended anymore unless some major upgrades are made.
> 
> There's that too, actual Ra'ad-II might not be a lengthened version at all and might have the same form factor and dimensions.
> 
> Um no thats not the case. Pakistan is advanced enough in the INS domain now to ensure strategic precision in a GPS-denied environment, and surgical precision with integrated GNSS corrections.


You can always have GIS (Geographic info system - 3D) loaded into the guys!!! After all, it's not Saturn - it's the next door neighbor where even the defense minister and chiefs complain about being bugged while in the most secure ops rooms!!!!



Mrc said:


> U guys do realise it was a mock up displayed??


Curiosity kills the cat!!! What else do you folks have in store!!! The other day they deployed some fire-detection radars at LOC, and you marched past one only after a couple of days!!! They toyed with the idea of First Use, now here we go with longer range air-launched CMs from fighters that can take off from the back alleys!!!!



graphican said:


> Why should Pakistan shoot a missile with non-strategic warhead at all? Pakistan has developed micro nukes and every missile might be carrying one.


Mass producing like bunnies is the way to go!!!



Vengeful One said:


> US never allows integration of Non-NATO missiles.


The US doesn't allow many things. Does Pak care????

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## ziaulislam

HAKIKAT said:


> Bull's eye!!!!


i dont want to speculate but either the thunder is monstrous enough to carry such an elongated missile or PAF is going to get another Chinese platform very soon to replace mirage 5 in strategic role 

I for one was thinking thunder will get the role and hence was expecting a smaller missile rather than doubling the range of current missle

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

ziaulislam said:


> no country uses supersonic missiles because it is a detetcted as soon as it launched, much easier to detect due to its high altitude flight, missles need to fly low(but you cant fly fast low) so even if missles do you supersonic version they are usally just end stage, just like chinese systems
> you need to educate yourself
> 
> only india uses it, and was conned by Russia to fund and buy it LOL


And, on the other hand, a helping hand for the Chinese folks, who by the by are paying back in much greater volumes of what they originally took!!!



graphican said:


> And in your head reality is that Pakistan's doesn't have an indigenous cruise missile?. Even sensible Indians would not agree with you. Fair enough. Now you can refrain from expressing your ideas and let there be logical discussion.
> 
> Thanks.


If you accept that Pak doesn't have the capability to produce CMs for arguments' sake, then who's producing these for them - similar to the US guys????? _Jinns_ (say, somehow Pak learnt the tricks from _Hazret-i Suleyman_!!) ??? It's even more scary!!!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Fawadqasim1

I saw it in parade too and heard its range is about 500 km was it a mockup @The Deterrent


----------



## dilpakistani

nope ... it wasn't ...it has avionics attached to it


----------



## The Deterrent

Fawadqasim1 said:


> Sir with due respect you really think these are the real maximum ranges of the above mentioned missiles?


Absolutely.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Thorough Pro

Is it just me or is it actually longer than the previous version?



abdulbarijan said:


> For those who missed the parade ..


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

By they way in parade they took some SPADA missile systems off line for parade usage , seems like we have sufficient replacement now that we can easily bring SPADA missile for Prarade and demonstration

I thought it was certainly fresh to see the SPADA displayed in Parade

Did anyone else noticed that subtle suggestion by Pakistan Military Establishment , I am sure it was noticed across the border

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The SC

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> ever heard of CX-1 my friend ? we can buy that too from china...it is the chinese missile from which india stole design for brahmos













There are two initial versions of the CX-1; the CX-1A ship-borne system and CX-1B road-mobile land-based system, equipped with a unitary semi-armor-piercing warhead. It also reportedly has a second land-attack function, for which it can have a unitary fragmentation-blast or penetration warhead. A land-based road-mobile unit would be composed of one command vehicle, one support vehicle, three launching vehicles, three transporter-loader vehicles, and 12 canisters for two-wave attacks. A submarine-launched version is also suspected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CX-1_Missile_Systems

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Safriz

JamD said:


> To add to your excellent point that most people are missing out on:
> A crucial system on any cruise missile is the inertial navigation system. The range may not just be limited by fuel quantity, fuel type, or engine fuel consumption, but also by the acceptable drift in INS (in a gps jammed environment) over the "maximum range". This increase in range of babur and raad could be a reflection of an improvement of sensors and filtering (among other things).


I am pretty sure the NPO turbo jets are the same as always used with babur and Raad.
The increased range may be down to use of Composites in Fuselage , reducing the weight and thus increasing weight.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Safriz

Falcon26 said:


> The camouflage makes this missile look quite ugly. In terms of aerodynamics it seems bulky. In my view, they should have used different color scheme. Actually, all Pakistani missiles have a very odd color schemes. Babur is orange and the Hatf series are jungle camouflage. Very odd selection of colors.
> 
> 
> 
> What's the major difference between this missile and Brahmos? Any technical differences?
> 
> 
> 
> They need to use as much composites as possible. This will reduce weight and make the missile more compact. Not sure how credible Pakistani composite technology is but this is an area they can cooperate with china and Turkey through the JF-17 and then scale it down to cruise missiles etc


For these subsonic missiles you dont need ultra high strength Carbon fiber. Good old resin based Glass fiber also does the same job.


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Extended range of Raad II definitely gives boost to strike deeper into enemy territory.
Range is now equal to Indian Planned Barhamos missile which will have 600 Km range.

Now just keen to see two more developments in Missile tech
1- ABM 
2- ASBM
I am sure work is being carried out on both platform.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rajput_Pakistani

Hi,
Some points from my side 

1. Those claiming that Pakistan missile system is nothing but paint job of Chinese technology. I would like to say, that Pakistan's missile program is moving on a very calculated, logical development path. RAAD-II is an example showing the development of newer version. That clearly show that somewhere, some great minds are at work. More surprises may come as and when required.
2. We Pakistanis, while engaging the Indian trolls over here never should indulge in nuclear response threat. Please try to understand Pakistan's conventional capabilities are enough to handle all threats emanating from East. We have shortfalls, so do the Indians. Use of TNW will be a last resort.
3.Recently there are some news regarding change in Indian nuclear doctrine. This is a clear and crisp case of nuclear blackmail. It would force Pakistan to up the ante. I am sure, Pakistani strategist would have already worked out such scenarios. If (God forbid) Pakistan is pushed in a situation like that, then why use TNW to counter force Why not go full throttle for counter value (the mindset, which Indian establishment is not willing to change). Smart statesmanship and diplomatic offense is needed to tell the world of nuclear blackmail, India is doing.
4. Cruise missile can carry nuclear. But the answer is not that simple.
It will all go down to the rule of employment. For a layman like me, BMs with CEP of ~<25m are ideal for nuclear strike. The CMs with CEP~<10m are more ideal for counter force roles.
Considering their stealth capabilities+accurecy, Pakistani CMs/SoW (Babur,RAAD etc.) would be employed on
1. Radars, ABM, AD
2. Command & Control
3. Air bases
4. High value industrial/communication

If in the starting 48 hours, Pakistan is able to take out mere 50% of Indian AD, the entire course of war would be altered.

For hint: Ever have a street fight? The boy who has a cool mind and less aggressive prevail in the end. Excessive release of Adrenaline leads to breath out. Muhammad Ali (the great boxer) Rope-a-dope strategy

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## The SC

Will Raad and Babur reach the 1000+ km range benchmark?


----------



## WaLeEdK2

The SC said:


> Will Raad and Babur reach the 1000+ km range benchmark?



Let's hope so. Naval Babur is supposed to be finished soon. Hopefully everything goes as planned for that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## razgriz19

abdulbarijan said:


> For those who missed the parade ..








The missile has definitely become longer. But i don't think it's just the fuel tank, they may have replaced the engine as well. Does anyone have any idea what engines they might be using on these?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fawadqasim1

The SC said:


> Will Raad and Babur reach the 1000+ km range benchmark?


with a good efficient turbofan engine why not

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The SC

Fawadqasim1 said:


> with a good efficient turbofan engine why not



Something like the Williams F107 used on the Tomahawk

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Itachi

The SC said:


> Will Raad and Babur reach the 1000+ km range benchmark?



I presume both missiles *have* reached the 1,000 km benchmark & beyond. It's been 12 years since Babur-I came out & 10 years since Ra'ad-I.

I suspect that most of the *capabilities* we are seeing _today_ had already been worked on & perfected years ago.

1) It takes 3-5 years to *increase* the range of _any_ CM from 200/300/450-700/900/1000 km. This has been the experience of *all* nations that have designed or co-produced CM's. So Pakistan too (using this theory) had already mastered the 700-km benchmark. So, by now, it must have passed or been at the 1000-km benchmark. Same goes for Ra'ad-I.

2) Babur-II & Babur-III were _publicly_ introduced *merely months* apart. Both CM types have different feature & different parameters + capabilities. Even if 2 different set of personnel's were working on the 2 different CM's, it would still take them each different amount of time before they are both finished (design, implementation, execution, prototyping, test runs, etc). This again leads to the conclusion that these CM's & their capabilities were already harnessed months (if not years) before their release to the public domain.

3) Ra'ad-II's increase of range from 350 km to 550 km is *not* a significant gain (at least according to me). The amount of years spent should have meant the increase of range to _at least_ 700-1,000 km by now. A 200 km increase over a period of *10 years* is simply unthinkable. Unless, that is, they deliberately decreased the range for public consumption *or* have developed a Ra'ad-III & Ra'ad-IV with significant increase in range (700 km for III & 1000 km for IV). 

This is all just _my opinion_. Take it with a pinch of salt. 


So, what we should all be expecting is *what* they are currently _cooking or have cooked. _

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Basel

The SC said:


> Brahmos can be launched from the air, CX-1 not yet, but it can be launched from submarines..



There is no need of air launched version because YJ-12 with 400km range and even ARM version is already in service with Chinese military.

An export version called CM-302 is now available too.

http://www.janes.com/article/65364/china-offers-export-version-of-yj-12-supersonic-anti-ship-missile

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rocky rock

*RA'AD II*

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## WarFariX

Rocky rock said:


> *RA'AD II*
> 
> View attachment 386680


thnx for the clear image


----------



## Furqan Sarwar

Hi,

I have a noob input as well. 

Everyone is saying that JF-17 might not be able to carry Raad as size is too large. Has anyone thought that it might be JF-17B (Twin Seater) / JF-17A (Block-3) which might be able to carry it.

As we now have a clear knowledge from Allan Warnes that there has been some design changes on JF-17B and hopefully these changes will surely be implemented on JF-17A (Block-3) as well.

Thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Windjammer

JamD said:


> This looks funny. Must be a badly made mockup.
> View attachment 386699



Cover on the intake.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Safriz




----------



## The SC

Critics say that RA'AD 2 was not tested (publicly) yet! what you guys make of this?



JamD said:


> This looks funny. Must be a badly made mockup.
> View attachment 386699


Looks like a different "oval" intake.. for stealth!?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JamD

The SC said:


> Critics say that RA'AD 2 was not tested yet! what you guys make of this?
> 
> 
> Looks like a different "oval" intake.. for stealth!?


I don't think so. There has to be an opening in an intake which I can't spot. It is either a bad mockup, or a (very strangely aerodynamic) cover as @Windjammer suggested.

EDIT: The intake is also shaped differently. MAYBE they've taken out the retraction mechanism as a weight/volume saving measure. And the cover is jettisoned when the missile is deployed from the aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The SC

Furqan Sarwar said:


> Hi,
> 
> I have a noob input as well.
> 
> Everyone is saying that JF-17 might not be able to carry Raad as size is too large. Has anyone thought that it might be JF-17B (Twin Seater) / JF-17A (Block-3) which might be able to carry it.
> 
> As we now have a clear knowledge from Allan Warnes that there has been some design changes on JF-17B and hopefully these changes will surely be implemented on JF-17A (Block-3) as well.
> 
> Thanks.


The problem is with the height of the JF-17, the changes on the JF-17B were reported to be a longer tail and the addition of fuel compartments to compensate for place taken by the second seat..



JamD said:


> I don't think so. There has to be an opening in an intake which I can't spot. It is either a bad mockup, or a (very strangely aerodynamic) cover as @Windjammer suggested.


A cover would have been rectangular tough, as the intake is rectangular..This is a mystery!!!


----------



## JamD

The SC said:


> A cover would have been rectangular tough, as the intake is rectangular..This is a mystery!!!



That's not a very good model of the actual Ra'ad. It's not THAT rectangular (as you can sort of see below). But I get your point.

There is definitely something up with the intake (or just a bad mockup):




@The Deterrent thoughts about my "losing the retraction mechanism for weight/volume saving" idea?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Safriz

The SC said:


> Critics say that RA'AD 2 was not tested (publicly) yet! what you guys make of this?
> 
> 
> Looks like a different "oval" intake.. for stealth!?


For a Cruise Missile NOTAms or giving notices to India isnt necessary. For Ballistic missiles it is.
So Raad could be tested many times without telling anyone.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WarFariX

Furqan Sarwar said:


> Hi,
> 
> I have a noob input as well.
> 
> Everyone is saying that JF-17 might not be able to carry Raad as size is too large. Has anyone thought that it might be JF-17B (Twin Seater) / JF-17A (Block-3) which might be able to carry it.
> 
> As we now have a clear knowledge from Allan Warnes that there has been some design changes on JF-17B and hopefully these changes will surely be implemented on JF-17A (Block-3) as well.
> 
> Thanks.


the problem is something else...reason for raad not carried is something else

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Itachi

The SC said:


> Critics say that RA'AD 2 was not tested (publicly) yet! what you guys make of this?



"A *third successful test* of Ra'ad (ALCM) was carried out on 29 April 2011, this time again fired from a Dassault Mirage fighter of Pakistan Air force. *Fourth test* of Ra'ad (ALCM) was carried out on 30 May 2012. *Another test* (_5th_) of Ra'ad (ALCM) was carried out on 2 Feb 2015" (Source: Wiki).

These tests (the fourth & fifth being 3 years apart) tell us that improvements were definitely made on Raad-I, such that it had to be tested 4 more times after it's official 1st test in 2007. Now we don't know *what* was being tested but surely, the test in 2011 (3-4 years after Ra'ad-I) could have meant an increase in range (or payload or better electronics, etc or just another test of the same version). So, the test(s) in 2012 & 2015 *must* have been of Ra'ad-II (5-8 years after the unveiling of Ra'ad-II). 



The SC said:


> A cover would have been rectangular tough, as the intake is rectangular..This is a mystery!!!



No, the intake (from the pic) doesn't look like a rectangular shape. Your image is rectangular but the Parade Ra'ad-II's have circular intakes (if you look closely) thus the cone-like caps on both of them (and not on the other 2).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Safriz

Doesn't look like any change in dimensions. same length and width.
They have created extra fuel space by scuttling intake retraction mechanism,as already suggested by another member

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

JamD said:


> There is definitely something up with the intake (or just a bad mockup):
> View attachment 386729
> 
> @The Deterrent thoughts about my "losing the retraction mechanism for weight/volume saving" idea?


That's right, I didn't notice it at first. The retractable air-intake on mechanism Ra'ad-I was inherited from Babur. However it take a lot of space inside which is affordable in a system the size of Babur, but not Ra'ad. So most probably they removed that, and introduced a fixed air-intake with an aerodynamic cover (to reduce the additional drag).

All that said, this modification alone contributes a fraction to all of the 200km range extension. The range extension on Ra'ad-I is based on similar volume-saving techniques implemented on Babur-I.


MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> the problem is something else...reason for raad not carried is something else


It will be solved soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WarFariX

شاھین میزایل said:


> Doesn't look like any change in dimensions. same length and width.
> They have created extra fuel space by scuttling intake retraction mechanism,as already suggested by another member


No dear . Length looks a bit larger


----------



## Thorough Pro

so what, just bleed some air out of tires and make the missile look a ton heavier 



Mrc said:


> Chinese stopped.parading actual missiles when they realized (probably through hacking cia) that americans were trying to calculate missile weight by distortion of tyres of carrying vehicles...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Eagle

Kindly use this sticky thread for further discussions, updates & news w.r.t. subject while keeping it clean by maintaining decorum and making it productive/informative.

Old thread was consisting useless posts that were irrelevant as well as off-topic, hence, made a sticky thread by excluding such posts. Members be receiving notifications regarding the same.

Thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Khafee

The SC said:


> Critics say that RA'AD 2 was not tested (publicly) yet! what you guys make of this?



So what will those critics say when NASR-2 is announced?



Basel said:


> Pakistan may soon declare that it can hit ships too.


Only a matter of time.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## The SC

Khafee said:


> So what will those critics say when NASR-2 is announced?
> 
> 
> Only a matter of time.


Read; was not tested publicly


----------



## Khafee

The SC said:


> Read; was not tested publicly


No test is "public", the results are, when the top tier command, thinks it is appropriate to do so.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Banglar Bir

Yummy. Bangladesh needs this cute one.

Sent from my HTC Desire 610 using Defence.pk mobile app


----------



## My-Analogous

During its March 23 Pakistan Day Parade, the Pakistan Strategic Plans Division (SPD) officially revealed the Ra’ad 2 (“Thunder 2”) air-launched cruise missile (ALCM).

Described as an improved and extended-range of the 350 km Ra’ad ALCM, which was introduced by Air Weapons Complex (AWC) and the National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM) in 2007, the Ra’ad 2 has a stated range of 550 km.

*Notes & Comments:*

With its low-detectable design and terrain-hugging capability, the sub-sonic Ra’ad ALCM series is regarded as a key piece of the Pakistani military’s deterrence strategy, specifically its second-strike ability. The Ra’ad and Babur land-attack cruise missiles (LACM) are capable of delivering miniature nuclear warheads.

External differences between the Ra’ad and Ra’ad 2 appear to be minimal, suggesting that an emphasis was made on extending the range more so than increasing payload (albeit an increase in the latter cannot be ruled out).

Although Pakistan did not yet announce tests for the Ra’ad 2, it used the end of 2016 and beginning of 2017 to announce the tests of the Babur-2 LACM and Babur-3 submarine-launched cruise missile (SLCM) respectively. These were joined by the test of the Ababeel multiple independent re-entry vehicle (MIRV)-capable medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM).

The Ra’ad ALCM-series is deployed from the Pakistan Air Force’s (PAF) Mirage III/5 aircraft.

While it aimed for strategic purposes, the Ra’ad could have the potential to serve in a conventional role. Like other conventional munitions, it can carry a conventional high-explosive warhead, which could prove useful for reinforced targets.

In the long-term, there are other ALCM-related possibilities. For example, precision-guided sub-munitions such as the BLU-105 enable the AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) to engage multiple targets in an area, such as armoured formations, air fields, air defence sites, and dockyards, among others. An analogous solution could be a next-step for the Ra’ad.

http://quwa.org/2017/03/23/pakistan...ded-range-raad-2-air-launched-cruise-missile/
@Horus @eagleeye @Imran Khan @Zarvan @MastanKhan @Khafee @WAJsal 
I am wondering that no body notice

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Areesh

My-Analogous said:


> During its March 23 Pakistan Day Parade, the Pakistan Strategic Plans Division (SPD) officially revealed the Ra’ad 2 (“Thunder 2”) air-launched cruise missile (ALCM).
> 
> Described as an improved and extended-range of the 350 km Ra’ad ALCM, which was introduced by Air Weapons Complex (AWC) and the National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM) in 2007, the Ra’ad 2 has a stated range of 550 km.
> 
> *Notes & Comments:*
> 
> With its low-detectable design and terrain-hugging capability, the sub-sonic Ra’ad ALCM series is regarded as a key piece of the Pakistani military’s deterrence strategy, specifically its second-strike ability. The Ra’ad and Babur land-attack cruise missiles (LACM) are capable of delivering miniature nuclear warheads.
> 
> External differences between the Ra’ad and Ra’ad 2 appear to be minimal, suggesting that an emphasis was made on extending the range more so than increasing payload (albeit an increase in the latter cannot be ruled out).
> 
> Although Pakistan did not yet announce tests for the Ra’ad 2, it used the end of 2016 and beginning of 2017 to announce the tests of the Babur-2 LACM and Babur-3 submarine-launched cruise missile (SLCM) respectively. These were joined by the test of the Ababeel multiple independent re-entry vehicle (MIRV)-capable medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM).
> 
> The Ra’ad ALCM-series is deployed from the Pakistan Air Force’s (PAF) Mirage III/5 aircraft.
> 
> While it aimed for strategic purposes, the Ra’ad could have the potential to serve in a conventional role. Like other conventional munitions, it can carry a conventional high-explosive warhead, which could prove useful for reinforced targets.
> 
> In the long-term, there are other ALCM-related possibilities. For example, precision-guided sub-munitions such as the BLU-105 enable the AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) to engage multiple targets in an area, such as armoured formations, air fields, air defence sites, and dockyards, among others. An analogous solution could be a next-step for the Ra’ad.
> 
> http://quwa.org/2017/03/23/pakistan...ded-range-raad-2-air-launched-cruise-missile/
> @Horus @eagleeye @Imran Khan @Zarvan @MastanKhan @Khafee @WAJsal
> I am wondering that no body notice



Already posted and discussed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rocky rock

My-Analogous said:


> During its March 23 Pakistan Day Parade, the Pakistan Strategic Plans Division (SPD) officially revealed the Ra’ad 2 (“Thunder 2”) air-launched cruise missile (ALCM).
> 
> Described as an improved and extended-range of the 350 km Ra’ad ALCM, which was introduced by Air Weapons Complex (AWC) and the National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM) in 2007, the Ra’ad 2 has a stated range of 550 km.
> 
> *Notes & Comments:*
> 
> With its low-detectable design and terrain-hugging capability, the sub-sonic Ra’ad ALCM series is regarded as a key piece of the Pakistani military’s deterrence strategy, specifically its second-strike ability. The Ra’ad and Babur land-attack cruise missiles (LACM) are capable of delivering miniature nuclear warheads.
> 
> External differences between the Ra’ad and Ra’ad 2 appear to be minimal, suggesting that an emphasis was made on extending the range more so than increasing payload (albeit an increase in the latter cannot be ruled out).
> 
> Although Pakistan did not yet announce tests for the Ra’ad 2, it used the end of 2016 and beginning of 2017 to announce the tests of the Babur-2 LACM and Babur-3 submarine-launched cruise missile (SLCM) respectively. These were joined by the test of the Ababeel multiple independent re-entry vehicle (MIRV)-capable medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM).
> 
> The Ra’ad ALCM-series is deployed from the Pakistan Air Force’s (PAF) Mirage III/5 aircraft.
> 
> While it aimed for strategic purposes, the Ra’ad could have the potential to serve in a conventional role. Like other conventional munitions, it can carry a conventional high-explosive warhead, which could prove useful for reinforced targets.
> 
> In the long-term, there are other ALCM-related possibilities. For example, precision-guided sub-munitions such as the BLU-105 enable the AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) to engage multiple targets in an area, such as armoured formations, air fields, air defence sites, and dockyards, among others. An analogous solution could be a next-step for the Ra’ad.
> 
> http://quwa.org/2017/03/23/pakistan...ded-range-raad-2-air-launched-cruise-missile/
> @Horus @eagleeye @Imran Khan @Zarvan @MastanKhan @Khafee @WAJsal
> I am wondering that no body notice



Sorry mate you're late. Even the Discussion ended months ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Accountant

Khafee said:


> No test is "public", the results are, when the top tier command, thinks it is appropriate to do so.


Not necessary ... our neighbours even invade other countries by using concept missile ... on pdf i have seen indian public is even claiming to have a better missile than Americans by the name of brahmos 2 ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Banglar Bir

Alhumdulillah
Almighty has been very kind to our Pakistani brother's. Congratulations
Salaam.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Banglar Bir

Insaha Allah Bangladesh can also be enormously benifetted from these remarkable achievements in times of our crisis.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## My-Analogous

BANGLAR BIR said:


> Insaha Allah Bangladesh can also be enormously benefited from these remarkable achievements in times of our crisis.


We are one, our soul are one, our Allah is one, Our Prophet(PBUH) is one, our religion is one. When we have so much common then why not we will not help you. You are our brothers.





Allama Iqbal

And this one is my favorite

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Banglar Bir

My-Analogous said:


> We are one, our soul are one, our Allah is one, Our Prophet(PBUH) is one, our religion is one. When we have so much common then why not we will not help you. You are our brothers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Allama Iqbal
> 
> And this one is my favorite


Alhumdulillah. Allahhu Akbar. Salam

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Thorough Pro

Height of ignorance and religious delusions



My-Analogous said:


> We are one, our soul are one, our Allah is one, Our Prophet(PBUH) is one, our religion is one. When we have so much common then why not we will not help you. You are our brothers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Allama Iqbal
> 
> And this one is my favorite

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## amardeep mishra

The Deterrent said:


> Um no thats not the case. Pakistan is advanced enough in the INS domain now to ensure strategic precision in a GPS-denied environment, and surgical precision with integrated GNSS corrections.


Hi @The Deterrent
Not much is known about "indigenous" pakistani research in the field of INS(I'm not talking about the algorithms but the hardware). Can you shed some light?
Also as I guess @JamD pointed out, filtering techniques might play some but not major role in increasing the range. In my opinion though, range can be extended if either somehow drag is reduced, or if they somehow get a highly efficient turbofan engine or if they go for all composite missile. Drag reduction might seem easy but it requires passing your model through wind tunnels a lot and wind tunnel experiments are really pain in the **** sometimes(at least in india)--I am sure such experiments in pakistan wouldnt be any comfortable. Second option requires pakistan to actually get a turbofan from china(which in turn used ukrainian expertise to design their own).
Speaking of INS and filters,I have personally implemented -
(a) Complementary filer-1st order
(b) Complimentary filter-2nd order and
(c) Kalman Filter
in python for simple MPU6050 as a hobby stuff. Here is the a real time graph plotted in python.





Although this is not from MPU6050 but from ADXL335. ADXL335 is notoriously sensitive to even small vibrations as you can see above(kindly note this is the result without any filtering). Some sort of high pass filter needed in order to smoothen the ADXL335 signal.
Now the reason why we need any kind of filtering is quite evident from my personal graph above-- accelerometer is jerky(yet doesnt drift),whereas gyro(rate gyro to be precise) is stable(yet it drifts over time). So in order to get a stable estimate we implement a filter-- one that combines the features of both HPF and LPF and the easiest, one could implement in either C or python happens to be a complementary filter. It gives fairly reasonable values in most of the regimes. For more info you can follow me on github

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

amardeep mishra said:


> Hi @The Deterrent
> Not much is known about "indigenous" pakistani research in the field of INS(I'm not talking about the algorithms but the hardware). Can you shed some light?


Yeah sure.

There you go.


amardeep mishra said:


> Also as I guess @JamD pointed out, filtering techniques might play some but not major role in increasing the range. In my opinion though, range can be extended if either somehow drag is reduced, or if they somehow get a highly efficient turbofan engine or if they go for all composite missile. Drag reduction might seem easy but it requires passing your model through wind tunnels a lot and wind tunnel experiments are really pain in the **** sometimes(at least in india)--I am sure such experiments in pakistan wouldnt be any comfortable. Second option requires pakistan to actually get a turbofan from china(which in turn used ukrainian expertise to design their own).


None of these have anything to do with the increase in range. For you (and other Indians for that matter) to understand how it was done, you need to first realize that Ra'ad was designed by Pakistan (although using OTS components and the conventional design methodologies). Its just that the first 'model' was pretty crude compared to the state-of-the-art systems of today.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Awan68

Thorough Pro said:


> Height of ignorance and religious delusions


To you maybe....


----------



## amardeep mishra

The Deterrent said:


> None of these have anything to do with the increase in range. For you (and other Indians for that matter) to understand how it was done, you need to first realize that Ra'ad was designed by Pakistan (although using OTS components and the conventional design methodologies). Its just that the first 'model' was pretty crude compared to the state-of-the-art systems of today.


Hi @The Deterrent
They indeed are related to "increase" in range-
(1) Reduced Drag
(2) Reduced SFC(i.e highly efficient engines)
(3) Reduced weight
(4) Increase in fuel capacity.
I am sure you're aware of the equations that determine endurance and range of any aerial vehicle.
I am not really sure that Ra'ad was indeed designed by pakistan as there are ample evidences to suggest otherwise. However I will refrain to tread that path as I am sure a lot of 'not-so-learned' folks would jump at me for denigrating pakistani efforts(which by the way was never my intention!). People dont realize that I have same standards for our own weapons R&D. Unless and Untill I see the tests and research references I dont take our own statements seriously.
There is also no doubt that Ra'ad has evolved into one of the sophisticated missiles of pakistani arsenal(and I being someone working on 'some' of these systems envy it!). Now what makes Ra'ad particularly effective in indo-pak scenario is the fact that it can be launched by an aircraft and it can fly really low. This gives very very small time window for indian systems like akash,spyder,MRSAM to react. This however is changing gradually as India is spending generously on aerostat based radars or very low level radars to plug gaps. 
In fact LRDE has in fact designed their own Aerostat based "look-down" radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Deterrent

amardeep mishra said:


> Hi @The Deterrent
> They indeed are related to "increase" in range-
> (1) Reduced Drag
> (2) Reduced SFC(i.e highly efficient engines)
> (3) Reduced weight
> I am sure you're aware of the equations that determine endurance and range of any aerial vehicle.


My bad. Let me rephrase: None of these _had_ anything to do with the increase in range _of Ra'ad_.



amardeep mishra said:


> I am not really sure that Ra'ad was indeed designed by pakistan as there are ample evidences to suggest otherwise.


Ample evidences? Oh right, the same ones by twitter 'professionals'.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## amardeep mishra

The Deterrent said:


> My bad. Let me rephrase: None of these _had_ anything to do with the increase in range _of Ra'ad_.
> 
> 
> Ample evidences? Oh right, the same ones by twitter 'professionals'.


I am not even on twitter my friend. And I was alluding to links with South Africa- I mean come on,Integration of such an advanced missile on an old mirage does ring some bells,when the ideal choice should have been JF-17!. Now i "really do not wish to go into" this debate because I am sure it will lead no where. Rest assured lets focus on range of Ra'ad as originally pointed out by JamD


----------



## The Accountant

Thorough Pro said:


> Height of ignorance and religious delusions


Not exactly correct ...



amardeep mishra said:


> I am not even on twitter my friend. And I was alluding to links with South Africa- I mean come on,Integration of such an advanced missile on an old mirage does ring some bells,when the ideal choice should have been JF-17!. Now i "really do not wish to go into" this debate because I am sure it will lead no where. Rest assured lets focus on range of Ra'ad as originally pointed out by JamD


First check the dates of first test of Raad and development cycle of thunder ... 

Raad first test was done in 2007 whereas JF-17 block first squadron got inducted 2010 ... So you mean to say that Raad is not Pakistani because it was not tested on Pakistan's indigenous under development fighter aircraft program ... Interesting theory ... This proves how biased your opinions are and how ignorant you are ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

amardeep mishra said:


> I am not even on twitter my friend. And I was alluding to links with South Africa- I mean come on,Integration of such an advanced missile on an old mirage does ring some bells,when the ideal choice should have been JF-17!. Now i "really do not wish to go into" this debate because I am sure it will lead no where. Rest assured lets focus on range of Ra'ad as originally pointed out by JamD


And here we thought you were more rational.


----------



## Thorough Pro

Don't waste your time on this leach



The Deterrent said:


> Yeah sure.
> 
> There you go.
> 
> None of these have anything to do with the increase in range. For you (and other Indians for that matter) to understand how it was done, you need to first realize that Ra'ad was designed by Pakistan (although using OTS components and the conventional design methodologies). Its just that the first 'model' was pretty crude compared to the state-of-the-art systems of today.



Whoever thinks bangali's are our brothers is a moron



Awan68 said:


> To you maybe....


----------



## Awan68

Thorough Pro said:


> Don't waste your time on this leach
> 
> 
> 
> Whoever thinks bangali's are our brothers is a moron


No brothers in todays world, specially not those who sided with pagan india against muslim pakistan, i consider bangladesh to be a traitor to islam n wish they suffer under indias yoke for a thousand years, they deserve it...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sameer25

is pakistan ever gonna develop something like the brahmos


----------



## DarX

Sameer25 said:


> is pakistan ever gonna develop something like the brahmos



Brahmos is a copy of the P-800 Onyx missile and is produced by a Russian-Indian joint venture. In any case, we don't need it as yet, as India cannot stop our Ra'ad and Babur cruise missiles with its air defense system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## [--Leo--]

are they going to test raad 2 ?any update?


----------



## amardeep mishra

The Deterrent said:


> And here we thought you were more rational.


Hi dear @The Deterrent
What has that got to do with being rational? I was not trying to denigrate anything--I was merely sounding a bit critical of Ra'ad which has ample amount of south african connection. But the reason why I am not debating it is simply because I am sure it will turn into a dirty mud slinging competition among people who probably wouldnt have worked on Aerial vehicles in any capacity.


----------



## Sameer25

is pakistan developing any icbms. i have heard rumors that there is a Tipu or Tahmoor ICBM i dont know if theyre true and what about slbm


----------



## The Deterrent

amardeep mishra said:


> Hi dear @The Deterrent
> What has that got to do with being rational? I was not trying to denigrate anything--I was merely sounding a bit critical of Ra'ad which has ample amount of south african connection. But the reason why I am not debating it is simply because I am sure it will turn into a dirty mud slinging competition among people who probably wouldnt have worked on Aerial vehicles in any capacity.


"Ample" South-African connection? Seriously? All you have is a stupid anal-yst who still thinks Ra'ad is a derivative of Torgos. In reality it is simply shrunken down version of Babur with an appropriate airframe and control surfaces similar to MUPSOW.
And Pakistan didn't start producing JF-17 until 2008, the year Ra'ad had its first flight. Mirage is simply the go-to test platform for all munitions Pakistan develops itself.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## amardeep mishra

The Deterrent said:


> "Ample" South-African connection? Seriously? All you have is a stupid anal-yst who still thinks Ra'ad is a derivative of Torgos. In reality it is simply shrunken down version of Babur with an appropriate airframe and control surfaces similar to MUPSOW.
> And Pakistan didn't start producing JF-17 until 2008, the year Ra'ad had its first flight. Mirage is simply the go-to test platform for all munitions Pakistan develops itself.


hi @The Deterrent 
I do not go by any analyst. I can only pity if you think so. I was merely trying to say that south africa indeed provided pakistan with MPSOW missile which formed the basis of Ra'ad cruise missile. Ra'ad is no derivative of Babur though-- Ra'ad is undoubtedly more close to MPSOW than babur. If I am not wrong then first flight of JF-17 took place in 2002 or 2003, right? and by 2008 JF-17 was flying well. Dont you think it is weird that Pakistan chooses to integrate such an advanced cruise missile in such an old platform that is well past it's useful life? The choice of platform should have been preferably JF-17 or F-16. It is like india choosing mig-21s to integrate Astra BVR.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Deterrent

amardeep mishra said:


> hi @The Deterrent
> I do not go by any analyst. I can only pity if you think so. I was merely trying to say that south africa indeed provided pakistan with MPSOW missile which formed the basis of Ra'ad cruise missile. Ra'ad is no derivative of Babur though-- Ra'ad is undoubtedly more close to MPSOW than babur.


Absolute BS. The MUPSOW I was referring to was the H-2/4 (Raptor-I/II) rocket powered guided stand-off munition. Ra'ad's Airframe is similar to that, not to Torgos SOW. Care to support your analysis with any credible details?



> If I am not wrong then first flight of JF-17 took place in 2002 or 2003, right? and by 2008 JF-17 was flying well.Dont you think it is weird that Pakistan chooses to integrate such an advanced cruise missile in such an old platform that is well past it's useful life? The choice of platform should have been preferably JF-17 or F-16. It is like india choosing mig-21s to integrate Astra BVR.


The first flight (2002-3) took place in China.
Last I checked, it is up to the manufacturer to choose the test platform. PAF is more comfortable with Mirage since it had earlier modified it for nuke delivery as well.
Let's apply the same logic on IAF. Which aircraft does DRDO choose for testing its new standoff munitions? Why not choose Tejas instead of Jaguar?

You are EXACTLY like those anal-ysts, who compare pictures and arrive to their own conclusions.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## amardeep mishra

The Deterrent said:


> The first flight (2002-3) took place in China.
> Last I checked, it is up to the manufacturer to choose the test platform. PAF is more comfortable with Mirage since it had earlier modified it for nuke delivery as well.
> Let's apply the same logic on IAF. Which aircraft does DRDO choose for testing its new standoff munitions? Why not choose Tejas instead of Jaguar?
> 
> You are EXACTLY like those anal-ysts, who compare pictures and arrive to their own conclusions.


@The Deterrent
Thats what you think my friend, thats what you think! I am not into the business of analysing pictures, I am a control engineer and I design control systems for Aerial vehicles. I do however read reports published in international platforms by authors who are not biased-- for instance the report I have attached below.
Also as for as my knowledge goes, India does not use Jaguars for testing of any new weapon systems. IAF uses mostly Sukhois for that, I am afraid you got confused with the current upgradation program going on for jags that will amount to integration of AESA radar, advanced avionics etc etc. Tejas is not used for testing of new weapons because a new weapon cant be tested off a not so mature platform. However you'll gradually see LCA carrying Astra MK1 and Mk2.


The Deterrent said:


> Absolute BS. The MUPSOW I was referring to was the H-2/4 (Raptor-I/II) rocket powered guided stand-off munition. Ra'ad's Airframe is similar to that, not to Torgos SOW. Care to support your analysis with any credible details?


Hi @The Deterrent
I never quoted any indian analyst for my statement. Actually if you are careful enough you would find ample evidences that South Africa Indeed had direct help in designing the Ra'ad-
http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1200544/revisiting-south-africas-bomb/

Pardon my inaccuracy, I should have made it clear that it was H-2 and not Torgos. My point was not if H-2 or Torgos was transfered but active help of South African to the extent of integrating the weapon to mirage platform.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Deterrent

amardeep mishra said:


> @The Deterrent
> Thats what you think my friend, thats what you think! I am not into the business of analysing pictures, I am a control engineer and I design control systems for Aerial vehicles. I do however read reports published in international platforms by authors who are not biased-- for instance the report I have attached below.
> Also as for as my knowledge goes, India does not use Jaguars for testing of any new weapon systems. IAF uses mostly Sukhois for that, I am afraid you got confused with the current upgradation program going on for jags that will amount to integration of AESA radar, advanced avionics etc etc. Tejas is not used for testing of new weapons because a new weapon cant be tested off a not so mature platform. However you'll gradually see LCA carrying Astra MK1 and Mk2.


I don't care what you do. You're wrong here.
Didn't IAF use Jaguar for testing SAAW recently?
And by the same effing logic, _"Tejas JF-17 is was not used for testing of new weapons because a new weapon cant be tested off a not so mature platform"._



amardeep mishra said:


> Hi @The Deterrent
> I never quoted any indian analyst for my statement. Actually if you are careful enough you would find ample evidences that South Africa Indeed had direct help in designing the Ra'ad-
> http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1200544/revisiting-south-africas-bomb/
> 
> Pardon my inaccuracy, I should have made it clear that it was H-2 and not Torgos. My point was not if H-2 or Torgos was transfered but active help of South African to the extent of integrating the weapon to mirage platform.


More BS. Just because the tail design of H-2 and Ra'ad is same, it doesn't means Ra'ad is derived from H-2/Torgos/MPSOW.
Oh, so now you have retracted your statement to only "integration help"? Wow, poor PAF/AWC can't even integrate a complicated weapon like Ra'ad with Mirage. I wonder how they rewired the avionics of Mirage for nuclear gravity bombs. Must have had French help, right? Wait, no no...it was the Chinese. Nah, it must be South Africa. Or was it somebody else?

Do me a favor: stop hurting your brain.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## amardeep mishra

The Deterrent said:


> I don't care what you do. You're wrong here.
> Didn't IAF use Jaguar for testing SAAW recently?
> And by the same effing logic, _"Tejas JF-17 is was not used for testing of new weapons because a new weapon cant be tested off a not so mature platform"._


Hi @The Deterrent
I am afraid you did not get the context of SAAW test. DRDO choose to test it from Jaguar because Jaguar happened to be available to them. There are certain number of aircrafts that are sanctioned by the IAF to DRDO for their weapon integration trials. For instance IAF has not yet sanctioned a Mig-29 for kaveri evaluation trials. The platform is subjected to availability.



The Deterrent said:


> More BS. Just because the tail design of H-2 and Ra'ad is same, it doesn't means Ra'ad is derived from H-2/Torgos/MPSOW.
> Oh, so now you have retracted your statement to only "integration help"? Wow, poor PAF/AWC can't even integrate a complicated weapon like Ra'ad with Mirage. I wonder how they rewired the avionics of Mirage for nuclear gravity bombs. Must have had French help, right? Wait, no no...it was the Chinese. Nah, it must be South Africa. Or was it somebody else?
> 
> Do me a favor: stop hurting your brain.


Look, I did not write that report neither did any Indian. So you can not simply write it off as wrong. Also I did not say the south african consultancy was limited to "integration help". Try reading my statement once more-I said-
"My point was not if H-2 or Torgos was transfered but active help of South African _to the extent_ of integrating the weapon to mirage platform."
South african help in Ra'ad is a fact whether you like it or not.
Also a nuclear gravity bomb is entirely different from a cruise missile and I just pray you know the difference. A whole lot of other things are necessary in order to program a cruise missile. In very simple terms, let me ask you a question-- have you worked on APM(ardu-pilot multiplatform)? There is a APM-mission planner that one needs to install in their laptops and the autopilot in UAV communicates with mission planner via a MAVLINK. Just like how you can do a bunch of different things with APM-mission planner like way point navigation, terrain fencing, return to launch etc etc-- cruise missiles have mission planners as well-- because at the end of the day cruise missile is a simple UAV! Also integration of a cruise missile to the platform is more challenging than integrating a gravity bomb.
You can indeed program the missile on-ground or have an interface with launching platform and do it in air from launching platform itself.

In case you have never dealt with mission planners, here is my video-

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## The Deterrent

amardeep mishra said:


> Hi @The Deterrent
> I am afraid you did not get the context of SAAW test. DRDO choose to test it from Jaguar because Jaguar happened to be available to them. There are certain number of aircrafts that are sanctioned by the IAF to DRDO for their weapon integration trials. For instance IAF has not yet sanctioned a Mig-29 for kaveri evaluation trials. The platform is subjected to availability.


Stop trying to justify your statements. The bottom-line is, the air-forces don't use aircraft that are still under-development or are not yet mature (reference: in 2008, JF-17 Block 1 couldn't fire AShMs). F-7PG ia mere interceptor, F-16 is off-limits for now. The only remaining choice is Mirage-III/V, which is also used for testing other new systems.



amardeep mishra said:


> Look, I did not write that report neither did any Indian. So you can not simply write it off as wrong. Also I did not say the south african consultancy was limited to "integration help". Try reading my statement once more-I said-
> "My point was not if H-2 or Torgos was transfered but active help of South African _to the extent_ of integrating the weapon to mirage platform."
> South african help in Ra'ad is a fact whether you like it or not.


Err, that report is based on the same kind of analysis as yours. PAF/AWC DO NOT need any external help in integrating weapon systems with Mirages. Mission data loading, one-way data link and INS (specifically IMU) start-up is all that's there to be done. All of this had already been done by Pakistan in different systems.

Can't find anything concrete? Maybe you should accept that you're just wrong.



amardeep mishra said:


> Also a nuclear gravity bomb is entirely different from a cruise missile and I just pray you know the difference. A whole lot of other things are necessary in order to program a cruise missile. In very simple terms, let me ask you a question-- have you worked on APM(ardu-pilot multiplatform)? There is a APM-mission planner that one needs to install in their laptops and the autopilot in UAV communicates with mission planner via a MAVLINK. Just like how you can do a bunch of different things with APM-mission planner like way point navigation, terrain fencing, return to launch etc etc-- cruise missiles have mission planners as well-- because at the end of the day cruise missile is a simple UAV! Also integration of a cruise missile to the platform is more challenging than integrating a gravity bomb.
> You can indeed program the missile on-ground or have an interface with launching platform and do it in air from launching platform itself.
> 
> In case you have never dealt with mission planners, here is my video-


Oh wow, thank you so much for your lesson on flying hobby drones. But you forgot, that Pakistan was already doing mission planning/way-point navigation since 2005 in Babur. Let me check where it says that Pakistan was not able to use the same technologies for both of its own cruise missiles.

As I said, stop hurting your brain. I don't want to be held responsible for a popped artery.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## amardeep mishra

The Deterrent said:


> Stop trying to justify your statements. The bottom-line is, the air-forces don't use aircraft that are still under-development or are not yet mature (reference: in 2008, JF-17 Block 1 couldn't fire AShMs). F-7PG ia mere interceptor, F-16 is off-limits for now. The only remaining choice is Mirage-III/V, which is also used for testing other new systems.


Hi @The Deterrent 
I am not justifying my statements. I am merely stating the policy of IAF. Also I do see your point that new weapons are tested from a mature platform. 


The Deterrent said:


> Err, that report is based on the same kind of analysis as yours. PAF/AWC DO NOT need any external help in integrating weapon systems with Mirages. Mission data loading, one-way data link and INS (specifically IMU) start-up is all that's there to be done. All of this had already been done by Pakistan in different systems.
> 
> Can't find anything concrete? Maybe you should accept that you're just wrong.


Well, if you think that report published in a neutral(neither pakistani nor Indian) source is wrong, then yeah I guess nothing can be done here. The reason why you're able to write or perhaps claim a lot of things is because pakistan unlike India has never been transparent regarding the source of their technology. Things would have been far different if the veil of secrecy is lifted off.



The Deterrent said:


> Oh wow, thank you so much for your lesson on flying hobby drones. But you forgot, that Pakistan was already doing mission planning/way-point navigation since 2005 in Babur. Let me check where it says that Pakistan was not able to use the same technologies for both of its own cruise missiles.
> 
> As I said, stop hurting your brain. I don't want to be held responsible for a popped artery.



Do not worry about my brain, my friend. I love analyzing such systems. And no they are not hobby drones in the sense that you can control it via RC. They are fully autonomous! ofcourse I did not develop the APM stack--I merely pulled it off the github. 
I have however designed completely nonlinear control for thrust vectored aerial vehicles and coded in python and implemented in micro-computer. This is radically different from linearized way of designing control wherein we use MRAC based gain scheduling.
The data transmission takes place using MQTT protocol(as against MAVLINK).
Yes indeed pakistan has been doing a LOT OF THINGS but that doesnt mean all of it has been designed there. We all know the origin and development of Babur. If you read carefully I never claimed pakistan was not able to use the same technologies for both of its own cruise missile-- the point I was making and I still make is -- there is a clear distinct south african hand in design of Ra'ad which you can not deny. There are couple of other sources as well-- dont worry they are not Indian-- and they claim south african involvement in Ra'ad.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Trango Towers

amardeep mishra said:


> hi @The Deterrent
> I do not go by any analyst. I can only pity if you think so. I was merely trying to say that south africa indeed provided pakistan with MPSOW missile which formed the basis of Ra'ad cruise missile. Ra'ad is no derivative of Babur though-- Ra'ad is undoubtedly more close to MPSOW than babur. If I am not wrong then first flight of JF-17 took place in 2002 or 2003, right? and by 2008 JF-17 was flying well. Dont you think it is weird that Pakistan chooses to integrate such an advanced cruise missile in such an old platform that is well past it's useful life? The choice of platform should have been preferably JF-17 or F-16. It is like india choosing mig-21s to integrate Astra BVR.


Gosh do you have any idea how research is done. They can even using modified civilian aircraft to test weapons and avionics and often do. Please learn before waffling

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ch abdullah

All of above pakistan first need to deveolpe ICBM(_*Intercontinental ballistic missile ) *_to make its defence more strong


----------



## Bossman

Abdullah khalid said:


> All of above pakistan first need to deveolpe ICBM(_*Intercontinental ballistic missile ) *_to make its defence more strong


Why, who will it be used against, will it make Pakistan stronger or weaker, what is the cost benefit? Please develop intellectual curiosity and the ability to analyze situations and not post childish statements.


----------



## The Accountant

Bossman said:


> Why, who will it be used against, will it make Pakistan stronger or weaker, what is the cost benefit? Please develop intellectual curiosity and the ability to analyze situations and not post childish statements.


Ok than discard your Nuclear bombs and ban your armed forces ...

Man I am also against test of ICBMs but capability should be there ...


----------



## Ch abdullah

Bossman said:


> Why, who will it be used against, will it make Pakistan stronger or weaker, what is the cost benefit? Please develop intellectual curiosity and the ability to analyze situations and not post childish statements.


Now you read this then might you it makes my country strong or weak and your neighbour INDIA has made ICBM.They are getting stronger in every field.There are in G 20 but we are at 25 and whatever situations are i may think only the benefit of my country not of other
An intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) is a guided ballistic missile with a minimum range of 5,500 kilometres (3,400 mi)[1] primarily designed for nuclear weapons delivery (delivering one or more thermonuclear warheads). Similarly, conventional, chemical, and biological weapons can also be delivered with varying effectiveness, but have never been deployed on ICBMs. Most modern designs support multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs), allowing a single missile to carry several warheads, each of which can strike a different target.

Early ICBMs had limited precision, which made them suitable for use only against the largest targets, such as cities. They were seen as a "safe" basing option, one that would keep the deterrent force close to home where it would be difficult to attack. Attacks against military targets (especially hardened ones) still demanded the use of a more precise manned bomber. Second- and third-generation designs dramatically improved accuracy to the point where even the smallest point targets can be successfully attacked.

ICBMs are differentiated by having greater range and speed than other ballistic missiles: intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs), medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs), short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs) and tactical ballistic missiles (TBMs). Short and medium-range ballistic missiles are known collectively as theatre ballistic missiles


----------



## Sameer25

Abdullah khalid said:


> Now you read this then might you it makes my country strong or weak and your neighbour INDIA has made ICBM.They are getting stronger in every field.There are in G 20 but we are at 25 and whatever situations are i may think only the benefit of my country not of other
> An intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) is a guided ballistic missile with a minimum range of 5,500 kilometres (3,400 mi)[1] primarily designed for nuclear weapons delivery (delivering one or more thermonuclear warheads). Similarly, conventional, chemical, and biological weapons can also be delivered with varying effectiveness, but have never been deployed on ICBMs. Most modern designs support multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs), allowing a single missile to carry several warheads, each of which can strike a different target.
> 
> Early ICBMs had limited precision, which made them suitable for use only against the largest targets, such as cities. They were seen as a "safe" basing option, one that would keep the deterrent force close to home where it would be difficult to attack. Attacks against military targets (especially hardened ones) still demanded the use of a more precise manned bomber. Second- and third-generation designs dramatically improved accuracy to the point where even the smallest point targets can be successfully attacked.
> 
> ICBMs are differentiated by having greater range and speed than other ballistic missiles: intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs), medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs), short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs) and tactical ballistic missiles (TBMs). Short and medium-range ballistic missiles are known collectively as theatre ballistic missiles


i heard rumors about Pakistan developing Tipu and Tamur icbms are they true or just rumors


----------



## Arsalan

Sameer25 said:


> i heard rumors about Pakistan developing Tipu and Tamur icbms are they true or just rumors


As you called them, they were "rumors".


----------



## Ch abdullah

Sameer25 said:


> i heard rumors about Pakistan developing Tipu and Tamur icbms are they true or just rumors





Arsalan said:


> As you called them, they were "rumors".


According to the Strategic Plan Division report issued, Pakistan has started to work to develop the intercontinental ballistic missile “Taimur” .

According to the source, intercontinental ballistic missile Taimur has a range of 7000 km and has the capacity of hitting its target accurately. Intercontinental ballistic missile of Pakistan “Taimur” can take over the nuclear warheads as well as traditional weapons. Development of Taimur definitely is a significant journey to stronger defense of the country.

In short Pakistan’s missiles program is the pride of Nation. Missile Development program of Pakistan, battlefield range missiles to intercontinental missile, is a journey of struggles, devotion and commitments. Definitely missile program of Pakistan, especially upcoming intercontinental missile Taimur is a great symbol of defense and guarantee of survival.
According to my sources its test my held in 2018 or 2019
And this is not RUMORS

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arsalan

Abdullah khalid said:


> According to the Strategic Plan Division report issued, Pakistan has started to work to develop the intercontinental ballistic missile “Taimur” .
> 
> According to the source, intercontinental ballistic missile Taimur has a range of 7000 km and has the capacity of hitting its target accurately. Intercontinental ballistic missile of Pakistan “Taimur” can take over the nuclear warheads as well as traditional weapons. Development of Taimur definitely is a significant journey to stronger defense of the country.
> 
> In short Pakistan’s missiles program is the pride of Nation. Missile Development program of Pakistan, battlefield range missiles to intercontinental missile, is a journey of struggles, devotion and commitments. Definitely missile program of Pakistan, especially upcoming intercontinental missile Taimur is a great symbol of defense and guarantee of survival.
> According to my sources its test my held in 2018 or 2019
> And this is not RUMORS


The idea have been there. However we have been hearing about them in development and in production for over three - four years now, may be even more. That is what i was referring to as rumors, circulating for all those years.


----------



## Safriz

Abdullah khalid said:


> According to the Strategic Plan Division report issued, Pakistan has started to work to develop the intercontinental ballistic missile “Taimur” .
> 
> According to the source, intercontinental ballistic missile Taimur has a range of 7000 km and has the capacity of hitting its target accurately. Intercontinental ballistic missile of Pakistan “Taimur” can take over the nuclear warheads as well as traditional weapons. Development of Taimur definitely is a significant journey to stronger defense of the country.
> 
> In short Pakistan’s missiles program is the pride of Nation. Missile Development program of Pakistan, battlefield range missiles to intercontinental missile, is a journey of struggles, devotion and commitments. Definitely missile program of Pakistan, especially upcoming intercontinental missile Taimur is a great symbol of defense and guarantee of survival.
> According to my sources its test my held in 2018 or 2019
> And this is not RUMORS


SPD only mentioned that they have the technology and capability to build an ICBM if the need arises. They never gave it a name and never gave a timeline.
Taimoor and similar names for an alleged ICBM came into circulation when A.Q.Khan was leading the project and was probably a plan on the drawing board which never materialized.


----------



## The Accountant

Arsalan said:


> As you called them, they were "rumors".


I think we did some initial work but then backed off due to threat of international backlash ...


----------



## Ch abdullah

The Accountant said:


> I think we did some initial work but then backed off due to threat of international backlash ...











The Accountant said:


> I think we did some initial work but then backed off due to threat of international backlash ...


If you worry of international backlash then why pakistan done atomic explosion in 1998 when there was a big international backlash 
So,please stop making statement like a child

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arsalan

The Accountant said:


> I think we did some initial work but then backed off due to threat of international backlash ...


Very little work but yeah!


----------



## The Accountant

Arsalan said:


> Very little work but yeah!


I am of the opinion that we should acquire the capability without disclosure or test ...

No-one knows if next 9/11 will be claimed to be originated from Pakistan ... They don't even ask for proof ... I am bringing @Zarvan bhai for my support :p


----------



## Zarvan

The Accountant said:


> I am of the opinion that we should acquire the capability without disclosure or test ...
> 
> No-one knows if next 9/11 will be claimed to be originated from Pakistan ... They don't even ask for proof ... I am bringing @Zarvan bhai for my support :p


Those who want to be in denial like Saddam was for long time and many others were that USA won't come after us than they are living in fools paradise. Reality is we need to consider each and ever country a potential enemy. We have to prepare for it. We have to go for ICBM. In fact I more than sure we are already working on few of them.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Accountant

Zarvan said:


> Those who want to be in denial like Saddam was for long time and many others were that USA won't come after us than they are living in fools paradise. Reality is we need to consider each and ever country a potential enemy. We have to prepare for it. We have to go for ICBM. In fact I more than sure we are already working on few of them.


Add China into that as well ... those who thinks that China will save us then they are living in fools land ... in international relations its always about own priorities ... today we are on priority list of china like we were for US in 80s but future is no guranteed so we have to rely only on our ownself and Allah while keeping best diplomatic relations with everyone

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Zarvan

The Accountant said:


> Add China into that as well ... those who thinks that China will save us then they are living in fools land ... in international relations its always about own priorities ... today we are on priority list of china like we were for US in 80s but future is no guranteed so we have to rely only on our ownself and Allah while keeping best diplomatic relations with everyone


I agree


----------



## Ch abdullah

Zarvan said:


> I agree


i also agree


----------



## Mahmood-ur-Rehman

The Accountant said:


> I am of the opinion that we should acquire the capability without disclosure or test .


We should make it and test it. It will improve our image and respect in international community.Those countries who have this capability are the most respected countries in the world.This world only bows down to might and this is the reality with out exception.The fear of this capability will be the best deterrence to keep this world from wars.


----------



## The Accountant

Mahmood-ur-Rehman said:


> We should make it and test it. It will improve our image and respect in international community.Those countries who have this capability are the most respected countries in the world.This world only bows down to might and this is the reality with out exception.The fear of this capability will be the best deterrence to keep this world from wars.


You are only partially right as power those wetern countries draws is from ecnonmy mainly and not from weapons alone ... First we need to build economy to test these weapons otherwise we will be creating useless enemies


----------



## Sameer25

Arsalan said:


> As you called them, they were "rumors".


yes, i am sad that they turned out to be "rumors" 



Abdullah khalid said:


> According to the Strategic Plan Division report issued, Pakistan has started to work to develop the intercontinental ballistic missile “Taimur” .
> 
> According to the source, intercontinental ballistic missile Taimur has a range of 7000 km and has the capacity of hitting its target accurately. Intercontinental ballistic missile of Pakistan “Taimur” can take over the nuclear warheads as well as traditional weapons. Development of Taimur definitely is a significant journey to stronger defense of the country.
> 
> In short Pakistan’s missiles program is the pride of Nation. Missile Development program of Pakistan, battlefield range missiles to intercontinental missile, is a journey of struggles, devotion and commitments. Definitely missile program of Pakistan, especially upcoming intercontinental missile Taimur is a great symbol of defense and guarantee of survival.
> According to my sources its test my held in 2018 or 2019
> And this is not RUMORS


sources?!?!? 
I really hope they are MIRV capable to begin with, then pakistan will have a truly sophisticated nuclear programme



Abdullah khalid said:


> If you worry of international backlash then why pakistan done atomic explosion in 1998 when there was a big international backlash
> So,please stop making statement like a child


its kind of sad but i cant read urdu fluently


----------



## The Deterrent

amardeep mishra said:


> Do not worry about my brain, my friend. I love analyzing such systems. And no they are not hobby drones in the sense that you can control it via RC. They are fully autonomous! ofcourse I did not develop the APM stack--I merely pulled it off the github.
> I have however designed completely nonlinear control for thrust vectored aerial vehicles and coded in python and implemented in micro-computer. This is radically different from linearized way of designing control wherein we use MRAC based gain scheduling.
> The data transmission takes place using MQTT protocol(as against MAVLINK).









amardeep mishra said:


> Yes indeed pakistan has been doing a LOT OF THINGS but that doesnt mean all of it has been designed there. We all know the origin and development of Babur. If you read carefully I never claimed pakistan was not able to use the same technologies for both of its own cruise missile-- the point I was making and I still make is -- there is a clear distinct south african hand in design of Ra'ad which you can not deny. There are couple of other sources as well-- dont worry they are not Indian-- and they claim south african involvement in Ra'ad.


May I present the options for origins of Babur?
1. Ukrainian KH-55 (the most popular choice among Indians)
2. Chinese CJ-10 (fallback option if KH-55 theory is busted) 
3. American Tomahawks (crashed units, OMG impossible to reverse-engineer for poor uneducated Pakistanis)
4. Computer-Generated Imagery (latest theory simulating an Ostrich's head buried in the sand)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue Marlin

The Deterrent said:


> May I present the options for origins of Babur?
> 1. Ukrainian KH-55 (the most popular choice among Indians)
> 2. Chinese CJ-10 (fallback option if KH-55 theory is busted)
> 3. American Tomahawks (crashed units, OMG impossible to reverse-engineer for poor uneducated Pakistanis)
> 4. Computer-Generated Imagery (latest theory simulating an Ostrich's head buried in the sand)


well either the kh-55 or the tomahawk have differant rear control surfaces designs thats the biggest give away. as for the ther rest then yeah its the same among other cruise missiles, long round, got folding wings, and has a turbine engine in it. if you put all this together then you have basically described every other missiles in this class
kh-55 mdcn, tomahawk, ch-10 even the nirbhay.


----------



## amardeep mishra

The Deterrent said:


> May I present the options for origins of Babur?
> 1. Ukrainian KH-55 (the most popular choice among Indians)
> 2. Chinese CJ-10 (fallback option if KH-55 theory is busted)
> 3. American Tomahawks (crashed units, OMG impossible to reverse-engineer for poor uneducated Pakistanis)
> 4. Computer-Generated Imagery (latest theory simulating an Ostrich's head buried in the sand)


Hi dear @The Deterrent
I really do not think memes and smilies are needed in a serious discussions. It would be great if we can avoid it here. Instead of getting riled up, kindly prove your point based on facts and established literature-- but I know you can not prove-- there is a difference between "proving" and "speculating". I am unfortunately not much into the latter.
As for the Babur, there are a plethora of literature available on the origins and development. Please lets not tread that path or else it will very easily turn into mud-slinging competition between two groups who I am sure would have never worked on any aerial vehicle in any capacity.
btw, do you really know what it takes to design a cruise missile? Does pakistan even have a certifying agency to certify the hardware and software for cruise missiles?
It is a fact--if you care to go through various American publications-- that a lot of KH-55 were indeed transferred to China in early 90s and also couple of un-exploded tomhawks(via pakistan in early 2000s). Now once you have a physical model-- you can create your own similar model and pass it through numerous wind tunnel tests at various AoAs, Side slip angles etc etc to create a matrix of data(Various Aerodynamic Coefficients). Various curve fitting techniques are then brought to bear to make out a relationship between aerodynamic coefficients and variables like alpha, beta, elevator deflection, rudder deflection, roll rates etc etc. Once you have these relationships, you can then linearize your model, about lets say level flight condition and then design a simple linear control. I am not sure if pakistan has even once passed the Babur through wind tunnel tests etc.
You would be guessing, as to why one can not use traditional off the shelf autopilots such as APM or PX4,right? Well they simply do not meet the stringent mil requirements. For a cruise missile you would have to design your own control and integrate it with a mission planner. The hardware and software should both adhere to mil requirements.

PS- Kindly note, I do not quote any Indian source just to make it neutral. All of my observations are based on either American or European sources. Also note I am not claiming that pakistan did nothing, Pakistan did infact work out ababeel almost entirely on their own-- which is a commendable job, although in cruise missiles, I do believe that it was China which had active help in Babur and South Africa that helped in Ra'ad.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ch abdullah

Sameer25 said:


> I really hope they are MIRV capable to begin with, then pakistan will have a truly sophisticated nuclear programme


the pakistan has deveopled MIRVs named ABABEEL for your kind information



Sameer25 said:


> its kind of sad but i cant read urdu fluently


your can read english fluently which is other country national languaage but not yours country national language this is not sad it is shameful


----------



## Arsalan

amardeep mishra said:


> Hi dear @The Deterrent
> I really do not think memes and smilies are needed in a serious discussions.


Hi,
Ever tried explaing this to @Guru_Dutt or @CalmDown@all_Dude ? 



amardeep mishra said:


> HIIt would be great if we can avoid it here. Instead of getting riled up, kindly prove your point based on facts and established literature-- but I know you can not prove-- there is a difference between "proving" and "speculating".* I am unfortunately not much into the latter.*
> .



Yet you go on to write all this:


> As for the Babur, there are a plethora of literature available on the origins and development. Please lets not tread that path or else it will very easily turn into mud-slinging competition between two groups who I am sure would have never worked on any aerial vehicle in any capacity.
> btw, do you really know what it takes to design a cruise missile? Does pakistan even have a certifying agency to certify the hardware and software for cruise missiles?
> It is a fact--if you care to go through various American publications-- that a lot of KH-55 were indeed transferred to China in early 90s and also couple of un-exploded tomhawks(via pakistan in early 2000s). Now once you have a physical model-- you can create your own similar model and pass it through numerous wind tunnel tests at various AoAs, Side slip angles etc etc to create a matrix of data(Various Aerodynamic Coefficients). Various curve fitting techniques are then brought to bear to make out a relationship between aerodynamic coefficients and variables like alpha, beta, elevator deflection, rudder deflection, roll rates etc etc. Once you have these relationships, you can then linearize your model, about lets say level flight condition and then design a simple linear control. I am not sure if pakistan has even once passed the Babur through wind tunnel tests etc.
> You would be guessing, as to why one can not use traditional off the shelf autopilots such as APM or PX4,right? Well they simply do not meet the stringent mil requirements. For a cruise missile you would have to design your own control and integrate it with a mission planner. The hardware and software should both adhere to mil requirements.
> 
> PS- Kindly note, I do not quote any Indian source just to make it neutral. All of my observations are based on either American or European sources. Also note I am not claiming that pakistan did nothing, Pakistan did infact work out ababeel almost entirely on their own-- which is a commendable job, although in cruise missiles, I do believe that it was China which had active help in Babur and South Africa that helped in Ra'ad


What else all this is if not speculations? You are assuming things, talking about possibilities and consider all that to be fact at the end? THIS is SPECULATION sir! 
A few fancy aerodynamic terms in there wont change the fact.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## v9s

amardeep mishra said:


> Hi dear @The Deterrent
> I really do not think memes and smilies are needed in a serious discussions. It would be great if we can avoid it here.



Haha..you think people take you seriously!


----------



## CalmDown@all_Dude

Arsalan said:


> Hi,
> Ever tried explaing this to @Guru_Dutt or @CalmDown@all_Dude ?


Well He said in a serious topic 
And i am never serious on any topic




Arsalan said:


> What else all this is if not speculations? You are assuming things, talking about possibilities and consider all that to be fact at the end? THIS is SPECULATION sir!
> A few fancy aerodynamic terms in there wont change the fact.


Sir 
Its always speculation that lead to its specification 
Further their isn't any credibility of it being an indigenous system or if custom made as then we could actually go through its specifications we could pin point its true facts the same way one gets about a plane through its rcs engine ;speed ;endurance ;payload capacity ;or mass as a matter of fact we all are fed what they want us to when their isn't any specification 
such as the Kn of thrust those turbofan produce when fired and at what point do these navigational support start mid ;initial etc


----------



## Arsalan

CalmDown@all_Dude said:


> Well He said in ********************




You want to try now @amardeep mishra ???

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Blue Marlin

im quiet enjoying the ping pong match between @deterant and @amardeep mishra

on one them is sane and the other guy is asking for evidence, this isn't gonna end well

@deterant you should go on the offensive and ask for proof of origin on the nirbhay to spice things up a bit, please.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sameer25

Abdullah khalid said:


> the pakistan has deveopled MIRVs named ABABEEL for your kind information
> 
> 
> your can read english fluently which is other country national languaage but not yours country national language this is not sad it is shameful


well i know about ababeel but i was saying that usually they start new type of missiles as non-MIRVs just single warhead. i meant that i hope the first taimur missile is MIRV to begin with.
the reason why i cant read urdu fluently is because when i was in pakistan i went to english medum private schools and they focused on english more than urdu, i can read it but i have to sound each word out. i moved to the US when i was 11 so i lost what progress i made


----------



## amardeep mishra

Arsalan said:


> What else all this is if not speculations? You are assuming things, talking about possibilities and consider all that to be fact at the end? THIS is SPECULATION sir!
> A few fancy aerodynamic terms in there wont change the fact


Hi @Arsalan
No, that is not speculation-- that is discussing based on "published American literature". I am sure those who published such reports had much more intelligence inputs than you or I. Also, I've worked on couple of things(still do!) and have research paper in AIAA(American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics), so I guess I know what it takes to design systems like this. Whatever I wrote above has been published by people who are NOT Indian!



Arsalan said:


> You want to try now @amardeep mishra ???


You see, I am afraid you think, just because that poster is an Indian, I will go soft on him? I believe smilies or memes should not be allowed in serious technical discussions regardless of the nationality of the poster!



Blue Marlin said:


> @deterant you should go on the offensive and ask for proof of origin on the nirbhay to spice things up a bit, please.


Yeah sure @Blue Marlin , ask whatever you wish to ask! DO not worry, I will write an elaborate reply on Nirbhay, if that is what you seek! There is a reason why it is taking time!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## CalmDown@all_Dude

amardeep mishra said:


> You see, I am afraid you think, just because that poster is an Indian, I will go soft on him? I believe smilies or memes should not be allowed in serious technical discussions regardless of the nationality of the poster!


Well sir 
their i didn't wanted to make fun but on a serious note its true when one need to learn one need has to leave the ignorance of enjoyment to devote time for actual learning .


----------



## Ch abdullah

Sameer25 said:


> the reason why i cant read urdu fluently is because when i was in pakistan i went to english medum private schools and they focused on english more than urdu, i can read it but i have to sound each word out. i moved to the US when i was 11 so i lost what progress i made


We are living in saudi arabia from starting my father here is a constructor but thy not allow us to forget our country culture or anything related to our counry . I was also went english medium school but i not lose grip on my national language but bro you have to get grip on it.


----------



## Blue Marlin

amardeep mishra said:


> Hi @Arsalan
> No, that is not speculation-- that is discussing based on "published American literature". I am sure those who published such reports had much more intelligence inputs than you or I. Also, I've worked on couple of things(still do!) and have research paper in AIAA(American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics), so I guess I know what it takes to design systems like this. Whatever I wrote above has been published by people who are NOT Indian!
> 
> 
> You see, I am afraid you think, just because that poster is an Indian, I will go soft on him? I believe smilies or memes should not be allowed in serious technical discussions regardless of the nationality of the poster!
> 
> 
> Yeah sure @Blue Marlin , ask whatever you wish to ask! DO not worry, I will write an elaborate reply on Nirbhay, if that is what you seek! There is a reason why it is taking time!


i could have sword many useres here have stated multiple time that pakistan wont release technical info on their missiles. even the chinese, yanks, french, the only thing you'd find is soviet memoirs from scientists.

i look forward to your replay in regards to the origin of the nirbhay, dont forget to include the russain mt36 engine and other components.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mahmood-ur-Rehman

amardeep mishra said:


> Hi dear @The Deterrent
> I really do not think memes and smilies are needed in a serious discussions. It would be great if we can avoid it here. Instead of getting riled up, kindly prove your point based on facts and established literature-- but I know you can not prove-- there is a difference between "proving" and "speculating". I am unfortunately not much into the latter.
> As for the Babur, there are a plethora of literature available on the origins and development. Please lets not tread that path or else it will very easily turn into mud-slinging competition between two groups who I am sure would have never worked on any aerial vehicle in any capacity.
> btw, do you really know what it takes to design a cruise missile? Does pakistan even have a certifying agency to certify the hardware and software for cruise missiles?
> It is a fact--if you care to go through various American publications-- that a lot of KH-55 were indeed transferred to China in early 90s and also couple of un-exploded tomhawks(via pakistan in early 2000s). Now once you have a physical model-- you can create your own similar model and pass it through numerous wind tunnel tests at various AoAs, Side slip angles etc etc to create a matrix of data(Various Aerodynamic Coefficients). Various curve fitting techniques are then brought to bear to make out a relationship between aerodynamic coefficients and variables like alpha, beta, elevator deflection, rudder deflection, roll rates etc etc. Once you have these relationships, you can then linearize your model, about lets say level flight condition and then design a simple linear control. I am not sure if pakistan has even once passed the Babur through wind tunnel tests etc.
> You would be guessing, as to why one can not use traditional off the shelf autopilots such as APM or PX4,right? Well they simply do not meet the stringent mil requirements. For a cruise missile you would have to design your own control and integrate it with a mission planner. The hardware and software should both adhere to mil requirements.
> 
> PS- Kindly note, I do not quote any Indian source just to make it neutral. All of my observations are based on either American or European sources. Also note I am not claiming that pakistan did nothing, Pakistan did infact work out ababeel almost entirely on their own-- which is a commendable job, although in cruise missiles, I do believe that it was China which had active help in Babur and South Africa that helped in Ra'ad.


Why are you so worried accept the realities.


----------



## The Deterrent

amardeep mishra said:


> Hi dear @The Deterrent
> I really do not think memes and smilies are needed in a serious discussions. It would be great if we can avoid it here. Instead of getting riled up, kindly prove your point based on facts and established literature-- but I know you can not prove-- there is a difference between "proving" and "speculating". I am unfortunately not much into the latter.
> As for the Babur, there are a plethora of literature available on the origins and development. Please lets not tread that path or else it will very easily turn into mud-slinging competition between two groups who I am sure would have never worked on any aerial vehicle in any capacity.
> btw, do you really know what it takes to design a cruise missile? Does pakistan even have a certifying agency to certify the hardware and software for cruise missiles?
> It is a fact--if you care to go through various American publications-- that a lot of KH-55 were indeed transferred to China in early 90s and also couple of un-exploded tomhawks(via pakistan in early 2000s). Now once you have a physical model-- you can create your own similar model and pass it through numerous wind tunnel tests at various AoAs, Side slip angles etc etc to create a matrix of data(Various Aerodynamic Coefficients). Various curve fitting techniques are then brought to bear to make out a relationship between aerodynamic coefficients and variables like alpha, beta, elevator deflection, rudder deflection, roll rates etc etc. Once you have these relationships, you can then linearize your model, about lets say level flight condition and then design a simple linear control. I am not sure if pakistan has even once passed the Babur through wind tunnel tests etc.
> You would be guessing, as to why one can not use traditional off the shelf autopilots such as APM or PX4,right? Well they simply do not meet the stringent mil requirements. For a cruise missile you would have to design your own control and integrate it with a mission planner. The hardware and software should both adhere to mil requirements.
> 
> PS- Kindly note, I do not quote any Indian source just to make it neutral. All of my observations are based on either American or European sources. Also note I am not claiming that pakistan did nothing, Pakistan did infact work out ababeel almost entirely on their own-- which is a commendable job, although in cruise missiles, I do believe that it was China which had active help in Babur and South Africa that helped in Ra'ad.



SERIOUS discussion? Let me think, who here would be interested in having a 'serious' discussion with a seemingly educated (dare I say 'proficient in scientific methodology') person...who thinks that Pakistan would fake an underwater cruise missile launch. 

Not me.



Blue Marlin said:


> im quiet enjoying the ping pong match between @deterant and @amardeep mishra
> 
> on one them is sane and the other guy is asking for evidence, this isn't gonna end well
> 
> @deterant you should go on the offensive and ask for proof of origin on the nirbhay to spice things up a bit, please.


----------



## Blue Marlin

The Deterrent said:


> SERIOUS discussion? Let me think, who here would be interested in having a 'serious' discussion with a seemingly educated (dare I say 'proficient in scientific methodology') person...who thinks that Pakistan would fake an underwater cruise missile launch.
> 
> Not me.


----------



## The Accountant

The Deterrent said:


> SERIOUS discussion? Let me think, who here would be interested in having a 'serious' discussion with a seemingly educated (dare I say 'proficient in scientific methodology') person...who thinks that Pakistan would fake an underwater cruise missile launch.
> 
> Not me.


No use this guy Andreep Mishra present him as some scientist think tank but his only purpose here is to discredit Pakistan's achievements ...

Previously he was advertising that Raad cannot indigenous as it was not intially tested on thunder and his emotions he forgot that Raad predates Thunder ...

These Indians ... they will never change ... deception is their favorite tool ...

Reactions: Like Like:
 1


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

Arsalan said:


> Hi,
> Ever tried explaing this to @Guru_Dutt or @CalmDown@all_Dude ?
> 
> 
> 
> Yet you go on to write all this:
> 
> What else all this is if not speculations? You are assuming things, talking about possibilities and consider all that to be fact at the end? THIS is SPECULATION sir!
> A few fancy aerodynamic terms in there wont change the fact.


One IIT (Indian Institute of Technology) folk has explained it all - their undergrads are products, masters are by-products, and doctorals are waste-products!!!! For _Aklman_, _Isharet is Ka'fi......_



Abdullah khalid said:


> According to the Strategic Plan Division report issued, Pakistan has started to work to develop the intercontinental ballistic missile “Taimur” .
> 
> According to the source, intercontinental ballistic missile Taimur has a range of 7000 km and has the capacity of hitting its target accurately. Intercontinental ballistic missile of Pakistan “Taimur” can take over the nuclear warheads as well as traditional weapons. Development of Taimur definitely is a significant journey to stronger defense of the country.
> 
> In short Pakistan’s missiles program is the pride of Nation. Missile Development program of Pakistan, battlefield range missiles to intercontinental missile, is a journey of struggles, devotion and commitments. Definitely missile program of Pakistan, especially upcoming intercontinental missile Taimur is a great symbol of defense and guarantee of survival.
> According to my sources its test my held in 2018 or 2019
> And this is not RUMORS


Everything looks fine except for the name "Timur"!!!! He was the most ruthless and "stone headed" ruler in that vicinity!!! Almost brought an end to the Ottomans!!! Reasons, passion etc. were completely foreign to that _Melun-el Melun_ !!! If Pak deliberately wants their ICBM to mimic him then it's understandable!!! And, who knows might be a good choice too!!!



My-Analogous said:


> We are one, our soul are one, our Allah is one, Our Prophet(PBUH) is one, our religion is one. When we have so much common then why not we will not help you. You are our brothers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Allama Iqbal
> 
> And this one is my favorite

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## My-Analogous

HAKIKAT said:


> One IIT (Indian Institute of Technology) folk has explained it all - their undergrads are products, masters are by-products, and doctorals are waste-products!!!! For _Aklman_, _Isharet is Ka'fi......_
> 
> 
> Everything looks fine except for the name "Timur"!!!! He was the most ruthless and "stone headed" ruler in that vicinity!!! Almost brought an end to the Ottomans!!! Reasons, passion etc. were completely foreign to that _Melun-el Melun_ !!! If Pak deliberately wants their ICBM to mimic him then it's understandable!!! And, who knows might be a good choice too!!!


Good to see that i am not alone and someone of same believe are working like i am now

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Deterrent

amardeep mishra said:


> Hi @The Deterrent
> Yeah sure you wont-- because you can NOT prove it. And yes the under water launch was fake. I am not saying, Pakistan isnt working on such a venture, it is just that, that particular launch video that ISPR put on internet was fake. Interestingly, in Pakistan it is the Army that has authority to reveal such things. Integrating Babur on Agostas is simply out of question and Pakistan couldnt have possibly designed an underwater pontoon.



There you go, that's more like it. See, was that difficult? Embrace your true colors, no shame in that. Be warned though, its a bad world out there for idiots living in their comfort-zone (aka BRF).

I don't need to prove anything, as I said earlier, _white_ people give your military all the proofs (OTOH Indians apparently 'tracked' a Shaheen-IA missile launched from northern Punjab and estimated its range to be 600km...while things were actually happening somewhere along the Pakistani coast). 
You, on the other hand, are proving your own worth...which is exactly how they say there, _'jeero bata lull'_.

Pakistan couldn't possibly have built nukes, or MRBMs, or Cruise missiles, or tactical nukes, or MIRVs.....I hope the list grows and every single time you repeat this statement till everything starts looking like a conspiracy to you.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Safriz

The Deterrent said:


> There you go, that's more like it. See, was that difficult? Embrace your true colors, no shame in that. Be warned though, its a bad world out there for idiots living in their comfort-zone (aka BRF).
> 
> I don't need to prove anything, as I said earlier, _white_ people give your military all the proofs (OTOH Indians apparently 'tracked' a Shaheen-IA missile launched from northern Punjab and estimated its range to be 600km...while things were actually happening somewhere along the Pakistani coast).
> You, on the other hand, are proving your own worth...which is exactly how they say there, _'jeero bata lull'_.
> 
> Pakistan couldn't possibly have built nukes, or MRBMs, or Cruise missiles, or tactical nukes, or MIRVs.....I hope the list grows and every single time you repeat this statement till everything starts looking like a conspiracy to you.


Yaar its not their fault, they are being constantly brainwashed by their media. Let them live in lala land.


----------



## cerebrum@Assasin

شاھین میزایل said:


> SPD only mentioned that they have the technology and capability to build an ICBM if the need arises. They never gave it a name and never gave a timeline.
> Taimoor and similar names for an alleged ICBM came into circulation when A.Q.Khan was leading the project and was probably a plan on the drawing board which never materialized.



Assalam o alaikum Sir ICBM is already there!!! We didn't disclosed it due to strategic reasons!


----------



## amardeep mishra

The Deterrent said:


> Pakistan couldn't possibly have built nukes, or MRBMs, or Cruise missiles, or tactical nukes, or MIRVs.....I hope the list grows and every single time you repeat this statement till everything starts looking like a conspiracy to you.


@The Deterrent
My dear friend, those _white _people know it too well how Pakistan "designed" these things. The world out there doesnt go by the conspiracy theories of Pakistanis. And the reason why I prefer to quote western sources, is simply because I want to keep it neutral-- because I know Pakistanis will reject an Indian report claiming it to be biased. I cant understand whats conspiracy in asking Chinese to set up almost every facility in Pakistan(regarding solid fuel delivery systems)? Maybe for you it is "conspiracy"- It is surely not for me!
PS- Kindly note, I am not claiming that Pakistan did nothing, all I am saying is, there is a "considerable" chinese hand in Babur and some of the solid fueled MRBMs. And various American Publications and intelligence reports point to this fact. Also I will repeat once again, Pakistan is indeed working on a sub launched cruise missile-- there is no doubt about that--however the issue is, the ISPR video that was uploaded was inconsistent and fake. In due time, PN will of course field a SLCM.


The Deterrent said:


> I don't need to prove anything, as I said earlier, _white_ people give your military all the proofs (OTOH Indians apparently 'tracked' a Shaheen-IA missile launched from northern Punjab and estimated its range to be 600km...while things were actually happening somewhere along the Pakistani coast).
> You, on the other hand, are proving your own worth...which is exactly how they say there, _'jeero bata lull'_.


I do not know what you intend to write, but tracking a Pakistani MRBM wouldnt be a problem, believe me! In case you wish to discuss the developments pertaining to R&D of long range AESA radars in India, I can gladly explain it here, but I am afraid, that will be too much technical stuff for a forum like this.
And for the last time, I do not need to prove anything to folks in a forum where a vast overwhelming majority do not have anything to do with research and development. My worth depends on my work,my experience and my research papers and not on remarks of deluded folks in a forum! And please be aware that In Aerospace, Pakistani contribution to journals like AIAA, International Journal of Control is abysmally poor. But I can understand the reason for that!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Deterrent

amardeep mishra said:


> @The Deterrent
> My dear friend, those _white _people know it too well how Pakistan "designed" these things. The world out there doesnt go by the conspiracy theories of Pakistanis. And the reason why I prefer to quote western sources, is simply because I want to keep it neutral-- because I know Pakistanis will reject an Indian report claiming it to be biased. I cant understand whats conspiracy in asking Chinese to set up almost every facility in Pakistan(regarding solid fuel delivery systems)? Maybe for you it is "conspiracy"- It is surely not for me!





amardeep mishra said:


> I do not know what you intend to write, but tracking a Pakistani MRBM wouldnt be a problem, believe me! In case you wish to discuss the developments pertaining to R&D of long range AESA radars in India, I can gladly explain it here, but I am afraid, that will be too much technical stuff for a forum like this.
> And for the last time, I do not need to prove anything to folks in a forum where a vast overwhelming majority do not have anything to do with research and development. My worth depends on my work,my experience and my research papers and not on remarks of deluded folks in a forum! And please be aware that In Aerospace, Pakistani contribution to journals like AIAA, International Journal of Control is abysmally poor. But I can understand the reason for that!


Failing to grasp the point, as usual. You're trying too hard, let it go.



amardeep mishra said:


> the ISPR video that was uploaded was inconsistent and fake.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bratva

Since SPD and ISPR is unwilling to release HD test videos of Ra'ad. Here is a similar HD test video of ALCM with 500 KM range which gives a pretty good idea what Ra'ad would look like in HD video

http://www.janes.com/article/73914/rokaf-successfully-test-fires-taurus-kepd-350k-cruise-missile


P.S. South Korea test videos are damn Good.

This is their SLCM video

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Thorough Pro

I have a four legged pet animal and sometimes he briefly exhibits your qualities............that is when he takes a pee and raises one leg up, but you have only two legs and still manage to keep one up all the time you are logged in on this forum 




amardeep mishra said:


> Hi @The Deterrent
> Yeah sure you wont-- because you can NOT prove it. And yes the under water launch was fake. I am not saying, Pakistan isnt working on such a venture, it is just that, that particular launch video that ISPR put on internet was fake. Interestingly, in Pakistan it is the Army that has authority to reveal such things. Integrating Babur on Agostas is simply out of question and Pakistan couldnt have possibly designed an underwater pontoon.
> 
> 
> Hi @HAKIKAT
> That was true to a great extent a decade back, but now things are changing at a decent pace in Indian research arena and now a lot of IIT/NIT undergrads(including myself) are preferring to take up research at IIT/IISc because Indian Govt is providing lucrative offer right after 3rd year in Engineering(Btech in India lasts 4 years). For instance, an IIT under grad, would be payed $1000+ per month if he/she chooses to pursue his/her research at IITs For instance I am pursuing "direct-PhD" and those statements that you've written above doesnt really hold true for present batch of "direct-PhDs". For more info you can look into the research works of some of the "direct-PhDs".

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SQ8

The Deterrent said:


> There you go, that's more like it. See, was that difficult? Embrace your true colors, no shame in that. Be warned though, its a bad world out there for idiots living in their comfort-zone (aka BRF).
> 
> I don't need to prove anything, as I said earlier, _white_ people give your military all the proofs (OTOH Indians apparently 'tracked' a Shaheen-IA missile launched from northern Punjab and estimated its range to be 600km...while things were actually happening somewhere along the Pakistani coast).
> You, on the other hand, are proving your own worth...which is exactly how they say there, _'jeero bata lull'_.
> 
> Pakistan couldn't possibly have built nukes, or MRBMs, or Cruise missiles, or tactical nukes, or MIRVs.....I hope the list grows and every single time you repeat this statement till everything starts looking like a conspiracy to you.


Look up the term loghorrea- this member is the definition of it. A wannabe "expert" whose only form of argument is to deny anyone else the ability to claim expertise.

Best to put on the ignore list and please report the second such members drags in India to start bragging

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## MastanKhan

Oscar said:


> Look up the term loghorrea- this member is the definition of it. A wannabe "expert" whose only form of argument is to deny anyone else the ability to claim expertise.
> 
> Best to put on the ignore list and please report the second such members drags in India to start bragging



Hi,

What that poster is using is a special technique---insult---degrade---humiliate---and someone will spill out their guts---means some kid who overheard his dad or uncles will spill out the beans.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## I.R.A

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> What that poster is using is a special technique---insult---degrade---humiliate---and someone will spill out their guts---means some kid who overheard his dad or uncles will spill out the beans.



It wasn't directed at any random person (like me), the target was chosen carefully someone with knowledge .... challenge, tempt, insult, degrade, and try to humiliate the person and may be he will fall prey.

Don't know about the targeted person but I missed the dp of a beautiful seccy young woman expert, with all her charms and innocent style of guftagoo. Would that have helped?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Well due to bad political situations tests which started stopped so any idea when those tests will take place again ? @The Deterrent


----------



## Imran Khan

Bratva said:


> Since SPD and ISPR is unwilling to release HD test videos of Ra'ad. Here is a similar HD test video of ALCM with 500 KM range which gives a pretty good idea what Ra'ad would look like in HD video
> 
> http://www.janes.com/article/73914/rokaf-successfully-test-fires-taurus-kepd-350k-cruise-missile
> 
> 
> P.S. South Korea test videos are damn Good.
> 
> This is their SLCM video


they buy good cameras . i think our forces made hd videos but not shear to public


----------



## The Deterrent

Bratva said:


> Since SPD and ISPR is unwilling to release HD test videos of Ra'ad. Here is a similar HD test video of ALCM with 500 KM range which gives a pretty good idea what Ra'ad would look like in HD video
> 
> http://www.janes.com/article/73914/rokaf-successfully-test-fires-taurus-kepd-350k-cruise-missile
> 
> 
> P.S. South Korea test videos are damn Good.
> 
> This is their SLCM video


The Taurus seemed to have been actively guided by an F-15, don't know for sure but saw a clip where it seemed like the F-15's IR display had a lock on the target.
Brilliant GIF for SLCM, thats almost like any torpedo-tube launched CM works. Shows clearly that the booster is ignited underwater and the capsule slides off later.



Zarvan said:


> Well due to bad political situations tests which started stopped so any idea when those tests will take place again ? @The Deterrent


Tests don't _'start' _or _'stop'_ because of internal or external political situations. Thats not how it works, except when the military conducts exercises for show-of-force.

Look up the history of launch dates over the past few years. May be you'll see a pattern.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SQ8

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> What that poster is using is a special technique---insult---degrade---humiliate---and someone will spill out their guts---means some kid who overheard his dad or uncles will spill out the beans.


Essentially, this is sophisticated troll baiting to either waste a thread or invite a useful response.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Khafee

Oscar said:


> Essentially, this is sophisticated troll baiting to either waste a thread or invite a useful response.


I would go with option 1 - waste the thread.
Adequate punishment should be handed out.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MastanKhan

Oscar said:


> Essentially, this is sophisticated troll baiting to either waste a thread or invite a useful response.



Very very sophisticated---I would say.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SQ8

MastanKhan said:


> Very very sophisticated---I would say.


Not exactly, basic 4 years in engineering college and copying off the textbooks gets you there.
Reminds me of those smart alec kids in college who would be the first trying to raise their hand; constantly trying to be pets and one up the other students. Keeping answers and information away etc.

Funny thing, I never applied for my first job because I was hand picked by the research team.. and after that never moved to the job that I would half heartedly apply for; always better offers would just call me.

The smart alec variety are currently doing rounds upon rounds of government

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Zarvan

__ https://www.facebook.com/


----------



## STRANGER BIRD

Zarvan said:


> __ https://www.facebook.com/



This video is Unable to play?


----------



## Zarvan

STRANGER BIRD said:


> This video is Unable to play?






South Korea tests its cruise Missile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Safriz

Zarvan said:


> South Korea tests its cruise Missile


but but butt.
Endians hve the only usable Cruise missile in the Universe?
The Brahmouse being Hypersonic is the only missile in the world that can be of any military benefit.
Dont know why Backward countries like south Korea keep testing Sub sonic missiles which can be shot by an airgun these days.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Safriz

__ https://www.facebook.com/






__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/940065215458058245


----------



## Safriz

Raad-2






Raad-2 model held by the pilot.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## [--Leo--]

stealth features is RAM in ra'ad or it fly's so low so it avoid radars?


----------



## vizier

For ALCM you have the option to increase its official range by experimenting with drop-fuel tanks on the missile. Since it is not tube launched it can have some configuration to carry payload externally or merged to its body increasing the range of the missile like KH-55 missile below with conformal fuel tanks under its wings.






https://www.ausairpower.net/Analysis-Cruise-Missiles.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fawadqasim1

A very good investment by Pakistan and now we are reaping the reward. Any Sam system will be hard-pressed to get this stealthy terrain hugger.

Even if an airborne radar picks it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Safriz

Has anyone seen this photo of Raad before? Never seen a Raad with Black-red color scheme.


----------



## DANGER-ZONE

Safriz said:


> Has anyone seen this photo of Raad before? Never seen a Raad with Black-red color scheme.
> View attachment 648440



That's the very first test of RA'AD ALCM.
The rest of the tests conducted later on had either Red & Grey or Red & White color scheme.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Super Falcon

FATAH 1 seems to have better pin point accuracy than Raad and Buraq


----------



## Cent4

Anyone got any pictures of raad 2 from the parade today


----------



## Deino

Cent4 said:


> Anyone got any pictures of raad 2 from the parade today




From the parade thread!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Deino said:


> From the parade thread!
> 
> View attachment 826656
> 
> View attachment 826658
> 
> View attachment 826657


It looks really compact. IMO a clear lock for the JF-17 @JamD

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> It looks really compact. IMO a clear lock for the JF-17 @JamD




Any idea if it will be compatible with the J-10C too? IMO the larger and more capable J-10C would make sense than the JF-17!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Deino said:


> Any idea if it will be compatible with the J-10C too? IMO the larger and more capable J-10C would make sense than the JF-17!


I imagine so, but it depends on how the PAF intends to use the J-10CE. It seems that the current primary role of the J-10CE (in the PAF) is air-to-air.

The PAF wants to make as many of the J-10CEs and F-16s available for BVR engagements. Logically, this means that the JF-17s and Mirages are going to be the main bomb trucks. In fact, those were the exact 2 fighter types the PAF used in the strike role back in Feb 2019 against India. So the processes and training for using the JF-17 in the SOW deployment role are already present.

The JF-17 is certainly smaller and lighter than the J-10CE, but the PAF's goal is to hit specific targets using precision stand-off weapons. It's not ideal, but if a JF-17 can deploy two SOWs and/or ALCMs, that's sufficient. You can use drones, GLCMs, MLRS etc to fill out the rest of the strike requirement. The J-10CEs and F-16s will provide the top cover and/or sweep.

That said, it seems that the PAF is open to using the J-10CE for the strike role. The PAF implied that the fighter can carry SOWs as-is. This may be something we see as the PAF builds out the J-10CE fleet (the minimum is always 90+ for a new fighter type).

Reactions: Like Like:
17 | Love Love:
1


----------



## RAMPAGE

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> It looks really compact. IMO a clear lock for the JF-17 @JamD


Bigger than the storm shadow or do they have comparable dimensions?


----------



## Abramar

Deino said:


> Any idea if it will be compatible with the J-10C too? IMO the larger and more capable J-10C would make sense than the JF-17!


They already said the J-10C was an omni-role aircraft, including nuclear delivery. I don't see why it wouldn't be used with the J-10C

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Cent4 said:


> Anyone got any pictures of raad 2 from the parade today




Here the best image I found so far …

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## RAMPAGE

Deino said:


> Here the best image I found so far …
> 
> View attachment 826773


Do you think it's small enough to be carried by a JF-17?


----------



## Deino

RAMPAGE said:


> Do you think it's small enough to be carried by a JF-17?




I think it could but does it make sense? Therefore my question if it makes not more sense to integrate it to the J-10C.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RAMPAGE

Deino said:


> I think it could but does it make sense? Therefore my question if it makes not more sense to integrate it to the J-10C.


Why not both? J-10Cs may not always be available. The JF-17 is still a better platform to carry it than the Mirage, no?


----------



## RAMPAGE

Old variant








New variant










Changes: redesigned control surfaces, a new antenna, and redesigned air intake.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## RAMPAGE

Was Ra'ad's design, to some degree, inspired by the H-2 or H-4 SOW? 

@JamD

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Amaa'n



Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

Finally some high quality Images 😍

Are the wings of Raad 2 foldable?? 
And one more question!
The wings of Raad 2 appear to be on air intake side while mostly subsonic cruise Missiles have wings on side opposite to air intake side.Does this have some(major or minor) aerodynamic effect?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Deino said:


> Here the best image I found so far …
> 
> View attachment 826773


IMO an attritable loyal wingman/UCAV would only be a bit bigger than this ALCM. The main focus of said loyal wingman would be to carry 2~4 AAMs OR light PGBs OR ECM jamming equipment. You could maybe design it such that it launches from the ground via a rocket, and then switches to its internal engine.

Basically, develop the Ra'ad stack into something like the Chinese FH-97 (though, given our procurement tract as of late, we might literally just get the FH-97). Seriously, I'm not sure why they didn't just pare AZM *down something like this as the starting project*. It's within our budget and our technical reach (albeit with additional, but plausibly doable, development work). tbh at this point it seems Baykar Makina's on a more realistic track to developing its own manned stealth fighter... @JamD

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## JamD

RAMPAGE said:


> Was Ra'ad's design, to some degree, inspired by the H-2 or H-4 SOW?
> 
> @JamD


I don't know for sure but there are many things that point to that.



Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> IMO an attritable loyal wingman/UCAV would only be a bit bigger than this ALCM. The main focus of said loyal wingman would be to carry 2~4 AAMs OR light PGBs OR ECM jamming equipment. You could maybe design it such that it launches from the ground via a rocket, and then switches to its internal engine.
> 
> Basically, develop the Ra'ad stack into something like the Chinese FH-97 (though, given our procurement tract as of late, we might literally just get the FH-97). Seriously, I'm not sure why they didn't just pare AZM *down something like this as the starting project*. It's within our budget and our technical reach (albeit with additional, but plausibly doable, development work). tbh at this point it seems Baykar Makina's on a more realistic track to developing its own manned stealth fighter... @JamD
> 
> View attachment 826920


Wrong thread. I think you meant PN Discussions thread lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## HRK

JamD said:


> Wrong thread. I think you meant PN Discussions thread lol.


Well in case of RA'AD wishes may come true few years back I wished RA'AD to have X configuration for its tail and now see my wish have come true in the form of RA'AD-II

I remember @Bilal. was the first person to recognize this change when the video of the first test of RA'AD-II was released but at that time video was not in good quality.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

JamD said:


> I don't know for sure but there are many things that point to that.
> 
> 
> Wrong thread. I think you meant PN Discussions thread lol.


PN next-gen fighter program: Project G-HAD (jk)

Reactions: Love Love:
2 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Riz

Foxtrot Alpha said:


> View attachment 826902


Raad 2 wings are bigger then Raad 1 ??


----------



## JamD

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> IMO an attritable loyal wingman/UCAV would only be a bit bigger than this ALCM. The main focus of said loyal wingman would be to carry 2~4 AAMs OR light PGBs OR ECM jamming equipment. You could maybe design it such that it launches from the ground via a rocket, and then switches to its internal engine.
> 
> Basically, develop the Ra'ad stack into something like the Chinese FH-97 (though, given our procurement tract as of late, we might literally just get the FH-97). Seriously, I'm not sure why they didn't just pare AZM *down something like this as the starting project*. It's within our budget and our technical reach (albeit with additional, but plausibly doable, development work). tbh at this point it seems Baykar Makina's on a more realistic track to developing its own manned stealth fighter... @JamD
> 
> View attachment 826920


On a serious note the reason that what you say is a great idea and is something that I have been advocating for as well is because there is a particular idara that has managed to accumulate ALL of the expertise to manufacture the Ra'ad. This is sort of amazing considering the compartmentalization in our idaras. So it would be a waste if that idara sticks to Ra'ads and Shahpar-IIs. Most of the inputs and the expertise are there - all that is needed is a desire and money.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Dreamer.

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> It looks really compact. IMO a clear lock for the JF-17 @JamD


Raad-2 is no more compact then it was before, not even much more than Raad-1.

So IF there was any issue with JF-17 carrying it due to size earlier, that'd still be there.


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Dreamer. said:


> Raad-2 is no more compact then it was before, not even much more than Raad-1.
> 
> So IF there was any issue with JF-17 carrying it due to size earlier, that'd still be there.


The compactness isn't just the core airframe, but also the horizontal stabilizers. With that in mind, the Ra'ad-I had a bigger footprint, but with the 'x-stock' tail, the Ra'ad-II is more compact. That said, the qualification picture @JamD shared earlier suggests that the PAF was working on integrating the Ra'ad-I to the JF-17. So, in the end, it may not have been a blocker.


----------



## JamD

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> The compactness isn't just the core airframe, but also the horizontal stabilizers. With that in mind, the Ra'ad-I had a bigger footprint, but with the 'x-stock' tail, the Ra'ad-II is more compact. That said, the qualification picture @JamD shared earlier suggests that the PAF was working on integrating the Ra'ad-I to the JF-17. So, in the end, it may not have been a blocker.


See the post that I just made on the anatomy of Ra'ad thread 



JamD said:


> This is long overdue but here it is my best guess of Ra'ad II measurements based on pixel counting:
> 
> 
> 
> For comparison Ra'ad I:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @Bilal Khan (Quwa) IMHO this change to X-tail is purely driven by a drag reduction reason because:
> 1. We have already seen the plaque with Ra'ad-I on JF-17 so my initial conjecture was wrong and Ra'ad-I can indeed fit on the wing pylon. Of course there have been other hindrances in its integration but that is besides the point.
> 2. Ra'ad II doesn't seem to be any smaller in terms of its fins covering a large area.
> 
> Why is there a drag reduction? Well, first of all the ventral fins have been removed. This reduces drag. Next, the H-tail presented many more surfaces (and thus a total larger surface area) to the air, which has been replaced with an X-tail. Designing a control system for X-tail (which is like a missile) is slightly more difficult than that for an H-tail (which is like a conventional aircraft) but only slightly. I am glad we got there on the Ra'ad. It's not like we couldn't do it given we have x-tails on all sorts of ballistic missiles and artillery rockets. It probably also reduces mechanical complexity since now you just have 4 body mounted servos, whereas previously you probably needed a complicated system of servos and link rods.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------

