# Pakistan again test-fires Babur Missile with range 700km



## Hasnain2009

All news channels are reporting that pakistan has test fired Babur Missile with 700km range.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Patriot

Yep, just saw breaking news on tv.Another Successful Test of HATF-7 Babur Cruise Missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Don Jaguar

Any web source?


----------



## Patriot

Don Jaguar said:


> Any web source?


The press release is up on ISPR ;.


> A special feature of today&#8217;s launch was the validation of a new multi tube Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV) during the test. The three tube MLV enhances manifold the targeting and deployment options in the conventional and nuclear modes. With its shoot-and-scoot capability, the MLV provides a major force multiplier effect for target employment and survivability.


http://ispr.gov.pk/front/main.asp?o=t-press_release&id=1889#pr_link1889

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Don Jaguar

How much more time for ICBM?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## CaptainJackSparrow

Does it not have a range of 1000km?


----------



## Windjammer

Rawalpindi - October 28, 2011: 
Pakistan today conducted a successful test fire of the multi tube, indigenously developed Cruise Missile Hatf  VII (Babur) having a range of 700 kms. The missile test was conducted to validate the design parameters of the weapon system and a *new Missile Launch Vehicle* (MLV). Babur Cruise Missile is low flying, terrain hugging missile with high maneuverability, pin point accuracy and radar avoidance features. It can carry both nuclear and conventional warheads and has stealth capabilities. It also incorporates the most modern cruise missile technology of Terrain Contour Matching (TERCOM) and Digital Scene Matching and Area Co-relation (DSMAC).

*A special feature of todays launch was the validation of a new multi tube Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV) during the test. The three tube MLV enhances manifold the targeting and deployment options in the conventional and nuclear modes. With its shoot-and-scoot capability, the MLV provides a major force multiplier effect for target employment and survivability.*

The test was witnessed by Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, General Khalid Shameem Wynne, Director General Strategic Plans Division, Lieutenant General (Retired) Khalid Ahmed Kidwai, Commander Army Strategic Force Command, Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani and Chairman National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM) Mr Muhammad Irfan Burney, senior officers and from the armed forces and strategic organizations, scientists and engineers. The test will consolidate Pakistans strategic deterrence capability and further strengthen national security.

The successful test has also been warmly appreciated by President and Prime Minister of Pakistan, who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success.

Reactions: Like Like:
20


----------



## VelocuR

Pakistan must test massive *Tsar Bomba (50 MT)*, when shall we do that?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Windjammer




----------



## monitor

Vertical Launce from its new Missile Launch Vehicle

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nomi007

media is saying missile have stealth technology


----------



## soul hacker




----------



## monitor

Pakistan successfully tested Babur Cruise Missile

[Translate] 


Pakistan today conducted a successful test fire of the multi tube, indigenously developed Cruise Missile Hatf &#8211; VII (Babur) having a range of 700 kms.

The missile test was conducted to validate the design parameters of the weapon system and a new Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV). Babur Cruise Missile is low flying, terrain hugging missile with high maneuverability, pin point accuracy and radar avoidance features. It can carry both nuclear and conventional warheads and has stealth capabilities. It also incorporates the most modern cruise missile technology of Terrain Contour Matching (TERCOM) and Digital Scene Matching and Area Co-relation (DSMAC).

*A special feature of today&#8217;s launch was the validation of a new multi tube Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV) during the test. The three tube MLV enhances manifold the targeting and deployment options in the conventional and nuclear modes. With its shoot-and-scoot capability, the MLV provides a major force multiplier effect for target employment and survivability.*

The test was witnessed by Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, General Khalid Shameem Wynne, Director General Strategic Plans Division, Lieutenant General (Retired) Khalid Ahmed Kidwai, Commander Army Strategic Force Command, Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani and Chairman National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM) Mr Muhammad Irfan Burney, senior officers and from the armed forces and strategic organizations, scientists and engineers. The test will consolidate Pakistan&#8217;s strategic deterrence capability and further strengthen national security.

The successful test has also been warmly appreciated by President and Prime Minister of Pakistan, who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success.


----------



## Doctor09

so they tested a new launch vehicle

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VelocuR

Windjammer said:


> Rawalpindi - October 28, 2011:
> Pakistan today conducted a successful test fire of the multi tube, indigenously developed Cruise Missile Hatf &#8211; VII (Babur) having a range of 700 kms. The missile test was conducted to validate the design parameters of the weapon system and a *new Missile Launch Vehicle* (MLV). Babur Cruise Missile is low flying, terrain hugging missile with high maneuverability, pin point accuracy and radar avoidance features. It can carry both nuclear and conventional warheads and has stealth capabilities. It also incorporates the most modern cruise missile technology of Terrain Contour Matching (TERCOM) and Digital Scene Matching and Area Co-relation (DSMAC).
> 
> *A special feature of today&#8217;s launch was the validation of a new multi tube Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV) during the test. The three tube MLV enhances manifold the targeting and deployment options in the conventional and nuclear modes. With its shoot-and-scoot capability, the MLV provides a major force multiplier effect for target employment and survivability.*
> 
> The test was witnessed by Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, General Khalid Shameem Wynne, Director General Strategic Plans Division, Lieutenant General (Retired) Khalid Ahmed Kidwai, Commander Army Strategic Force Command, Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani and Chairman National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM) Mr Muhammad Irfan Burney, senior officers and from the armed forces and strategic organizations, scientists and engineers. The test will consolidate Pakistan&#8217;s strategic deterrence capability and further strengthen national security.
> 
> The successful test has also been warmly appreciated by President and Prime Minister of Pakistan, who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success.



It would good to add Cruise Missiles (MLV) in submarines. 



> Third version of Babur Missiles is under development for Ship/Submarine launch and Agosta 90 submarines





> It can avoid radar detection to penetrate hostile defensive systems "with pinpoint accuracy" and could also be modified so it can be launched from *ships, submarines and aircraft.* Currently Pakistan is looking into modification that will enable the missile to be launched from its F-16s, Mirage and A-5 air platforms and naval platform such as Agosta 90B attack submarines and its Tariq Class frigates. In a statement issued by ISPR the spokesman said that Pakistan will be modifying the missile for air and sea launch configurations in coming months. He added Pakistan is also working on a more advanced version of Babur (possibly named as Babur-2) with a range of 1,000km with increased payload. Serial production of Babur has started in October 2005.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jbnj1lTN0I

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Windjammer

doctor09 said:


> so they tested a new launch vehicle



*This is what i said in an earlier thread.* 

_While Nasr may be the battle field punch to neutralize any enemy thrust, it's worth noting, how the evolution of the Babur cruise Missile has quitely progressed to possibly end up in a multi launch tube system._


















---------- Post added at 09:52 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:49 AM ----------

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## fd24

ISLAMABAD (AP)  Pakistan's military says it has test-fired a medium-range missile capable of delivering a nuclear warhead.

An army statement says the missile was fired on Friday.

It says the missile, named Hatf-7, has been developed in Pakistan and has a range of 440 miles (700 kilometers).

Pakistan routinely tests such missiles which are mainly designed to match those of nuclear-armed neighboring archrival India.

Pakistan test fires nuclear-capable missile | World news | The Guardian


----------



## The Deterrent

^^^ Correction there...the quadruple launcher (middle one) was not a launcher...rather it was a transporter vehicle...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Windjammer

AhaseebA said:


> ^^^ Correction there...the quadruple launcher (middle one) was not a launcher...rather it was a transporter vehicle...



Indeed, and no image of the multi tube launcher has been released yet, the shot was just to give an idea of how the system could be exercised.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

http://ftpapp.app.com.pk/en_/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=161533&Itemid=2


http://nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-...conducts-test-fire-of-Cruise-Missile-HatifVII


----------



## Zarvan

Pakistan tests nuclear-capable Hatf-7 cruise missile


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...atf-7-cruise-missile/articleshow/10518119.cms


----------



## Imran Khan

as i think these new tubes look like nasr tubes

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hunter_hunted

RaptorRX707 said:


> Pakistan must test massive *Tsar Bomba (50 MT)*, when shall we do that?


 
Its possible for Pakistan to make it, but not possible to test u need a big area to test such another TSAR BOMBA

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Malik Usman

RAWALPINDI: Pakistan on Friday conducted successful test fire of an indigenously developed multi-tube having stealth capabilities Cruise Missile Hatf-VII (Babur).

Babur has a target range of 700 kms, said ISPR in a news release here. The missile test was conducted to validate the design parameters of the weapon system and a new Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV). 

"Babur Cruise Missile is low flying, terrain hugging missile with high maneuverability, pin-point accuracy and radar avoidance features. 

"It can carry both nuclear and conventional warheads and has stealth capabilities. "It also incorporates the most modern cruise missile technology of Terrain Contour Matching (TERCOM) and Digital Scene Matching and Area Co-relation (DSMAC)."

A special feature of Friday's launch was the validation of a new multi-tube MLV during the test. The three tube MLV enhances manifold the targeting and deployment options in the conventional and nuclear modes. With its shoot-and-scoot capability, the MLV provides a major force multiplier effect for target employment and 
survivability.

The test was witnessed by Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Khalid Shahmeem Wynne, Director General Strategic Plans Division Lieutenant General (R) Khalid Ahmed Kidwai, Commander Army Strategic Force Command, Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani and Chairman National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM) Muhammad Irfan Burney, senior officers from the armed forces and strategic organizations, scientists and engineers. 

The test will consolidate country's strategic deterrence capability and further strengthen national security.

The successful test has also been warmly appreciated by President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success.

Pakistan test fires multi-tube stealth cruise missile

http://www.khabraingroup.com/breaking_detail_news.htm?img=BreakingNews/-10748detail.gif

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jahangeer yousaf

ALLAH HO AKBAR
may ALLAH bless pakistan AMEEN


----------



## jahangeer yousaf

ALLAH HO AKBAR

may ALLAH bless Pakistan


----------



## great01pk

Babur is really a great force multiplier to the defence of motherland, but I am more concerned in hearing the news about its naval or airborne version as in the future war will basically fought by the Navy or airforce rather than the army. an other interesting aspect could be upgrading of PNS Alamgir (OHP Class) ship by installation of naval version of babur cruise missile. can somebody put more light please

thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IceCold

Any Pictures?


----------



## Dazzler

The canister version tested last year is a huge step towards naval version for more than one reason. It is destined to be in Navy as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shbaziz

great01pk said:


> but I am more concerned in hearing the news about its naval or airborne version as in the future war will basically fought by the Navy or airforce rather than the army. an other interesting aspect could be upgrading of PNS Alamgir (OHP Class) ship by installation of naval version of babur cruise missile. can somebody put more light please



We already have Ra'ad as ALCM. And i believe if it ll be given to Navy only if there is a real need. Plus the importance of Navy and AF is recognized, but the role of army is also pivotal and quite modified after Pakistan developed a potent missile program.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Now its Naval version should be made and through this MultiTube How Many Missiles can be fired at a single time


----------



## Imran Khan

Zarvan said:


> Now its Naval version should be made and through this MultiTube How Many Missiles can be fired at a single time



yaara lets wait till first images come out .if its 3 on each its really nice .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## great01pk

I am not under-estimating or under mining army in any way as defence and capturing of enemy land is done by army but the actual punch is delivered by navy or air force

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jawadqamar

*PAKISTAN SUCCESSFULLY TESTS HATF-VII BABUR LAND ATTACK CRUISE MISSILE
*








Pakistan has successfully tested the Hatf-VII Babur Land Attack Cruise Missile (LACM) today. Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) has announced that Hatf-VII Babur was test fired against the target at a range of 700 kilometers.

Hatf-VII Babur Land Attack Cruise Missile (LACM) has a maximum range of 750 kilometers km and longer range version with range of 1000km is also under development. Hatf-VII Babur Land Attack Cruise Missile features stealth shaping and low flying capability to avoid detection by the enemy radars.

Read more: Pakistan Successfully Tests Hatf-VII Babur Land Attack Cruise Missile ~ Pakistan Military Review





















Read more: http://pakmr.blogspot.com/2011/10/pakistan-successfully-tests-hatf-vii.html#ixzz1c6hQ5ybi

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Saifullah Sani

*Pakistan test fires multi-tube stealth cruise missile​*Updated at: 1330 PST, Friday, October 28, 2011​






RAWALPINDI: Pakistan on Friday conducted successful test fire of an indigenously developed multi-tube having stealth capabilities Cruise Missile Hatf-VII (Babur).

Babur has a target range of 700 kms, said ISPR in a news release here. The missile test was conducted to validate the design parameters of the weapon system and a new Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV). 

"Babur Cruise Missile is low flying, terrain hugging missile with high maneuverability, pin-point accuracy and radar avoidance features. 

"It can carry both nuclear and conventional warheads and has stealth capabilities. "It also incorporates the most modern cruise missile technology of Terrain Contour Matching (TERCOM) and Digital Scene Matching and Area Co-relation (DSMAC)."

*A special feature of Friday's launch was the validation of a new multi-tube MLV during the test. The three tube MLV enhances manifold the targeting and deployment options in the conventional and nuclear modes. With its shoot-and-scoot capability, the MLV provides a major force multiplier effect for target employment and 
survivability.*

The test was witnessed by Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Khalid Shahmeem Wynne, Director General Strategic Plans Division Lieutenant General (R) Khalid Ahmed Kidwai, Commander Army Strategic Force Command, Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani and Chairman National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM) Muhammad Irfan Burney, senior officers from the armed forces and strategic organizations, scientists and engineers. 

The test will consolidate country's strategic deterrence capability and further strengthen national security.

The successful test has also been warmly appreciated by President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success.
Geo tv | Geo News | Pakistan, Sports, World, Video News


----------



## DANGER-ZONE

Multi Missile Launching Tubes ... Something like this

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Emmie

*A special feature of todays launch was the validation of a new multi tube Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV) during the test. The three tube MLV enhances manifold the targeting and deployment options in the conventional and nuclear modes. With its shoot-and-scoot capability, the MLV provides a major force multiplier effect for target employment and survivability.
*

Now I cant wait to see the pictures...


----------



## Saifullah Sani

RAWALPINDI: Pakistan on Friday conducted successful test fire of an indigenously developed multi-tube having stealth capabilities Cruise Missile Hatf-VII (Babur).

Babur has a target range of 700 kms, said ISPR in a news release here. The missile test was conducted to validate the design parameters of the weapon system and a new Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV). 

"Babur Cruise Missile is low flying, terrain hugging missile with high maneuverability, pin-point accuracy and radar avoidance features. 

"It can carry both nuclear and conventional warheads and has stealth capabilities. "It also incorporates the most modern cruise missile technology of Terrain Contour Matching (TERCOM) and Digital Scene Matching and Area Co-relation (DSMAC)."

*A special feature of Friday's launch was the validation of a new multi-tube MLV during the test. The three tube MLV enhances manifold the targeting and deployment options in the conventional and nuclear modes. With its shoot-and-scoot capability, the MLV provides a major force multiplier effect for target employment and 
survivability.*

The test was witnessed by Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Khalid Shahmeem Wynne, Director General Strategic Plans Division Lieutenant General (R) Khalid Ahmed Kidwai, Commander Army Strategic Force Command, Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani and Chairman National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM) Muhammad Irfan Burney, senior officers from the armed forces and strategic organizations, scientists and engineers. 

The test will consolidate country's strategic deterrence capability and further strengthen national security.

The successful test has also been warmly appreciated by President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success.
Geo tv | Geo News | Pakistan, Sports, World, Video News

---------- Post added at 04:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:16 PM ----------

RAWALPINDI: Pakistan on Friday conducted successful test fire of an indigenously developed multi-tube having stealth capabilities Cruise Missile Hatf-VII (Babur).

Babur has a target range of 700 kms, said ISPR in a news release here. The missile test was conducted to validate the design parameters of the weapon system and a new Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV). 

"Babur Cruise Missile is low flying, terrain hugging missile with high maneuverability, pin-point accuracy and radar avoidance features. 

"It can carry both nuclear and conventional warheads and has stealth capabilities. "It also incorporates the most modern cruise missile technology of Terrain Contour Matching (TERCOM) and Digital Scene Matching and Area Co-relation (DSMAC)."

*A special feature of Friday's launch was the validation of a new multi-tube MLV during the test. The three tube MLV enhances manifold the targeting and deployment options in the conventional and nuclear modes. With its shoot-and-scoot capability, the MLV provides a major force multiplier effect for target employment and 
survivability.*

The test was witnessed by Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Khalid Shahmeem Wynne, Director General Strategic Plans Division Lieutenant General (R) Khalid Ahmed Kidwai, Commander Army Strategic Force Command, Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani and Chairman National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM) Muhammad Irfan Burney, senior officers from the armed forces and strategic organizations, scientists and engineers. 

The test will consolidate country's strategic deterrence capability and further strengthen national security.

The successful test has also been warmly appreciated by President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success.
Geo tv | Geo News | Pakistan, Sports, World, Video News


----------



## Emmie

danger-zone said:


> Multi Missile Launching Tubes ... Something like this



Something like CJ-10? I wish it is like that....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Khalidr

Video Please...


----------



## Windjammer

*There you go guys....Windjammer brings you the first image.
*






Pakistan successfully test fired its multi tube, indigenously developed Cruise Missile Hatf  VII (Babur) today. (28-10-11)

Reactions: Like Like:
20


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

one more thing should the missile be launched vertically for it to be navalized ?


----------



## Imran Khan

Windjammer said:


> *There you go guys....Windjammer brings you the first image.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan successfully test fired its multi tube, indigenously developed Cruise Missile Hatf &#8211; VII (Babur) today. (28-10-11)



WRONG direction of image lolz now these are 2 or four? BTW i was right its same as NASR missile tube

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doctor09

Windjammer said:


> *There you go guys....Windjammer brings you the first image.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan successfully test fired its multi tube, indigenously developed Cruise Missile Hatf &#8211; VII (Babur) today. (28-10-11)


i knew it Windjammer mera sar jhuknay nai dey ga ..... 
you did it man BTW thanx for 1st image 

---------- Post added at 05:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:18 PM ----------




Imran Khan said:


> WRONG direction of image lolz now these are 2 or four? BTW i was right its same as NASR missile tube


Imran bhai image ku ulti side say dikhnay ki koshash karain

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Don Jaguar

Windjammer said:


> *There you go guys....Windjammer brings you the first image.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan successfully test fired its multi tube, indigenously developed Cruise Missile Hatf &#8211; VII (Babur) today. (28-10-11)



Nice pic Chaa gaya bhai.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Windjammer

Imran Khan said:


> WRONG direction of image lolz now these are 2 or four? BTW i was right its same as NASR missile tube



This is just the test vehicle, even if this supports only two, having up to four tubes is very much compatible.


----------



## IceCold

Windjammer said:


> *There you go guys....Windjammer brings you the first image.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan successfully test fired its multi tube, indigenously developed Cruise Missile Hatf &#8211; VII (Babur) today. (28-10-11)



Is the picture or the missile really has lost some serious weight. I wonder how the Indians are going to track it down with their ABM, something this small and which flies low and has terrain hugging capability.


----------



## ares

IceCold said:


> Is the picture or the missile really has lost some serious weight. I wonder how the Indians are going to track it down with their ABM, something this small and which flies low and has terrain hugging capability.



Terrain hugging missiles are detected and tracked from air(using Doppler shift) by AWACs or Aerostats and not by ground based radars.

---------- Post added at 05:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:52 PM ----------




IceCold said:


> Is the picture or the missile really has lost some serious weight. I wonder how the Indians are going to track it down with their ABM, something this small and which flies low and has terrain hugging capability.



Terrain hugging missiles are detected and tracked from air(using Doppler shift) by AWACs or Aerostats and not by ground based radars.


----------



## Najam Khan

Great going Pakistan, thumbs up for the engineers & scientists. The sooner we make Nasr,Babur and Ra'ad operational the greater will be our strength!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Emmie

Windjammer thanks for the picture buddy..... Orange wrath is really looking damn cool.

I think it has been modified a great deal, overall validation of a new MLV is a key thing.

Congratulations to Pakistan for achieving yet another milestone.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## S-A-B-E-R->

Imran Khan said:


> WRONG direction of image lolz now these are 2 or four? BTW i was right its same as NASR missile tube


if its like CJ 10 than i guss third one in atop the other 2 and thus at this angle not visible.


----------



## Emmie

S-A-B-E-R-> said:


> if its like CJ 10 than i guss third one in atop the other 2 and thus at this angle not visible.



Sir je I think it is more like NASR than CJ-10.. If it was like CJ10 then the third tube would been have also visible in the angle, or at least the protuberance or more wider gap with depression.


----------



## jawadqamar

Imran Khan said:


> WRONG direction of image lolz now these are 2 or four? BTW i was right its same as NASR missile tube


 


> The *three tube MLV e*nhances manifold the targeting and deployment options in the conventional and nuclear modes.



It have Three Missile Tubes

Have to say, This version of Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV) looks great


----------



## Zarvan

So can Pakistan Fire at least 2 Missiles at the same time ?


----------



## DANGER-ZONE

Zarvan said:


> So can Pakistan Fire at least 2 Missiles at the same time ?



News article has mentioned 3 but not at same time, i guess. with a lil Difference. 
Just wait for more pictures from diff angles.


----------



## Zarvan

danger-zone said:


> News article has mentioned 3 but not at same time, i guess. with a lil Difference.
> Just wait for more pictures from diff angles.


I mean with difference of few seconds only just like when we use MRL


----------



## Windjammer

*What makes it more interesting is the vertical launch compared to the earlier tests.....ready to be deployed on sea vessels. ??!!*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Doctor09

jawadqamar said:


> It have Three Missile Tubes


guys i think its fired from 3rd tube behind the first two ... check the position of missile its almost between the first two so it was not fired from any of the front two tubes ... what you think ?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## regular

Its good to hear that Pakistan is still doing missle tests but it will be great if it tests at least 1700km cruise missile instead of 700km. 700km is too old tech now.


----------



## VelocuR

News Announcement
Pakistan test fires multi-tube stealth cruise missile Hatf-VII (Babur) - YouTube

Pakistan test fires nuclear-capable Multi Tube Ballistic Missile Hatf IX (NASR) (similar)
April 19, 2011

Pakistan test fires nuclear-capable Multi Tube Ballistic Missile Hatf IX (NASR) - April 19, 2011 - YouTube

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PakShaheen79

doctor09 said:


> guys i think its fired from 3rd tube behind the first two ... check the position of missile its almost between the first two so it was not fired from any of the front two tubes ... what you think ?



Very interesting observation, i must say.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ababeel

Why still not a single video


----------



## jawadqamar

regular said:


> Its good to hear that Pakistan is still doing missle tests but it will be great if it tests at least 1700km cruise missile instead of 700km. 700km is too old tech now.



No doubt it will be great to have a long range version of Babur Cruise missile and also a naval version

but lets remember that our neighbour is still missing any comparable weapon and Babur provides unmatched surgical strike capability

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Congratulation to every one on successful test of Babur missile.By reading the all related news whats development is achieved or near to achieve are;

-Babur multiple launch from single vehicle is achieved.
-babur-2 with range over 1000kmis in its advanced development stage and possibly be test in next year 2013.
-Naval version for Babur to be launch from ships and submarines is near to achieve and possibly will be test fire in 2013.
-Air version is also in advance development stage and likely to be tested in next year.

Nice development in cruise missile field.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Yes.it looks missile is not fired from first two front tubes but from rare upper tube.
So it should be 4-tube multi _launcher vehicle.


----------



## TOPGUN

Mashallah awsome news GOD bless Pakistan & its armed forces.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

Naval version of Babur (sea tiger) - with a reported range of over 1000 kilometers - with this launch many features have been validated, will deployed on both surface, and sub.


----------



## Safriz

RaptorRX707 said:


> Pakistan must test massive *Tsar Bomba (50 MT)*, when shall we do that?



YAAA,,,SO THAT HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF NATIONAL MONEY GOES UP IN THE AIR AND AND DOWN IN A CRATER FOR NOTHING....


----------



## Rafi

safriz said:


> YAAA,,,SO THAT HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF NATIONAL MONEY GOES UP IN THE AIR AND AND DOWN IN A CRATER FOR NOTHING....



Not needed our missiles are accurate.


----------



## crimemaster_gogo

from the bottom of my heart , congratulations pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Safriz

Emmie said:


> Windjammer thanks for the picture buddy..... Orange wrath is really looking damn cool.
> 
> I think it has been modified a great deal, overall validation of a new MLV is a key thing.
> 
> Congratulations to Pakistan for achieving yet another milestone.



Dont think it will be painted orange when deployed...Its for test purposes only...
Orange is highly visible and against camouflage


----------



## Emmie

safriz said:


> Dont think it will be painted orange when deployed...Its for test purposes only...
> Orange is highly visible and against camouflage



Sir jee app tu laad bhi nae kernay detay, I was just praising the beauty.... Of course a missile has to be highly camouflaged, orange means 'hey I am here'

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashokdeiva

congrats Pakistan, but lets hope that non of the missiles in each of our arsenal both India and Pakistan are never used against any one.

Lets cherish life rather than embrase death/pain

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Areesh

Cool_Soldier said:


> Yes.it looks missile is not fired from first two front tubes but from rare upper tube.
> So it should be 4-tube multi _launcher vehicle.


 
Just saw the video on GEO. It ha three tubes. But yeah operational model might have 4 tubes.


----------



## Safriz

Emmie said:


> Sir jee app tu laad bhi nae kernay detay, I was just praising the beauty.... Of course a missile has to be highly camouflaged, orange means 'hey I am here'



lol...ok got the point

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Emmie

It is 3 tube multi launcher vehicle, just watched on geo tv

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doctor09

Emmie said:


> It is 3 tube multi launcher vehicle, just watched on geo tv


so my observation was right

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Emmie

doctor09 said:


> so my observation was right



Bulls eye doc saab...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## HANI

doctor09 said:


> so my observation was right



u got some eyes bro well done


----------



## [--Leo--]

Man my attention took just 1 point >>>Stealthly features <<<<i dono where i came from in 2005 and 2007 babur was not stealth not even RA'AD was in 2008 but after the landing of stealthy chopper in pakistan during bin-ladin operation RA'AD test again with stealthy features so as after few months babur is stealth man man whats going on?anyways i m happy more than any one i was jumping when i heard the news all day waiting for new defence news in news channals and forums i m really happy
Mubarak ho sab ko and zilhaj ka chand mubarak hoo 2 in 1 day

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doctor09

HANI said:


> u got some eyes bro well done


bhai sniper ley kar meri ankh phornay ka irada hai kiya ?  

---------- Post added at 10:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:03 PM ----------




Emmie said:


> Bulls eye doc saab...


bulls eye ? 
nai nai bhai yeah meri apni ankh hai

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Windjammer

Guys, it was clearly mentioned in the ISPR notification.




> A special feature of todays launch was the validation of a new multi tube Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV) during the test. *The three tube MLV* enhances manifold the targeting and deployment options in the conventional and nuclear modes. With its shoot-and-scoot capability, the MLV provides a major force multiplier effect for target employment and survivability.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Emmie

[--Leo--];2233409 said:


> Man my attention took just 1 point >>>Stealthly features <<<<i dono where i came from in 2005 and 2007 babur was not stealth not even RA'AD was in 2008 but after the landing of stealthy chopper in pakistan during bin-ladin operation RA'AD test again with stealthy features so as after few months babur is stealth man man whats going on?anyways i m happy more than any one i was jumping when i heard the news all day waiting for new defence news in news channals and forums i m really happy
> Mubarak ho sab ko and zilhaj ka chand mubarak hoo 2 in 1 day



I would love to know your definition of 'stealth'? 

Stealth literary means something that can not be detected by radars and not something which is not visible to human naked eye... Cruise missile generally can not be detected by ground radars because of extremely low altitude trajectory, so in a sense cruise missiles are stealth.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashokdeiva

Emmie said:


> I would love to know your definition of 'stealth'?
> 
> Stealth literary means something that can not be detected by radars and not something which is not visible to human naked eye... Cruise missile generally can not be detected by ground radars because of extremely low altitude trajectory, so in a sense cruise missiles are stealth.


The next gen stealth is also about being invisible to naked eye, lost of UK, US and German companies are working to achieve this. 
The tech is to reflect the image captured by tiny cameras on one side of the surface to the light emiting polymer skin on the other side. A few days ago i saw this expreimental tech video on YouTube, Its like James Bonds car in "Die Another Day"

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Doctor09

Windjammer said:


> Guys, it was clearly mentioned in the ISPR notification.


they were fighting over it that there are two , three or four tubes so i proved this with my theory .............

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jawadqamar

RaptorRX707 said:


> I don't want discuss comparison, our neighbour have Brahmos, (btw 2.5 to 2.9 machs. )
> 
> Indian Brahmos Missile test hits bullseye at speed MACH 2.9+ - YouTube
> 
> Awesome tests....Take a look carefully at 0:11 and how quickly it turns faster. Beautiful move!
> 
> *Important notes:
> *
> According to American experts, Babur Missiles can penetrate PAC-3 with ease. Guidance: INS, TERCOM/DSMAC, GPS Babur can hit its target with pin point accuracy.
> 
> Brahmos have no stealth features.
> 
> See this video examples
> 
> Brahmos cruise missile better than Babur cruise missile - YouTube
> Wrong label actually: " Babur has more advantages missiles than Brahmos."
> 
> 
> 
> Yes yaar, it is important for Pakistan. Not only massive big mushroom visible, enemy who lives in far away can feel and threaten in the message.
> 
> For money, we always proud to spend millions of national money ANNUALLY instead our people and poor.



Brahmos is supersonic anti-ship cruise missile (Indian assembled version of Yakhont)which was adopted by India for land attack role in absence of a true land attack cruise missile. It have failed number of times to hit its intended targets and these failures were only accepted after media reported them. Brahmos have range of 120 kilometers low/low flight profile (Like Babur) and its range is 290kms when it flies @ 14000-15000m for cruise phase in lo/hi/lo flight profile. Brahmos is limited to less then 300km range due to MTCR. Brahmos cant be fitted with Nuclear warhead due to MTCR

Anyways

*Here are some pics of New Babur launcher Three Tube Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV)
*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Windjammer

doctor09 said:


> they were fighting over it that there are two , three or four tubes so i proved this with my theory .............



Aap ney injection laga diya.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Emmie

ashokdeiva said:


> The next gen stealth is also about being invisible to naked eye, lost of UK, US and German companies are working to achieve this.
> The tech is to reflect the image captured by tiny cameras on one side of the surface to the light emiting polymer skin on the other side. A few days ago i saw this expreimental tech video on YouTube, Its like James Bonds car in "Die Another Day"



Yeah I heard about it, if this tech is achieved then it would be like bringing stars on the earth (at least for me). 

Perhaps we gonna have wizards rather than armies.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## qasimalinaqvi

Another nice work done by NESCOM.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## [--Leo--]

Emmie said:


> I would love to know your definition of 'stealth'?
> 
> Stealth literary means something that can not be detected by radars and not something which is not visible to human naked eye... Cruise missile generally can not be detected by ground radars because of extremely low altitude trajectory, so in a sense cruise missiles are stealth.



agreed just 1 question why they didn,t mention in test of 2005,2007,2008 that missile have stealthy feature but now they mention please answer i was thinking the same thing


----------



## S-A-B-E-R->

Emmie said:


> Sir je I think it is more like NASR than CJ-10.. If it was like CJ10 then the third tube would been have also visible in the angle, or at least the protuberance or more wider gap with depression.


ofcourse sir but i just saw the launch on geo as i said its a triangular setup but rather than tubes its a triangular structure which holdes 3 tubes inside if u get the chance to see the video on geo as i saw u will see the structure.


----------



## Emmie

S-A-B-E-R-> said:


> ofcourse sir but i just saw the launch on geo as i said its a triangular setup but rather than tubes its a triangular structure which holdes 3 tubes inside if u get the chance to see the video on geo as i saw u will see the structure.



Yes sir, confusion is over now... It is sort of triangular structure, different from CJ10.. In fact the very same I tried to put up, very different from CJ10.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Pakistan should test some ballistic missile with at least range 3500-4000 km.After that, we do not need to move missile near border to hit enemy's far areas.So less chances of movement detection and more safer to fire from deep underground facilities.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Cool_Soldier said:


> Pakistan should test some ballistic missile with at least range 3500-4000 km.After that, we do not need to move missile near border to hit enemy's far areas.So less chances of movement detection and more safer to fire from deep underground facilities.



Isn't the 7000km one under development?

Even it is still a rumor, but it is most likely becoming true one day.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Thor

Cool_Soldier said:


> Pakistan should test some ballistic missile with at least range 3500-4000 km.After that, we do not need to move missile near border to hit enemy's far areas.So less chances of movement detection and more safer to fire from deep underground facilities.



Pakistan most likely, from looking at the record of increasing the lethality of its Missile arsenal most likely already has such a missile, but can you imagine the fallout from the International world for such a test........

India is the target which at length is 1200km......... we can target every last inch of India, so why does it need a missile to go further and Pakistan will find it hard to justify that......... they will face sanctions and sorts of problems, especially here in the UK, where civilians are already asking why we give hundreds of millions of pounds to Pakistan when they have their own space program and why in God's name are we giving India with their economy the way it is........ 

Pakistan should quietly work on an ICBM even as a launch vehicle and when it comes to testing, do it once, and face the consequences then rather then testing one and then another and another and face multiple sanctions..........

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Emmie

[--Leo--];2233551 said:


> agreed just 1 question why they didn,t mention in test of 2005,2007,2008 that missile have stealthy feature but now they mention please answer i was thinking the same thing



Previously it had a 'near-stealth' capability because of 'terrain hugging' ability of the missile, guided by TERCOM and GPS. Now the missile has been incorporated with more advanced guidance system called DSMAC, which further embellishes the ability of missile being more terrain hugging hence more stealthier and ultimately 'stealth'..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MM_Haider

Pakistan Successfully Test Fire Hataf-VII (Babar) Cruise Missile With 700km Range (28 October,2011) - YouTube




there you go...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Imran Khan

its 3333333333333333333333333333 cleared guys nice luncher and great to see action .


----------



## maverick1977

Pakistan has ICBM but never tested it. Only reason is that pakistan doesnt want give ammo to western countries to put pressure on them.


----------



## Imran Khan

maverick1977 said:


> Pakistan has ICBM but never tested it. Only reason is that pakistan doesnt want give ammo to western countries to put pressure on them.




tumhary moo main gheee or 1 bori sugar 

i think 3500-4500 is posible after 2003 ghuri tests .till now now new range missile .but better keep it in store these days we are not hurry to jump when good time will come we will step forward .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DV RULES

Vertical ejection system has to apply on Nasr too, it takes too much time after ejection to curving for required level. Wasn't better if propulsion programmed after ejection & initial auto guidance?

Any military professional can put light over it?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rana4pak



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## jawadqamar



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## VelocuR

Is possible Babur Missiles become S-300 SAM "hot pursuit" to destroy incoming jets? 

Love this man! 
S-300 destroyed 10 targets - YouTube


----------



## Imran Khan

RaptorRX707 said:


> Is possible Babur Missiles become S-300 SAM "hot pursuit" to destroy incoming jets?
> 
> Love this man!
> S-300 destroyed 10 targets - YouTube




nope it can not dear


----------



## Emmie

RaptorRX707 said:


> Is possible Babur Missiles become S-300 SAM "hot pursuit" to destroy incoming jets?
> 
> Love this man!
> S-300 destroyed 10 targets - YouTube



Not possible, both missiles belong to different categories and are meant to serve different causes. One is a cruise missile and other is a tool against cruise missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## funlahore

weldone Pakistan, our prayers are with you


----------



## ARSENAL6

Lets hope that Pakistan increases the range of both Babur and Raad to 2000km.

Pakistan Zindabad.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Donatello

RaptorRX707 said:


> Is possible Babur Missiles become S-300 SAM "hot pursuit" to destroy incoming jets?
> 
> Love this man!
> S-300 destroyed 10 targets - YouTube



Oh bhai,

It is Babur cruiser missile, not Optimus Prime.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## air marshal



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## zaiby

penumbra said:


> Oh bhai,
> 
> It is Babur cruiser missile, not Optimus Prime.


 
nice one


----------



## air marshal



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VelocuR

Imran Khan said:


> nope it can not dear



I know, Babur Cruise Missile. It is something we can make different kind of missiles in MultiTube, I love Russian SAMs shown in video. 



Emmie said:


> Not possible, both missiles belong to different categories and are meant to serve different causes. One is a cruise missile and other is a tool against cruise missile.


 
You are right. 



penumbra said:


> Oh bhai,
> 
> It is Babur cruiser missile, not Optimus Prime.



Lol, Optimus Prime. I appreciate we developed Cruise Missile. Urgently we need to make Air defences to shoot down which is our weaknesses.


----------



## ARSENAL6

The Multitube carrier truck that carries the babur seen on a previous posst should be able to move like this without tyer wear on its wheels








> ETF developed a unique steering system. All wheels are steered at low to medium speeds reducing tyre wear, while at higher speeds the last two axle lines gradually change to nearly rigid resulting in better stability. ETF trucks are equipped with a special speed-proportional steering system. At very low speeds, such as when spotting the loader, the system requires only two turns from lock to lock. The whole system works automatically without interference from the operator..

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ufone

Imran Khan said:


> tumhary moo main gheee or 1 bori sugar
> 
> i think 3500-4500 is posible after 2003 ghuri tests .till now now new range missile .but better keep it in store these days we are not hurry to jump when good time will come we will step forward .


 
I dont think pak has any icbm as otherwise they would have tested it in china to avoid sanctions


----------



## regular

Yes! It has been fired from the 3rd tube as clearly seen from the above pic...


----------



## regular

ARSENAL6 said:


> Lets hope that Pakistan increases the range of both Babur and Raad to 2000km.
> 
> Pakistan Zindabad.


Yes! thats what we need right now...


----------



## alibaz

Indeed its a great achievement by our scientists and engineers. Congrats to our scientists and engineers of NESCOM and whole nation for this great achievement.


----------



## razgriz19

why dont they ever show the missile hitting its intended target?
seriously it really pisses me off!
it seems as though "succesful test fired" only means succesful launch in Pakistan military!
except navy, they showed the ship being hit by multiple missiles...


----------



## Kompromat

I like those launch tubes , looks like we are making progress in indigenous missile making. Pakistan zindabad


----------



## VelocuR

razgriz19 said:


> why dont they ever show the missile hitting its intended target?
> seriously it really pisses me off!
> it seems as though "succesful test fired" only means succesful launch in Pakistan military!
> except navy, they showed the ship being hit by multiple missiles...



No, we can't do that to show the world, the information is secret. We can't exposed how much we hit its accurate targets, enemy would gather information and details. 

Hope this is clear. (Keep "pissing off" at yourself. Lol.)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Zarvan

according to news papers there three tubes


----------



## SBD-3

NAjAM Khan said:


> Great going Pakistan, thumbs up for the engineers & scientists. The sooner we make Nasr,Babur and Ra'ad operational the greater will be our strength!


I think Babur is already operational....NASR would also have been quietly put into service and so is RAAD....there is never an official statement on Missile inductions, they are quietly taken in active inventory without a fuzz

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Zarvan

hasnain0099 said:


> I think Babur is already operational....NASR would also have been quietly put into service and so is RAAD....there is never an official statement on Missile inductions, they are quietly taken in active inventory without a fuzz


Sir can this Multi Tube Fire the Missile just like the MRLS Fire Rockets ?


----------



## hunter_hunted

penumbra said:


> Oh bhai,
> 
> It is Babur cruiser missile, not Optimus Prime.


 


U naughty deceptecon

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SBD-3

Zarvan said:


> Sir can this Multi Tube Fire the Missile just like the MRLS Fire Rockets ?


Well I am not sure that how quickly the three of the missiles carried on it, can be fired. But it do have its own advantages e.g.
1-A multitube carrier should be much more effective and economical than three single launch platforms.
2- The role is diversified to an extent that a shoot and scoot capability added would be enough to frustrate the adversary as it now has will have to bear the additional burden of building layers of mobile defense systems if it wants to enhance its survivability, that would put an additional strain on its resources.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sunny Malik94

a great achievement indeed...
instead ov making sea launched version, y dont v simply parky ths MLV on the helipad ov our F22 p frigates or on OHP.. just a thought


----------



## S-A-B-E-R->

Sunny Malik94 said:


> a great achievement indeed...
> instead ov making sea launched version, y dont v simply parky ths MLV on the helipad ov our F22 p frigates or on OHP.. just a thought


for sea launch the simplest as u said can be done but remember militarys dont just work that way. first as u said to just put it there well to tell u the truth babur is not controlled from MLV its controlled from a different station an MLV just takes it to a position and sets it up last launch is done remotely(remember its nuclear capable) that system is huge and to set it up on a ship a lot of modifaction is needed cuz a ship the size of OHP needs to have full control over its weapons.
secondly a sea launched CM is different from a land launched one remember the terrain of sea is ever changing and land remains the same thus terrain mapping ang guiding systems have to be different. 
thire having CM on a ship gives it huge advantage u can target an enemy vessel from beyond even the stand off range ( 700 km) but to target a ship u need different seekers similar to the ons in C-802, Exocet ,Harpoon. with the ability of in flight manuvers and a concreat datalink to the firing vessel for course correcion if needed.
so u can launch Babur with little modification from an Aircraft (even than it very hard work) but sea launch system is a bit too different.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Windjammer

Guys, this multi platform has given the strategic forces a true multi dimensional strike capability.
One launch pad, three weapons, with three different inputs to strike three different pre determined targets.
It's like an aircraft taking off from a PAF base and attacking three different targets in a single sortie.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Doctor09

Windjammer said:


> Guys, this multi platform has given the strategic forces a true multi dimensional strike capability.
> One launch pad, three weapons, with three different inputs to strike three different pre determined targets.
> It's like an aircraft taking off from a PAF base and attacking three different targets in a single sortie.


i think if we make them supersonic then it can create much more problem for enemies plus there is a need to enhance its range


----------



## Mani2020

hasnain0099 said:


> I think Babur is already operational....*NASR would also have been quietly put into service* and so is RAAD....there is never an official statement on Missile inductions, they are quietly taken in active inventory without a fuzz



Considering the fact that NASR appeared just some time back i don't see the possibility of it being operational as of yet....but its true for babur's early versions , while RAAD has still ambiguity ....keeping in view the lots of integration going on with jf-17 there is a strong possibility that it just has been or is currently being started to put in operational service


----------



## SBD-3

Mani2020 said:


> Considering the fact that NASR appeared just some time back i don't see the possibility of it being operational as of yet....*but its true for babur's early versions , while RAAD has still ambiguity* ....keeping in view the lots of integration going on with jf-17 there is a strong possibility that it just has been or is currently being started to put in operational service


This is not the new version but the same version with new launch platform. Though we do hear that Raa'd is the choice for JFT, but we must also remember that it was tested on a mirage platform meaning that mirage systems could be modified to mate with Raa'd. I dont see any reason to delay Raa'd induction for the sake for JFTs. While JFTs are not replacing Mirages, I think Mirages would have been modified to carry this as a stop gap. Well its been about 7 or 8 months or so when we heard about NASR but i do agree with you that it would not have been in active service with PA.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SBD-3

doctor09 said:


> i think if we make them supersonic then it can create much more problem for enemies plus there is a need to enhance its range


If it were supersonic, then we could say bye bye to terrain matching.....everything has its advantages and disadvantages. No wonder west likes subsonic Crusie missiles. You can have supersonic cruise missiles for antiship role (as sea surface does offer the potential of ses skimming to a supersonic missile but that too has its own advantages and disadvantages as supersonic missile has to rise much earlier than a subsonic missile increasing its window of vulnerability vis-a-vis subsonic missile but has its advantages too.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sunny Malik94

S-A-B-E-R-> said:


> for sea launch the simplest as u said can be done but remember militarys dont just work that way. first as u said to just put it there well to tell u the truth babur is not controlled from MLV its controlled from a different station an MLV just takes it to a position and sets it up last launch is done remotely(remember its nuclear capable) that system is huge and to set it up on a ship a lot of modifaction is needed cuz a ship the size of OHP needs to have full control over its weapons.
> secondly a sea launched CM is different from a land launched one remember the terrain of sea is ever changing and land remains the same thus terrain mapping ang guiding systems have to be different.
> thire having CM on a ship gives it huge advantage u can target an enemy vessel from beyond even the stand off range ( 700 km) but to target a ship u need different seekers similar to the ons in C-802, Exocet ,Harpoon. with the ability of in flight manuvers and a concreat datalink to the firing vessel for course correcion if needed.
> so u can launch Babur with little modification from an Aircraft (even than it very hard work) but sea launch system is a bit too different.




thanks for explanation


----------



## SBD-3

DV RULES said:


> Vertical ejection system has to apply on Nasr too, it takes too much time after ejection to curving for required level. Wasn't better if propulsion programmed after ejection & initial auto guidance?
> 
> Any military professional can put light over it?


I am not a military professional but there is a difference, NASR is a high speed missile unlike babur which is subsonic one so for babur it should not be much of the problem. Both are said to be highly maneuverable. I dont think that NASR too, will have the muti-speed stages. But anyways, vertical launch does give missile an omnidirectional capability i.e. Missile can be maneuvered in any direction and secondly its very difficult to locate the launch platform too as VLM would complicate the detection of launch platform as VLS does not follow the usual projectile trajectory which can be used to detect the probable location, add a scoot capability to that and the survivability rate should go further up.


----------



## blackcobran

Sunny Malik94 said:


> a great achievement indeed...
> instead ov making sea launched version, y dont v simply parky ths MLV on the helipad ov our F22 p frigates or on OHP.. just a thought


Good Idea dear


----------



## S-A-B-E-R->

Sunny Malik94 said:


> thanks for explanation


any time mate


----------



## SBD-3

S-A-B-E-R-> said:


> for sea launch the simplest as u said can be done but remember militarys dont just work that way. first as u said to just put it there well to tell u the truth babur is not controlled from MLV its controlled from a different station an MLV just takes it to a position and sets it up last launch is done remotely(remember its nuclear capable) that system is huge and to set it up on a ship a lot of modifaction is needed cuz a ship the size of OHP needs to have full control over its weapons.
> secondly a sea launched CM is different from a land launched one remember the terrain of sea is ever changing and land remains the same thus terrain mapping ang guiding systems have to be different.
> thire having CM on a ship gives it huge advantage u can target an enemy vessel from beyond even the stand off range ( 700 km) but to target a ship u need different seekers similar to the ons in C-802, Exocet ,Harpoon. with the ability of in flight manuvers and a concreat datalink to the firing vessel for course correcion if needed.
> so u can launch Babur with little modification from an Aircraft (even than it very hard work) but sea launch system is a bit too different.


Another important point is that at sea you face moving targets and Land attack missiles are used for fixed targets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Windjammer

hasnain0099 said:


> If it were supersonic, then we could say bye bye to terrain matching.....everything has its advantages and disadvantages. No wonder west likes subsonic Crusie missiles. You can have supersonic cruise missiles for antiship role (as sea surface does offer the potential of ses skimming to a supersonic missile but that too has its own advantages and disadvantages as supersonic missile has to rise much earlier than a subsonic missile increasing its window of vulnerability vis-a-vis subsonic missile but has its advantages too.


 
Correct me if I am wrong but since Cruise missiles are compact compared to ballistic weapons hence they can only carry so much fuel which in supersonic mode will burn much quicker leading to shorter striking distance.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SBD-3

Windjammer said:


> Correct me if I am wrong but since Cruise missiles are compact compared to ballistic weapons hence they can only carry so much fuel which in supersonic mode will burn much quicker leading to shorter striking distance.


 well not necessarily, there are some other factors too which should be considered i.e. angle of trajectory, aerodynamics, friction, height..Supersonic missiles fly at greater heights that to some extent should allow them for a greater trajectory. If you're asking about Brahmos then the most plausible reason is MCTR.


----------



## itaskol

It is very good news.
nice job.

but you still need to increase the range of this missile.

700 kilometer is not long enough to cover whole india territory.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HANI

itaskol said:


> It is very good news.
> nice job.
> 
> but you still need to increase the range of this missile.
> 
> 700 kilometer is not long enough to cover whole india territory.



We also have other babies for this purpose brother India is well with in our reach........ And mean while the range of Babar will b increased surely

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## [--Leo--]

itaskol said:


> It is very good news.
> nice job.
> 
> but you still need to increase the range of this missile.
> 
> 700 kilometer is not long enough to cover whole india territory.




upgradation is going on time 2 time we made 3 test all sucessfull first 500 and Last two of 700 Km with upgrade teach soon navy version will be coming could it be?anti ship or ship-to-surface/submarine to surface


----------



## Last Hope



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dr. Strangelove

Last Hope said:


>


thanks fr the vedio hope we can increase its range


----------



## Raftar




----------



## somebozo

Pakistan test fires multi-tube stealth cruise missile


Pakistan test fires multi-tube stealth cruise missile - GEO.tv


Updated at: 1330 PST, Friday, October 28, 2011
RAWALPINDI: Pakistan on Friday conducted successful test fire of an indigenously developed multi-tube having stealth capabilities Cruise Missile Hatf-VII (Babur).

Babur has a target range of 700 kms, said ISPR in a news release here. The missile test was conducted to validate the design parameters of the weapon system and a new Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV). 

"Babur Cruise Missile is low flying, terrain hugging missile with high maneuverability, pin-point accuracy and radar avoidance features. 

"It can carry both nuclear and conventional warheads and has stealth capabilities. "It also incorporates the most modern cruise missile technology of Terrain Contour Matching (TERCOM) and Digital Scene Matching and Area Co-relation (DSMAC)."

A special feature of Friday's launch was the validation of a new multi-tube MLV during the test. The three tube MLV enhances manifold the targeting and deployment options in the conventional and nuclear modes. With its shoot-and-scoot capability, the MLV provides a major force multiplier effect for target employment and 
survivability.

The test was witnessed by Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Khalid Shahmeem Wynne, Director General Strategic Plans Division Lieutenant General (R) Khalid Ahmed Kidwai, Commander Army Strategic Force Command, Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani and Chairman National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM) Muhammad Irfan Burney, senior officers from the armed forces and strategic organizations, scientists and engineers. 

The test will consolidate country's strategic deterrence capability and further strengthen national security.

The successful test has also been warmly appreciated by President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ISI Agent

Hi friends i'm new here!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Doctor09

ISI Agent said:


> Hi friends i'm new here!!!!


open a intro thread in member section ..... btw Welcome to PDF


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

plz introduce ur self in the member club or what ever this is no place for the kind of post u wrote no hard feeling i am just telling u what i was told the first time when i did something resembling that

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HANI

ISI Agent said:


> Hi friends i'm new here!!!!


Yes brother u can only comment here related to the thread posted here


----------



## Last Hope

*Please stop feeding him and get to the topic.*

Anyways my intelligence and sources told me more about Hatf-7.
The missile was upgraded, and this is a part of Pakistan's program to make Naval version of Babur.

The modifications to our delight were successful, Alhamdulilah.
I cannot mention what was special in it, classified, but expect Naval version of Babur soon, followed by Air-Craft Carrier killer till 2015.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SBD-3

Last Hope said:


> *Please stop feeding him and get to the topic.*
> 
> Anyways my intelligence and sources told me more about Hatf-7.
> The missile was upgraded, and this is a part of Pakistan's program to make Naval version of Babur.
> 
> The modifications to our delight were successful, Alhamdulilah.
> I cannot mention what was special in it, classified, but expect Naval version of Babur soon, followed by Air-Craft Carrier killer till 2015.


Any antiship missile can be used as anti ACC missile.....the only special craft killer missile from China (DF-21 V(D)) is renowned for it being a ballistic missile developed to be a craft killer. The speculation had already started from previous test featuring canastered launch. What i would really look forward is for full 1500KM range babur, that would be something real big...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Last Hope

Well. We are working on our own Anti-ACC missile, as my sources fed me details about it.
It seems to be Nuclear Tipped.

And about the 1500KM Babur, the main problem faced by Pakistan was resolved in the previous launch. Now we will witness PN Ships with Babur. About the range, I am sure they are working on it. Near 1800KM is expected.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MM_Haider

Last Hope said:


> Well. We are working on our own Anti-ACC missile, as my sources fed me details about it.
> It seems to be Nuclear Tipped.
> 
> And about the 1500KM Babur, the main problem faced by Pakistan was resolved in the previous launch. Now we will witness PN Ships with Babur. About the range, I am sure they are working on it. Near 1800KM is expected.



dude you are revealing alot of of classified info...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sinnerman108

With fear of being wrong I noticed two things here ...

1. The Video is edited too much.
2. The launch cycle hints at Submarine deployment.


----------



## Last Hope

I cannot confirm nor deny any of what you said. But indeed sharp thinking. ^^^

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bratva

Is it me or any one else too noticed shape of Babur which is smaller than the previous ones? If it is what i saw really then above poster comments can be taken in to consideration

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

We are doing it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HANI

Last Hope said:


> Well. We are working on our own Anti-ACC missile, as my sources fed me details about it.
> It seems to be Nuclear Tipped.
> 
> And about the 1500KM Babur, the main problem faced by Pakistan was resolved in the previous launch. Now we will witness PN Ships with Babur. About the range, I am sure they are working on it. Near 1800KM is expected.


Sir U just make my fingers cross..... I love to see all these news accounted officially


----------



## Luftwaffe

Last Hope said:


> Well. We are working on our own Anti-ACC missile, as my sources fed me details about it. It seems to be Nuclear Tipped.
> 
> And about the 1500KM Babur, the main problem faced by Pakistan was resolved in the previous launch. Now we will witness PN Ships with Babur. About the range, I am sure they are working on it. Near 1800KM is expected.


 
Many don't know about Projects but sources are sleeping about Ra'ad CM how can it be that ra'ad is neglected and newer projects are worked upon before upgrades introducing newer Versions.

Are there plans to extend the range/revamp the design and parameters such as a capable German Taurus KEPD 350 atleast or similar Euro/Russian counterparts.

So far Anti AC missile is not being worked upon such Project are in Stasis but plans are in place, such a project is massive it is pre-phase to ICBM so far Pakistan is tight on funds this does not mean necessary Pakistan would not not get into such a Project but its too early. 

Ra'ad and Babur are of importance because we needs deep strike elements so further upgrades, modifications, range and revamped design is deemed necessary and important.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SBD-3

interesting point........11 pages and not a single Indian invasion .........good for everyone i guess...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dr. Strangelove

hasnain0099 said:


> interesting point........11 pages and not a single Indian invasion .........good for everyone i guess...


kuch nahin un ke pass kehney k liyey kuch ha hi nahin


----------



## Arsalan

the official statement suggested that the test was carried out to study flight parameter and *EVALUATE A NEW LAUNCH MECHANISM. *
the bold part is what interests me the most. we all have discussed that Pakistan is working on a naval version of the missiles. now if we have a close look at the new launch system:





yes, this is a perfectly vertical launch! i guess, this was part of development work being done for the naval version. we might see the naval version inducted soon, Inshallah!!

thanks and best regards!
Arsalan Aslam

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## monitor

Waiting for the day Pakistan test fire its indigenously developed tomahawk type cruse missile from F-22P frigate .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SBD-3

Luftwaffe said:


> Many don't know about Projects but sources are sleeping about Ra'ad CM how can it be that ra'ad is neglected and newer projects are worked upon before upgrades introducing newer Versions.
> 
> Are there plans to extend the range/revamp the design and parameters such as a capable German Taurus KEPD 350 atleast or similar Euro/Russian counterparts.
> 
> So far Anti AC missile is not being worked upon such Project are in Stasis but plans are in place, such a project is massive it is pre-phase to ICBM so far Pakistan is tight on funds this does not mean necessary Pakistan would not not get into such a Project but its too early.
> 
> Ra'ad and Babur are of importance because we needs deep strike elements so further upgrades, modifications, range and revamped design is deemed necessary and important.


I personally dont think IN would like to bring out its ACC into active theater as PN should see it an opportunity rather than a threat considering the morale shock of destruction of crown jewel on IN. Anyways, I look forward to hear more...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## M.ASIF AMIN

This is NAVAL vesion of Babur missile and missile launched vehicle . vehicle have multi launched tube can launched other type of missiles like C-802 and C-602 missiles this is great punch on Indian navy.


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Pakistan is paying more attention towards cruise missile development to give answer Indian ABM programme.Hopefully within a year Babur-2 land attack missile and naval version will be test fired successfully.Insha Allah


----------



## HANI

M.ASIF AMIN said:


> This is NAVAL vesion of Babur missile and missile launched vehicle . vehicle have multi launched tube can launched other type of missiles like C-802 and C-602 missiles this is great punch on Indian navy.



This is not a navel version man it is just a test of new multi tube launch vehicle ...... But still we can say it a step closer to our Navel Version


----------



## SBD-3

HANI said:


> This is not a navel version man it is just a test of new multi tube launch vehicle ...... But still we can say it a step closer to our Navel Version


It is a significant development. Here is an interesting comparison
Babur
Lenght:6.25 m 
Diameter: 0.52 m
Weight:<1,500 kg
CJ-10 (which is likely to operate over Qing Class)
Lenght:6.5 m
Diameter: 0.52 m
Weight:~1632 kg

Do you think there is any "special" efforts would be required when it comes to Qing using Baburs 

CJ-10 cruise missile Will Be Enhanced The Accuracy Combined With Compass Navigation System | WAREYE
Babur (cruise missile) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Windjammer

*Vertical launch captured from a different angle.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Last Hope

Hey winddy ^^
That is the second test fire of Babur, not the third. 

Purani picture hai bhai


----------



## Windjammer

[SUP][/SUP]


Last Hope said:


> Hey winddy ^^
> That is the second test fire of Babur, not the third.
> 
> Purani picture hai bhai



I thought the second test was from a tilted launcher.


----------



## Last Hope

@Winddy. Bro, you are confusing things up.

*This is the first test of Babur.
*










*
This is the second test of Babur.*











*
And this is the latest test of Babur.*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Waitin for a submarine launched version !!! love to see it on the 6 QING CLASS SUBZ!


----------



## Last Hope

Long way to go bro, but one more objective in the list cleared in this test.
I expect it to be out in 2 years.


----------



## Dazzler

i heard this IS the naval version!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SQ8

nabil_05 said:


> i heard this IS the naval version!



The canistereized launch system is the naval breakthrough, But has been kept for the land version as well. Easier to reload.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## regular

Last Hope said:


> Well. We are working on our own Anti-ACC missile, as my sources fed me details about it.
> It seems to be Nuclear Tipped.
> 
> And about the 1500KM Babur, the main problem faced by Pakistan was resolved in the previous launch. Now we will witness PN Ships with Babur. About the range, I am sure they are working on it. Near 1800KM is expected.


I guess we need at least 2500km cruise stealth missiles for our subz, so that not even the AWACS can track them down...


----------



## Last Hope

*We want everything.*

But we need to chose the one which meets our requirements and economically feasible. 
A lot of opportunity costs here.

Remember. We are seeking quality which meets requirements within financial range.
For subs, we simply cannot go and fit in Cruise Missile which has range of ICMBs.
Though that would give us mighty strength, we do not need it. We simply don't want to waste our money.

This was just an example. Ballistic missiles are aimed at Indian cities. Cruise missiles are aimed at early bases, enemy Air Bases, enemy nuke facilities, nuclear reactors, defense HQ and other strategic areas. 

We are doing nearly perfect, though we need to increase range of Ra'ad to that of Baburs, and Babur to around 1200KM and the range of Babur SLCM between 1800-2500KM.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Najam Khan

LastHope a food for thought...
Why would Pakistan risk breaking the Nuclear taboo of non-use and target an aircraft carrier with Nuclear missile when the same objective can be achieved through conventional weapons? Decision to use of Nuclear weapons is based on well thought out doctrines and well crafted strategy....they are the weapons of last resort and cannot be used to achieve limited military objectives.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Last Hope

You got a point TT.
I cannot answer it, as a insider told me about a N.Capable missile being worked on as Anti-ACC.

I'll ask him to read this and I will feed you back.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## regular

Last Hope said:


> You got a point TT.
> I cannot answer it, as a insider told me about a N.Capable missile being worked on as Anti-ACC.
> 
> I'll ask him to read this and I will feed you back.


That might be the tactical nuke to accomplish small task within small boundary area like Nasr etc. The US and Russia have them so why we can't??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mughaljee

Congratulation,
even though i am right now in Makkah, 
but after hearing this news i could not stop my self to post a reply, 

now plz share information , 
is this Missile like first one, ?
what is difference ? first one and this latest one ?
any technical detail.


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Most of missiles in our arsenal could be tipped with nuke but it does not mean they will always be fired with nuke.They can be fired with traditional weapon system to get limited military objective.Nuke is just last option.
So if we are working on some anti ACC nuked tipped, it does not mean it will be only fire with nuke.It could be achieved with 1000 kg warhead.


----------



## SBD-3

Last Hope said:


> You got a point TT.
> I cannot answer it, as a insider told me about a N.Capable missile being worked on as Anti-ACC.
> 
> I'll ask him to read this and I will feed you back.


I agree with najam that why would there be a need for Nuke tip when same can be achieved with conventional MIRVs? Its just my guess is that a current nuke tipped missile would be modified to work as a conventional ACC killer

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cool_Soldier

mughaljee said:


> Congratulation,
> even though i am right now at Makkah,
> but after hearing this news i could not stop my self to post a reply,
> 
> now plz share information ,
> is this Missile like first one, ?
> what is difference ? first one and this latest one ?
> any technical detail.



Vertical launch system
Mutitubes (3 tubes)
New Launch vehicle.

and new Babur-2 and new naval version very soon Insha Allah next year.

Now do your prays more and more and do dua for nation aor mery bhi dua.


----------



## HRK

NAjAM Khan said:


> LastHope a food for thought...
> Why would Pakistan risk breaking the Nuclear taboo of non-use and target an aircraft carrier with Nuclear missile when the same objective can be achieved through conventional weapons? Decision to use of Nuclear weapons is based on well thought out doctrines and well crafted strategy....they are the weapons of last resort and cannot be used to achieve limited military objectives.




To my understanding nuclear capable missile does not necessarily mean that it will be equipped with nuclear warhead all the time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

HAMMAD REHMAN KHAN said:


> To my understanding nuclear missile does not necessarily mean that it will be equipped with nuclear warhead all the time.



Then its not a nuclear missile.. its just a missile.
When you attach the word nuclear, you point to the warhead.
A ballistic missile is a nuclear missile when it has a nuke warhead.
Otherwise it can be just a conventional ballistic missile.

Which is why its better to stick to the terms of the type of missile and not generalize it by warhead.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

mughaljee said:


> Congratulation,
> even though i am right now in Makkah,
> but after hearing this news i could not stop my self to post a reply,
> 
> now plz share information ,
> is this Missile like first one, ?
> what is difference ? first one and this latest one ?
> any technical detail.



Pray for the nation .. the world n me too..lol


----------



## HRK

Santro said:


> Then its not a nuclear missile.. its just a missile.
> When you attach the word nuclear, you point to the warhead.
> A ballistic missile is a nuclear missile when it has a nuke warhead.
> Otherwise it can be just a conventional ballistic missile.
> 
> Which is why its better to stick to the terms of the type of missile and not generalize it by warhead.



What I mean to say in my previous post that a nuclear capable missile is not necessarily mean to be equipped with nuclear warhead all the time, any way I have edited my post.


----------



## Last Hope

hasnain0099 said:


> I agree with najam that why would there be a need for Nuke tip when same can be achieved with conventional MIRVs? Its just my guess is that a *current nuke tipped missile would be modified to work as a conventional ACC killer*



Right on target! Though is is not really a current missile, the missile is obtained from what today is a Nuclear Missile. 
More like starting from prototypes of the missile.
*
Anyways this isin't the right thread. If you want to talk more on it, create a separate thread named 'Pakistan working on Air-Craft carrier killers'. Time to lock this thread Santro.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Major Sam

m very happy now, from many weeks am desperately waiting for this moment.................... congrats to all Pakistan

do pray to all he will keep us under his BLESSINGS. ameen


----------



## SBD-3

Last Hope said:


> Right on target! Though is is not really a current missile, the missile is obtained from what today is a Nuclear Missile.
> More like starting from prototypes of the missile.
> *
> Anyways this isin't the right thread. If you want to talk more on it, create a separate thread named 'Pakistan working on Air-Craft carrier killers'. Time to lock this thread Santro.*


lol...Well I'd rather leave it till we have something concrete on it....After all, we are not DRDOish aren't we?


----------



## Peaceful Civilian

I am very happy in the recently advancements in the cruise missile technology, Specially addition of vertical launch system and multitube system. Of course this advancement will help launching CMS from naval.


----------



## Bratva

can anyone point out what's the advantages/disadvantages of vertical launch/tilted launch?


----------



## Ghareeb_Da_Baal

Dang............................. 
Imagine several of these on naval ships.
This is a big, big boost for navy as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

NAjAM Khan said:


> LastHope a food for thought...
> Why would Pakistan risk breaking the Nuclear taboo of non-use and target an aircraft carrier with Nuclear missile when the same objective can be achieved through conventional weapons? Decision to use of Nuclear weapons is based on well thought out doctrines and well crafted strategy....they are the weapons of last resort and cannot be used to achieve limited military objectives.




Sir,

Would you kindly shed some light on the non conventional strike to take out an air craft carrier---what kind of weapons and how.


----------



## Zarvan

Peaceful Civlian said:


> I am very happy in the recently advancements in the cruise missile technology, Specially addition of vertical launch system and multitube system. Of course this advancement will help launching CMS from naval.


Lets hope this Multi Tube works exactly like MRLS it will be great 3 cruise missiles fired in few seconds gap and causing complete destruction of enemy forces and hope these kind of tubes also are fitted in our Naval Ships


----------



## regular

Zarvan said:


> Lets hope this Multi Tube works exactly like MRLS it will be great 3 cruise missiles fired in few seconds gap and causing complete destruction of enemy forces and hope these kind of tubes also are fitted in our Naval Ships


I guess we are going to installthem on our ships like F-22p's etc...in very near future to increase the threat for our enemies....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arsalan

we had already employed multiple tube as far as i know but what in a further development in this test was a new launch vehicle and a vertical launch!
that indicates that we might see PN future frigates fitted with the Babur missile!!

thanks and best regards!
Arsalan Aslam

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cabatli_53

Congratulations to Pakistan for achieving such a great and strategic system.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Faheka.afk

Agreed! 
More pics here
Pakistan Successfully Tests Hatf-VII Babur Land Attack Cruise Missile ~ Pakistan Military Review






Strong Pakistan = Strong Turkey

Reactions: Like Like:
18


----------



## regular

Now we need to enhance its quality, size , speed and range and also add stealth features in it. I wish its range be increased to at least 2500km and its speed be 3.0 macs min. so that it becomes impossible for any anti-missile system to shoot it down before reaching its target. Cuz most of the anti-missile systems are between 3-4macs . We need to beat them down in speed. Insha-Allah..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

guys one more question considering that we are now going to use it against Indian navy but to utilize this thing we also need decent radars for the ships dont u agree do u think that the radars of f22-p have this much range

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Riz

if we were able to make a two stage ( first stage with turbojet engine & 2nd with ramjet engine ) version of babur Air-Craft Carrier missile , then it will impossible for any abm system to counter it


----------



## Najam Khan

MastanKhan said:


> Sir,
> 
> Would you kindly shed some light on the non conventional strike to take out an air craft carrier---what kind of weapons and how.


No.8 Sqn operates Mirage-VPA2 and PA3 aircraft, former is a dedicated for ground attack and latter is a dedicated aircraft for naval support/deep-sea interdiction missions. AM-39 is their primary weapon. After integration of C-802/803 with JF-17, PAF will be able to assign naval support role to more than one squadrons. Harpoons might be small in number, but could be used as a deadliest weapon against such targets.

Now question comes why Nuclear tipped weapons cant be used? Using a nuclear tipped weapon won''t be a strategic move...The aftermath of its use will be drastic for both sides....And definitely will be a very expensive kill as compare to a conventional weapon.

Also making a smaller warhead is a very difficult task, it takes too much cost and effort in making one. Nasr is one good punch for the enemy, but at the same time it has a price tag as well...i don't see any reason in shooting a smaller target with an expensive weapon.

_What's the sense of sending $2 million missiles to hit a $10 tent that's empty?

 President George W. Bush, Oval Office meeting, 13 September 2001._

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Last Hope

NAjAM Khan said:


> No.8 Sqn operates Mirage-VPA2 and PA3 aircraft, former is a dedicated for ground attack and latter is a dedicated aircraft for naval support/deep-sea interdiction missions. AM-39 is their primary weapon. After integration of C-802/803 with JF-17, PAF will be able to assign naval support role to more than one squadrons. Harpoons might be small in number, but could be used as a deadliest weapon against such targets.



Thanks for this information.



> Now question comes why Nuclear tipped weapons cant be used? Using a nuclear tipped weapon won''t be a strategic move...The aftermath of its use will be drastic for both sides....And definitely will be a very expensive kill as compare to a conventional weapon.
> 
> Also making a smaller warhead is a very difficult task, it takes too much cost and effort in making one. Nasr is one good punch for the enemy, but at the same time it has a price tag as well...i don't see any reason in shooting a smaller target with an expensive weapon.


Mr. TT, I guess you should ask this to TT's of Armed Forces. 


> _What's the sense of sending $2 million missiles to hit a $10 tent that's empty?
> 
> &#8212; President George W. Bush, Oval Office meeting, 13 September 2001._


...that guy killed millions, and he has destabilized several Nations for a long long time. He is the reason of misery in lives of multi-millions all over the world..


----------



## IceCold

Last Hope said:


> ...that guy killed millions, and he has destabilized several Nations for a long long time. He is the reason of misery in lives of multi-millions all over the world..



You are right but i fail to understand how any of this is related to the thread topic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Pakistan should now develop a new cruise missile with more speed and more range and also develop for Navy too


----------



## MastanKhan

NAjAM Khan said:


> No.8 Sqn operates Mirage-VPA2 and PA3 aircraft, former is a dedicated for ground attack and latter is a dedicated aircraft for naval support/deep-sea interdiction missions. AM-39 is their primary weapon. After integration of C-802/803 with JF-17, PAF will be able to assign naval support role to more than one squadrons. Harpoons might be small in number, but could be used as a deadliest weapon against such targets.
> 
> Now question comes why Nuclear tipped weapons cant be used? Using a nuclear tipped weapon won''t be a strategic move...The aftermath of its use will be drastic for both sides....And definitely will be a very expensive kill as compare to a conventional weapon.
> 
> Also making a smaller warhead is a very difficult task, it takes too much cost and effort in making one. Nasr is one good punch for the enemy, but at the same time it has a price tag as well...i don't see any reason in shooting a smaller target with an expensive weapon.
> 
> _What's the sense of sending $2 million missiles to hit a $10 tent that's empty?
> 
> &#8212; President George W. Bush, Oval Office meeting, 13 September 2001._



Sir,

I am totally lost with this answer-----in your other post you mentioned using non-conventional against air craft carrier----could you please elucidiate on that. Thank you.

I would like to know which non nuc option can take out an aircraft carrier----.


----------



## SQ8

MastanKhan said:


> Sir,
> 
> I am totally lost with this answer-----in your other post you mentioned using non-conventional against air craft carrier----could you please elucidiate on that. Thank you.
> 
> I would like to know which non nuc option can take out an aircraft carrier----.



Something the size of a KH-22.. 
However, you dont need to sink an aircraft carrier to put it out of commission.
Just disable its abilty to maintain flight operations. Making dents in what is essentially steel may not be easy, but can be done.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Najam Khan

MastanKhan said:


> Sir,
> 
> I am totally lost with this answer-----in your other post you mentioned *using non-conventional *against air craft carrier----could you please elucidiate on that. Thank you.
> 
> I would like to know which non nuc option can take out an aircraft carrier----.



Sir i wrote earlier...
_Why would Pakistan risk breaking the Nuclear taboo of non-use and target an aircraft carrier with Nuclear missile when the same objective can be achieved through *conventional weapons?* _

Non-nuke option is discussed in post#207.


----------



## MastanKhan

NAjAM Khan said:


> Sir i wrote earlier...
> _Why would Pakistan risk breaking the Nuclear taboo of non-use and target an aircraft carrier with Nuclear missile when the same objective can be achieved through *conventional weapons?* _
> 
> Non-nuke option is discussed in post#207.



Sir,

Are you discussing it with yourself or with the board members----you discussed nothing in post #207---. I thought I missed something important----so I went back to post #207---so where is the inormation----or is that all.


Santro,

In that category---the kh 22 nuc capable is considered for that job----the conventional kh22 is not considered sufficient----beinglaunched from 200 + miles----. 

You have to decide---do you need to take the enemy's assets out---or do you the wrath of the enemy----. If you have to take the enemy's assets out----then there is the only option---a nuc option---. So far the americans don't think that their a/c/c can be taken out by conventional methods. 

Now---did pakistan get the KH22's!!!!!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dazzler

Sinking an AC is not an easy job because of sheer size among other factors but Cruise Missiles can be equipped with both nuclear and non nuclear warheads. in case of conventional warhead, the weight can be increased at a cost of slight range reduction. This can be achieved by Babur or C-602 at respectable ranges as both are medium sized CMs and able to carry heavy conventional payloads. Raad also comes into equation. Few other options can also be exercised.


----------



## MastanKhan

Hi,

Please just say I don't know anything about it----.

Aircraft carriers will be taken out by nuc strikes only----primarly the first one with an air burst over the target---what it will do will to completely neutralize the surface acitivity on the ship---secondly all the complimentary surface fleet or most of it( the armada )would be rendered neutral as well----. Second nuc strike would probably obliterate the ship--depending on the size of the bomb---you may not need a second strike.

Conventional missiles---most of them will be taken out by anti air craft and anti missile defences----secondly---these conventional missiles don't pack that big a punch even if they hit the aircraft carriership.

The priamary air burst from a nuc will render all these on the ship defences useless as well---the heat wil light the ships on fire the shock wave and concussion will literally lift the ship upside down---or throw them sideways---the radiation will take care of the survivors.

The reason for using the tactical nuc missile is, that it is an anywhere weapons----it does not need to hit the target---even if it explodes in the viccinity---it will do the job---as a matter of fact an air burst on the top of the carrier will be preferred---whereas the conventional missile may do little damage---it may hit or it may miss----. If it hits---these ships are designed in such a way nowadays---that they can take severest form of punishment from missile strikes and still survive to fight another day.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dazzler

Thats the problem. You think you know it all at least your attitude shows this. Read the post again, where did i say a conventional strike will sink the career for sure? I talked about possibilities that can be implied and these are practically applicable scenarios to keep it as conventional as possible. Going Nuclear will ensure a mutual destruction for both sides for sure. The career, even if not sunk, will still suffer enough damage that will force it dysfunctional for quite a while.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MastanKhan

Nabil---is the post I replied to by you or Najamkhan.

Stop putting the spin---. None of the items that you talked about would reach the aircraft carrier---it is too well protected by support vessels, aircraft and air sentries---and the aftermath won't be drastic as you would think in case of nuc strike----.

The oceans are the only place left that you may use indescretion to use nuc against the enemy---either through torpedoes---ie---submarine launched----or through aircraft-----aircraft carriers have too much protection surrounding them for the conventional weapons to reach them.

How many 802 /803 a jf 17 can carry---1-----how many missiles do you think you need to launch at that aircraft carrier battle group to get through the perimeter setup to protect it from such attacks------. 

Now do I need to teach the THINK TANK that the aircraft carrier does not ride the waves on its own----it has a carrier battle group surrounding it----. A whole flotilla of ships----aircraft----awacs---submarines----.

The first issue with the jf 17 would be to reach within launch distance of the carrier battle group----which will be impossible----then it would have to launch atleast 50 ---802/803 missiles at the carrier group of which. Pak navy won't have 50 jf 17's to spare for a one way trip----they won't even have 25 jf 17's to spare for this trip---because all of them would be taken out by the enemy----either before launch of the missile.

So---for the 25 missiles launched maybe maybe 1 will reach the aircraft carrier----most of the others will be taken out---some will fall short----. But the bottomline is that this scenario won't happen---because paf doesnot have any air superiority fighters to intercept the aircraft carrier groups planes from intercepting the jf17's in the first place.

Don't put your thoughts on the paper because you want to----they are flawed----do some research---read some books on the subject---understand the significance of how the war can be fought with the carrier battle group----.

There is only one way pakistan can reach it----your diesel electric air propulsion submarine, submerged, lying in wait for the carreir battle group launched a nuc tipped cruise missile for an air burst right on top the aircraft carrier. A sudden surprise attack would take out all the communications----destroy smaller ships and make the aircraft carrier impotent----.

Paf cannot reach any aircraft carrier group on their own in numbers.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dbc

Conventional attack will be ineffective, in 1969 nine 500 lb bombs roughly the destructive force of 12 cruise missile accidentally exploded inside the USS Enterprise killing 27 sailors and injuring 300. The carrier resumed its strike mission one hour after that catastrophic event. Attacking a CBG with nuclear weapons isn't easy either the biggest challenge is detecting the ship and tracking it in order to guide a nuclear missile. The act of tracking the ship will expose the enemy radar, in 30 seconds a E/A-18 G will be in the air anticipating an attack, prepared to render the hostile emitter ineffective as soon as a missile launch is detected.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Donatello

MastanKhan said:


> Nabil---is the post I replied to by you or Najamkhan.
> 
> Stop putting the spin---. None of the items that you talked about would reach the aircraft carrier---it is too well protected by support vessels, aircraft and air sentries---and the aftermath won't be drastic as you would think in case of nuc strike----.
> 
> The oceans are the only place left that you may use indescretion to use nuc against the enemy---either through torpedoes---ie---submarine launched----or through aircraft-----aircraft carriers have too much protection surrounding them for the conventional weapons to reach them.
> 
> How many 802 /803 a jf 17 can carry---1-----how many missiles do you think you need to launch at that aircraft carrier battle group to get through the perimeter setup to protect it from such attacks------.
> 
> Now do I need to teach the THINK TANK that the aircraft carrier does not ride the waves on its own----it has a carrier battle group surrounding it----. A whole flotilla of ships----aircraft----awacs---submarines----.
> 
> The first issue with the jf 17 would be to reach within launch distance of the carrier battle group----which will be impossible----then it would have to launch atleast 50 ---802/803 missiles at the carrier group of which. Pak navy won't have 50 jf 17's to spare for a one way trip----they won't even have 25 jf 17's to spare for this trip---because all of them would be taken out by the enemy----either before launch of the missile.
> 
> So---for the 25 missiles launched maybe maybe 1 will reach the aircraft carrier----most of the others will be taken out---some will fall short----. But the bottomline is that this scenario won't happen---because paf doesnot have any air superiority fighters to intercept the aircraft carrier groups planes from intercepting the jf17's in the first place.
> 
> Don't put your thoughts on the paper because you want to----they are flawed----do some research---read some books on the subject---understand the significance of how the war can be fought with the carrier battle group----.
> 
> There is only one way pakistan can reach it----your diesel electric air propulsion submarine, submerged, lying in wait for the carreir battle group launched a nuc tipped cruise missile for an air burst right on top the aircraft carrier. A sudden surprise attack would take out all the communications----destroy smaller ships and make the aircraft carrier impotent----.
> 
> Paf cannot reach any aircraft carrier group on their own in numbers.




They have 5 billion dollar worth assets protecting 5 billion dollar worth Aircraft carrier.....we know that...however you cannot miss the USS Stark and USS Cole incidents.........meaning you cannot rely entirely on the technology to defend.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ziaulislam

MastanKhan said:


> Nabil---is the post I replied to by you or Najamkhan.
> 
> Stop putting the spin---. None of the items that you talked about would reach the aircraft carrier---it is too well protected by support vessels, aircraft and air sentries---and the aftermath won't be drastic as you would think in case of nuc strike----.
> 
> The oceans are the only place left that you may use indescretion to use nuc against the enemy---either through torpedoes---ie---submarine launched----or through aircraft-----aircraft carriers have too much protection surrounding them for the conventional weapons to reach them.
> 
> How many 802 /803 a jf 17 can carry---1-----how many missiles do you think you need to launch at that aircraft carrier battle group to get through the perimeter setup to protect it from such attacks------.
> 
> Now do I need to teach the THINK TANK that the aircraft carrier does not ride the waves on its own----it has a carrier battle group surrounding it----. A whole flotilla of ships----aircraft----awacs---submarines----.
> 
> The first issue with the jf 17 would be to reach within launch distance of the carrier battle group----which will be impossible----then it would have to launch atleast 50 ---802/803 missiles at the carrier group of which. Pak navy won't have 50 jf 17's to spare for a one way trip----they won't even have 25 jf 17's to spare for this trip---because all of them would be taken out by the enemy----either before launch of the missile.
> 
> So---for the 25 missiles launched maybe maybe 1 will reach the aircraft carrier----most of the others will be taken out---some will fall short----. But the bottomline is that this scenario won't happen---because paf doesnot have any air superiority fighters to intercept the aircraft carrier groups planes from intercepting the jf17's in the first place.
> 
> Don't put your thoughts on the paper because you want to----they are flawed----do some research---read some books on the subject---understand the significance of how the war can be fought with the carrier battle group----.
> 
> There is only one way pakistan can reach it----your diesel electric air propulsion submarine, submerged, lying in wait for the carreir battle group launched a nuc tipped cruise missile for an air burst right on top the aircraft carrier. A sudden surprise attack would take out all the communications----destroy smaller ships and make the aircraft carrier impotent----.
> 
> Paf cannot reach any aircraft carrier group on their own in numbers.



funny is the ACC in pacific ocean that PAf cant reach it!!!!!
if its within 1000 km any PAf aircraft and jf-17 can reach it fire 2 atleast (3 possible if sacrifying long range air to air missles). so 15 odd can fire 45 and having a chance to hit atleast 10%.it can give 4-5 hits which are possible to disable the carrier to carry its operation. 


p.s
there are photos of jf-17 models showing 2 c-802 missles..just like before it was speculated that jf can carry only two sd-10 that was shown wrong with original photos . i am pretty sure once naval version comes in you would see 2 c-802

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## regular

ziaulislam said:


> funny is the ACC in pacific ocean that PAf cant reach it!!!!!
> if its within 1000 km any PAf aircraft and jf-17 can reach it fire 2 atleast (3 possible if sacrifying long range air to air missles). so 15 odd can fire 45 and having a chance to hit atleast 10%.it can give 4-5 hits which are possible to disable the carrier to carry its operation.
> 
> 
> p.s
> there are photos of jf-17 models showing 2 c-802 missles..just like before it was speculated that jf can carry only two sd-10 that was shown wrong with original photos . i am pretty sure once naval version comes in you would see 2 c-802


Mr Mastan khan is right no matter what u do ,u can't hit the ACC with anything u have within ure inventory except the nukes. I highly doubt that our cruise missiles can even reach the carrier.I guess guys don't have an idea about the US tech. If u wanna see then ask ure naval or Airforce chief. why they can't even say a word against US. Cuz they know they are an easy prey for the US forces anytime...

---------- Post added at 03:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:27 PM ----------




Death.By.Chocolate said:


> Conventional attack will be ineffective, in 1969 nine 500 lb bombs roughly the destructive force of 12 cruise missile accidentally exploded inside the USS Enterprise killing 27 sailors and injuring 300. The carrier resumed its strike mission one hour after that catastrophic event. Attacking a CBG with nuclear weapons isn't easy either the biggest challenge is detecting the ship and tracking it in order to guide a nuclear missile. The act of tracking the ship will expose the enemy radar, in 30 seconds a E/A-18 G will be in the air anticipating an attack, prepared to render the hostile emitter ineffective as soon as a missile launch is detected.


Yes! absolutely right...that is a fact....

---------- Post added at 03:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:30 PM ----------




Death.By.Chocolate said:


> Conventional attack will be ineffective, in 1969 nine 500 lb bombs roughly the destructive force of 12 cruise missile accidentally exploded inside the USS Enterprise killing 27 sailors and injuring 300. The carrier resumed its strike mission one hour after that catastrophic event. Attacking a CBG with nuclear weapons isn't easy either the biggest challenge is detecting the ship and tracking it in order to guide a nuclear missile. The act of tracking the ship will expose the enemy radar, in 30 seconds a E/A-18 G will be in the air anticipating an attack, prepared to render the hostile emitter ineffective as soon as a missile launch is detected.


Yes! absolutely right...that is a fact....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IND151

RaptorRX707 said:


> Pakistan must test massive *Tsar Bomba (50 MT)*, when shall we do that?



pak doesn't need 50 mt bomb.

200 kt warhead is enough.

and pak doesn't have technology, enough plutonium, uranium, test sigt and powerful bomber to deliver such massive bomb.


----------



## regular

IND151 said:


> pak doesn't need 50 mt bomb.
> 
> 200 kt warhead is enough.
> 
> and pak doesn't have technology, enough plutonium, uranium, test sigt and powerful bomber to deliver such massive bomb.


Thats why we need to work hard day and night to achieve that level to keep our freedom to ourselves....


----------



## Last Hope

Actually, Sir Mastan has got a point. A/C/C are always well protected buy missile boats, frigates and submarines to avoid it getting damaged. We have a chance to break the back of the enemy. Not only the A/C/C but it's safety vessels can also be damaged with a nuke-tipped Anti-A/C/C. But if the radius of the safety circle is large, Air support can be called in. Air support by Mirage or JF-17 carrying Ra'ad with conventional warhead, as we do not have any other boats to take away.

Still, the problem that lies is, will our air support be able to reach the A/C/C in enemy waters?
Suppose our frigates and subs are protecting our waters, and beyond the range of torpedoes, sail the enemy vessels. And even further away is the A/C/C positioned. Do our Mirages or Thunders have enough fuel to make it towards the A/C/C and return back after firing the Ra'ad? And what about the safety barricades with the frigates. They may shoot us down.
Plus Babur has a range of, let's assume 800KM with conventional warhead. It wont be able to reach the A/C/C as well.

And the Naval version of Babur being worked on, is most likely to be attacked on land. It will carry nuclear warhead before its commission, unless you are telling me the respected frigate/submarine is sent for special purpose with conventional warhead. 

Looking at the mentioned factors, a Nuke-tipped Anti-A/C/C will be used. Even if the A/C/C is being surrounded by other vessels, or not, it is the best option we have. And hence we are developing one. 
_
(PS. Hope you are getting my point, if not, I will present you with diagrams)._


----------



## Dazzler

MastanKhan said:


> Nabil---is the post I replied to by you or Najamkhan.
> 
> Stop putting the spin---. None of the items that you talked about would reach the aircraft carrier---it is too well protected by support vessels, aircraft and air sentries---and the aftermath won't be drastic as you would think in case of nuc strike----.
> 
> 
> 
> The oceans are the only place left that you may use indescretion to use nuc against the enemy---either through torpedoes---ie---submarine launched----or through aircraft-----aircraft carriers have too much protection surrounding them for the conventional weapons to reach them.
> 
> How many 802 /803 a jf 17 can carry---1-----how many missiles do you think you need to launch at that aircraft carrier battle group to get through the perimeter setup to protect it from such attacks------.
> 
> Now do I need to teach the THINK TANK that the aircraft carrier does not ride the waves on its own----it has a carrier battle group surrounding it----. A whole flotilla of ships----aircraft----awacs---submarines----.
> 
> The first issue with the jf 17 would be to reach within launch distance of the carrier battle group----which will be impossible----then it would have to launch atleast 50 ---802/803 missiles at the carrier group of which. Pak navy won't have 50 jf 17's to spare for a one way trip----they won't even have 25 jf 17's to spare for this trip---because all of them would be taken out by the enemy----either before launch of the missile.
> 
> So---for the 25 missiles launched maybe maybe 1 will reach the aircraft carrier----most of the others will be taken out---some will fall short----. But the bottomline is that this scenario won't happen---because paf doesnot have any air superiority fighters to intercept the aircraft carrier groups planes from intercepting the jf17's in the first place.
> 
> Don't put your thoughts on the paper because you want to----they are flawed----do some research---read some books on the subject---understand the significance of how the war can be fought with the carrier battle group----.
> 
> There is only one way pakistan can reach it----your diesel electric air propulsion submarine, submerged, lying in wait for the carreir battle group launched a nuc tipped cruise missile for an air burst right on top the aircraft carrier. A sudden surprise attack would take out all the communications----destroy smaller ships and make the aircraft carrier impotent----.
> 
> Paf cannot reach any aircraft carrier group on their own in numbers.



Hypothetically or realistically? no asset no matter how well protected, is invincible. The aspect of strategic long range weapons has changed the doctrine and tactics as well as allowed more options hence increasing a chance of rendering a AC vulnerable to some extent. I have attended defense conferences where different scenarios are discussed to achieve just that so i know what i am talking about. These strikes are well prepared and all aspects are taken care of. This does not include a single missile or aircraft, rather a bunch. A proper brief of the target(s) is conducted and all possible options are discussed. I do not feel the need of going further but the main target (AC), other ships in battle group, air cover etc are all deeply discussed and solutions to eliminate them are repeatedly checked. And last but not least, your assumption that only JFT will be implied is far from truth as i said plenty of options in such a scenario will applied taking all the aspects and strengths of battle group including AWACS, air cover, destroyers in to equation. Will discuss more in detail.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## regular

Yes! it is true that nothing is invincible. There are limits to the human protections. ACC can be protected very well but are vulnerable to attacks from many angles. Yes this is true that it is not an easy target....


----------



## MastanKhan

nabil_05 said:


> Hypothetically or realistically? no asset no matter how well protected, is invincible. The aspect of strategic long range weapons has changed the doctrine and tactics as well as allowed more options hence increasing a chance of rendering a AC vulnerable to some extent. I have attended defense conferences where different scenarios are discussed to achieve just that so i know what i am talking about. These strikes are well prepared and all aspects are taken care of. This does not include a single missile or aircraft, rather a bunch. A proper brief of the target(s) is conducted and all possible options are discussed. I do not feel the need of going further but the main target (AC), other ships in battle group, air cover etc are all deeply discussed and solutions to eliminate them are repeatedly checked. And last but not least, your assumption that only JFT will be implied is far from truth as i said plenty of options in such a scenario will applied taking all the aspects and strengths of battle group including AWACS, air cover, destroyers in to equation. Will discuss more in detail.



Sir,

Aiyain----Baain----Shaain-----keep on trying---.

Whomsoever gave the example of USS stark and cole---that was a bad example---.

DBC gave a good example of explosion on an ACC------. 

First of all--we need to see how far the JF17 would have to fly to get to the target---then we have to assess what assets the opponent has in the air to keep an eye on the jf17 and from what distance----thirdly what air superiority fighters does the opponent have to confront the jf17's and at what distance----fourthly----knowing that the jf17's are based on a certain base----would the opponent had taken out the base including its assets before they were launched----.

We need a higher standard of postings by the TT members---it would have been better to discuss the positioning of acc battle groupd, deployment and launching of your assets and how they will get there using what resources----how many missiles will be launched and how many will get throug and what kind of sensors the missiles have that they can capture just the acc----.

I am not talking about single missile scenario----you guys were talking about it----I talked about maybe from 25---50 missiles being launched at the battle group----how would that happen and under what conditions----.

Please don't try to impress by telling us about your attending defence conferences---tell us how it will be done----. Right now the concensus is that the aircraft carrier cannot be targeted just by conventional missiles----.

You ought to have a large number of air assets just to get close-----and be able to suffer major losses just to take out the surface fleet---please discuss in form of real battle scenario. Thank you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

ziaulislam said:


> funny is the ACC in pacific ocean that PAf cant reach it!!!!!
> if its within 1000 km any PAf aircraft and jf-17 can reach it fire 2 atleast (3 possible if sacrifying long range air to air missles). so 15 odd can fire 45 and having a chance to hit atleast 10%.it can give 4-5 hits which are possible to disable the carrier to carry its operation.
> 
> 
> p.s
> there are photos of jf-17 models showing 2 c-802 missles..just like before it was speculated that jf can carry only two sd-10 that was shown wrong with original photos . i am pretty sure once naval version comes in you would see 2 c-802



Hi,

The question is IFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF they can reach it-----at max range---you will have 1 maybe 2 missiles---so---you have 20 aircraft taking off at one time on a one way trip-----so the opponent is supposedly blind---seemingly it has no assets in the air to keep an eye on these aircraft taking off---what do you think---is it the pakistan millitary general headquarters that can be breached by a few terrorists----.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VCheng

Even assuming that it is somehow possible, what does attacking a US Carrier Group actually achieve? An open act of war? A repeat of Pearl Harbor, followed by the inevitably vicious US response?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

well usa was never the opponent it was the india and india alone usa well we cant even think about it and this is a fact whether we deny it or not

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LeGenD

*Some basics:*







*An example:*






*The Power of the Carrier Strike Group:*



> Of the world&#8217;s great powers the United States is unique in having benefitted from the presence of two oceans between the homeland and foreign threats. Yet, this blessing also places the burden on this country to project its power overseas and to ensure freedom of passage in the global commons. U.S. naval forces are uniquely suited to projecting U.S. diplomatic strength and military power globally. Operating in the freedom of the world&#8217;s oceans, naval forces can move where they are needed and remain on station nearly indefinitely. These same forces can project power and influence not only over the immediate sea area around them, but along the sea lines of communication that circle the globe, onshore and into the skies overhead.
> 
> The most powerful and capable expression of U.S. naval power is the carrier strike group (CSG). The CSG can project unequalled offensive and defensive power against a wide range of threats ashore, on the seas and in the air. The CSG is also able to exert influence and control over an enormous volume of sea and air space, ensuring the free flow of goods and people across the global commons. As has been demonstrated repeatedly from Haiti to Indonesia, the CSG is also a potent force in the execution of humanitarian assistance/disaster relief operations. A critical aspect of the CSG&#8217;s ability to provide unparalleled support in humanitarian crises is its ability to deploy anywhere in the world and operate from international or territorial waters. Another feature of the CSG is its ability to use the broad ocean area to disappear from sight while still performing its assigned missions.
> 
> The carrier strike group is also possibly the most complex military organization ever to exist. There is the aircraft carrier (CVN) itself, a 90,000-plus ton nuclear powered goliath with 50 aircraft nominally and a crew of more than 4,000. The CVN is supported by its own fleet of escort ships and submarines able to conduct air, surface and subsurface warfare simultaneously. Of course there is the air wing that deploys with the CVN. The air wing consists of a combination of strike aircraft (currently F/A-18s but soon also F-35s), helicopters, airborne surveillance, and long-range resupply aircraft. Networked together, the combination of ships, submarines and aircraft/helicopters in the CSG can respond to the broadest possible spectrum of missions. The power of the CSG is scalable with the Navy able to deploy as many as nine CSG&#8217;s in a single theater given sufficient warning.
> 
> The value to the United States of the Navy&#8217;s ability to deploy CSGs anywhere in the world&#8217;s oceans cannot be underestimated. During Operation Enduring Freedom, the USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63) was initially deployed to the North Arabian Sea to serve as a platform from which helicopters and Marine Corps units could be inserted into Afghanistan. Subsequently, the USS Enterprise (CVN 65) with an eight ship and submarine task group, followed by the USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70) with nine other ships and submarines deployed to support operations in Afghanistan. Naval strike aircraft provided near-continuous air support to deployed U.S. forces. No other Navy in the world could have undertaken this mission.



*The countermeasures against missile based threats:*



> Cruise and ballistic missiles are challenges the Navy is preparing to address. Its Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air (NIFC-CA) system is a system-of-systems that will link sensors, aircraft, ships and even land-based air defense missiles into a capability that can neutralize large numbers of targets at long-ranges and all altitudes. When coupled to the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, off board sensors and weapons systems such as Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), NIFC-CA has the capacity to provide area defense against both airborne and ballistic threats.
> 
> The cornerstone of the NIFC-CA capability will be the E-2D, an advanced version of the venerable E-2 Hawkeye family of carrier-capable, airborne sensor platforms. The E-2D will not only expand the Navy&#8217;s surveillance capability, but also will enable naval and joint forces to conduct effective defenses against advanced cruise missile threats.
> 
> The E-2D now in production with a 2015 initial operational capability will have a new solid-state, electronically steered ultra high frequency radar capable of conducting surface as well as airborne surveillance, integration of multiple sensors, an advanced tactical cockpit and software to support theater missile defense engagements. It will have better networking/processing power than earlier models and planning is ongoing to integrate the ability to do Internet-based networking. The E-2D plans to add in-flight refueling, enabling the Hawkeye to stay airborne twice as long as before.
> The E-2D can draw threat data from its own sensors and other surveillance and reconnaissance systems, establish engagement priorities and match available weapons to targets. Demonstrating this capability in the Arabian Gulf could be a significant deterrent to Iranian aggression.
> 
> The E-2 fleet is evolving from a primary Airborne Early Warning system to airborne command and control, providing information, connecting other platforms and making decisions. With their data links, they will be coordinating various assets from the tactical air controller on the ground while communicating with the Combined Air Operations Center and ships at sea and also reaching back to the United States with direct satellite feeds to the Pentagon.



Main source: http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/l...Defense/Enabling_The_Carrier_Strike_Group.pdf 

*NOTE:* Most of these capabilities are already operational, if we get in the depth of US Naval technologies.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## unicorn

Death.By.Chocolate said:


> *Conventional attack will be ineffective*, in 1969 nine 500 lb bombs roughly the destructive force of 12 cruise missile accidentally exploded inside the USS Enterprise killing 27 sailors and injuring 300. The carrier resumed its strike mission one hour after that catastrophic event. Attacking a CBG with nuclear weapons isn't easy either the biggest challenge is detecting the ship and tracking it in order to guide a nuclear missile. The act of tracking the ship will expose the enemy radar, in 30 seconds a E/A-18 G will be in the air anticipating an attack, prepared to render the hostile emitter ineffective as soon as a missile launch is detected.



This is the easiest option to get the job done...



> American military chiefs have been left dumbstruck by an undetected Chinese submarine popping up at the heart of a recent Pacific exercise and close to the vast U.S.S. Kitty Hawk - a 1,000ft supercarrier with 4,500 personnel on board.
> 
> By the time it surfaced the 160ft Song Class diesel-electric attack submarine is understood to have sailed within viable range for launching torpedoes or missiles at the carrier.
> 
> According to senior Nato officials the incident caused consternation in the U.S. Navy.
> The Americans had no idea China's fast-growing submarine fleet had reached such a level of sophistication, or that it posed such a threat.
> 
> One Nato figure said the effect was "as big a shock as the Russians launching Sputnik" - a reference to the Soviet Union's first orbiting satellite in 1957 which marked the start of the space age.
> The incident, which took place in the ocean between southern Japan and Taiwan, is a major embarrassment for the Pentagon.



The uninvited guest: Chinese sub pops up in middle of U.S. Navy exercise, leaving military chiefs red-faced | Mail Online


----------



## VCheng

unicorn said:


> This is the easiest option to get the job done...
> .................[/SIZE]



Excuse me, but that will merely be the first step of a whole 'nother job, that won't get done until the US has given a fully satisfying response to the perpetrator. Right?


----------



## SQ8

VCheng said:


> Excuse me, but that will merely be the first step of a whole 'nother job, that won't get done until the US has given a fully satisfying response to the perpetrator. Right?



That incident was apparently "allowed" by the American forces to get congress to "DO more"..
According to most.. the US knew the sub was coming, even the Carriers own sonar had it picked up.
Most Chinese subs have a long way to go when it comes to sound.. they sound like washing machines under water.

However, we have allowed the Chinese to take a look at our agosta's some time before.. what they learnt from that.. they expanded upon.. priority for this new anechoic tiling and construction had been given to their Ballistic missile force. Perhaps that will filter down to the Qings.

The best way to sink a carrier is to break its back... however. for that you need a very large underwater explosion right underneath the keel. The Russians had planned on using a nuclear torpedo to that effect. But the formidable ASW screen close to a CVBG made that next to impossible. So they planned for launching massed cruise attacks, nothing less than 30 missiles in that air, so that at least two or three would get past the SAMs and CIWS. 
Not only would this attack be from long range maritime strike (tu-22M2).. and SSGN's.(Oscar class of Kursk accident fame).
Staying out of the CVBG's protective grid and launching a swarm of weapons. 

In effect, to kill a carrier.. the Russians had planned a strike force of no less than 5 large bombers, 1 SSGN..and 2 escorting SSN's.

How will Pakistan achieve the same with its limited resources.. 
The much touted incident of PAF Mirage VPA3's getting a drop on a USS carrier is evidence that given the right sea state, tactics and weather.. a dedicated low level fighter force can penetrate a carrier's fighter screen. 
The Russians planned to use supersonic missiles capable of hypersonic speeds, the C-803 is subsonic .. if detected is easy prey for a SAM.. or is it?
3 to 5 meters above sea level, a SAM will have to be extremely accurate and its approach in targeting that missile.
However, being subsonic.. it still is easy prey for CIWS.. unless it takes extreme maneuvers before impact.

In the slight chance that it does manage a hit on the superstructure of the Carrier's bridge, or perhaps a strike into the hangar bay(unlikely).. it may end up disabling flight ops for a certain time.

Again, scenario's can be laid up for the best case for any side but the reality is, best case scenario for the US are far more plentiful and likely.

Ironically, an excellent weapon to disable a US carrier is the Indian Brahmos, albeit much improved with sea skimming ability and evasive maneuvers.. four or so brahmos launched withing 160 km .. there is a fair chance that one will cause damage to the carrier.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## VCheng

Santro said:


> .....................................
> 
> The best way to sink a (US) carrier is to break its back... .....................................



Okay, let's assume it is done. Now what happens next?


----------



## Secur

VCheng said:


> Okay, let's assume it is done. Now what happens next?


 Nothing happens next ... We are just discussing scenarios to sink Aircraft Carriers ...


----------



## maverick1977

one very common diversion tactic used is to have 3 to 4 squardons of jets flying into the vicinity of a battle group to engage enemy figthers and AAM ships, and another wave of 2 to 3 squardons of anti ship carrying fighters coming in off an opposite direction.... there are way too many tactics available to strike battle groups...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## regular

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> The question is IFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF they can reach it-----at max range---you will have 1 maybe 2 missiles---so---you have 20 aircraft taking off at one time on a one way trip-----so the opponent is supposedly blind---seemingly it has no assets in the air to keep an eye on these aircraft taking off---what do you think---is it the pakistan millitary general headquarters that can be breached by a few terrorists----.


I don't think that PAF even have gutts to attack the aircraft carrier. Upto now they couldn't shoot down a small drone how they gonna attack the biggest and the highest tech system within the US arsenal. We will believe when we will see it. Other than that everything is crap I guess. Right now the big claims to taking down the Aircraft carriers especially by us is mere exaggeration or to fool the public, yeah if we bring China into the equation,Yes! then we can do that


----------



## Last Hope

^^^
Please be formal. We have the ability for drones but it is political mess.
Not the topic.


Whatever we may argue, the result would be N.Capable missiles would be used to kill A/C/C and its support.
Nothing less, nothing more.

Right on target.


----------



## regular

Last Hope said:


> ^^^
> Please be formal. We have the ability for drones but it is political mess.
> Not the topic.
> 
> 
> Whatever we may argue, the result would be N.Capable missiles would be used to kill A/C/C and its support.
> Nothing less, nothing more.
> 
> Right on target.


I know/agree what Ure saying but I guess U didn't hear the interview of the air Chief that its very easy to shoot down the drone but its extremely hard to stand after that. Cuz after that the Hell gonna get loose on our country or Air force such that won't find no place to hide...thats the main problem and thats why Mr Gilani ran to China to seek refuge for his country after the OBL incident in May 5th. Otherwise even a small kid can shoot that drone with any anti aircraft weapon no doubt about that. If we were able to withstand the retaliation from the US/NATO Airforce we would have shot down drones hundred times but the opposite is true...


----------



## regular

VCheng said:


> Okay, let's assume it is done. Now what happens next?


Then Mr. Zardari and Looterra Tolla will run to find some Nuclear proof underground bunkers to hide their @$$z..cuz then US gonna get chance to test every weapon on us including their Nukes as well as H2 bombs etc etc.....


----------



## regular

Santro said:


> Ironically, an excellent weapon to disable a US carrier is the Indian Brahmos, albeit much improved with sea skimming ability and evasive maneuvers.. four or so brahmos launched withing 160 km .. there is a fair chance that one will cause damage to the carrier.


Yes! Brahmos has that capability to disable the Carrier..very nicely said ...This means its a risk for us too then. We need to develop cruise missile for 3Macs speed too then...


----------



## Thorough Pro

Tidal waves created by under water nuclear detonations are not very friendly to any kind of floating structures...


----------



## MastanKhan

maverick1977 said:


> one very common diversion tactic used is to have 3 to 4 squardons of jets flying into the vicinity of a battle group to engage enemy figthers and AAM ships, and another wave of 2 to 3 squardons of anti ship carrying fighters coming in off an opposite direction.... there are way too many tactics available to strike battle groups...



Hi,

And where would paf gett all those aircraft from----and where would they be flying from---and what about air refeulling-----.Wouldn't it look very obvious when so many aircraft take off at one time.


----------



## SQ8

VCheng said:


> Okay, let's assume it is done. Now what happens next?



I am assuming that this is done by surprise in what is essentially in idiotic move.
The immediate response would be mobilization of the closest CVBGs(not one but two).
The remaining ships of the attacked CVBG would launch massive strikes against military facilities on the Pakistani shoreline, the PN will not survive for long. If they can manage a few attacks by missile ships, few would be succesful.
PAF Masroor, Faisal, Badin radar, Jacobabad.. 
PN facilities such as those in Karachi, Ormara.. the strategic oil storage tanks.. all go.

It will be shock and awe.. ask the Iraqis about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Windjammer

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> And where would paf gett all those aircraft from----and where would they be flying from---and what about air refeulling-----.Wouldn't it look very obvious when so many aircraft take off at one time.


*It may not be down everyone's ally, none the less the following makes an interesting read.*








Flying a few feet above the Arabian Sea, the two Mirage pilots are impressed by the awesome silhouette of the nuclear-powered Abraham Lincoln as the carrier looms gradually above the sea curvature, dead on the nose. The mission: To penetrate successfully the Carrier Task Force's early warning and perimeter defences and, to deliver a simulated Exocet guided missile attack on "the world's largest warship". The memorable sortie was flown during "Inspired Alert" - a Pakistan-US joint exercise. O.C. No. 8 Squadron, strictly following the ground rules, planned and led a simultaneous multidirectional attack profile against CVN-72, in an attempt to overload its defence. As two of the three Mirage pairs turned away, the lead Mirage carried out a simulated Exocet "launch" from several miles away, without meeting any of the ship's fighters. The Squadron Commander and his wingman later did a friendly fly by at the carrier's side, perhaps just as surprised as the Lincoln's crews, at the missed interception.

Wing Commander Asim Suleiman Leader and O.C. No 8 Squadron
Flight Lieutenant Ahmed Hassan Wingman.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Dazzler

*Aiyain----Baain----Shaain-----keep on trying---.*

* This kind of nonsense does not suit a former TT.

*Whomsoever gave the example of USS stark and cole---that was a bad example---.*

* yes it was out of context

*DBC gave a good example of explosion on an ACC------.* 

* to a good extent..

*First of all--we need to see how far the JF17 would have to fly to get to the target---then we have to assess what assets the opponent has in the air to keep an eye on the jf17 and from what distance----thirdly what air superiority fighters does the opponent have to confront the jf17's and at what distance----fourthly----knowing that the jf17's are based on a certain base----would the opponent had taken out the base including its assets before they were launched----.*

* Assuming the ACC is in the vicinity of Arabian Ocean, i am talking in the light of a multitier attack which is not limited to fighter aircrafts alone but also include AshMs from various positions/ frigates, Submarines, even land based assets. In this kind of hypothetical attack, a massive force from air comprising of C-80x series, Exocets, Harpoons, for radar hunt, MAR-1s, for air to air combat, SD-10, Aim 120s, WVRs), from subs, Exocet, harpoon, C80x, torpedoes, and from land babur, C602, possibly C-80x series might be used. To add to their confusion, SRBMs with conventional warheads can be used as to create more panic, not necessarily to hit the ACC. The key word here is to inflict a massive thrust of incoming threats from various directions. No matter how fast their SAMS, how proficient their aircrafts, radars and jammers are, they will still sustain damage. 

*We need a higher standard of postings by the TT members---it would have been better to discuss the positioning of acc battle groupd, deployment and launching of your assets and how they will get there using what resources----how many missiles will be launched and how many will get throug and what kind of sensors the missiles have that they can capture just the acc----.*

* Those who set parameters for selection know better than you and me what they are doing. You do not have to worry about this. 

*I am not talking about single missile scenario----you guys were talking about it----I talked about maybe from 25---50 missiles being launched at the battle group----how would that happen and under what conditions----.*

*Please don't try to impress by telling us about your attending defence conferences---tell us how it will be done----. Right now the concensus is that the aircraft carrier cannot be targeted just by conventional missiles----.*

* MK, it would be better for you not to discuss things you have no knowledge about. 

*You ought to have a large number of air assets just to get close-----and be able to suffer major losses just to take out the surface fleet---please discuss in form of real battle scenario. Thank you.*

* Yes any strike force will suffer major losses, no argument in this. Hitting the battle group is no joke and IF ever happened, the US will take it as a blow to their pride and will unleash their might. I will say it again, it is very difficult but not impossible.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Last Hope

We may think of another possibility.

If we send one of our Thunder with Ra'ad (1400 KM of Thunder and 350 KM of Ra'ad) would mean we can hit targets only 1750KM.
And we can expect them to scramble their jets after us, so it needs to be accompanied by two formations of fighters. This is the Anti-A/C/C we are talking about which needs to be destroyed. 

Won't the PAF be busy handling other Air Wars? Where would we get these excessive jets from?
Doesn't make sense Nabil.


----------



## Dazzler

Last Hope said:


> We may think of another possibility.
> 
> If we send one of our Thunder with Ra'ad (1400 KM of Thunder and 350 KM of Ra'ad) would mean we can hit targets only 1750KM.
> And we can expect them to scramble their jets after us, so it needs to be accompanied by two formations of fighters. This is the Anti-A/C/C we are talking about which needs to be destroyed.
> 
> Won't the PAF be busy handling other Air Wars? Where would we get these excessive jets from?
> Doesn't make sense Nabil.



who is saying to put 10 sqd in it? look at it as a scenario not otherwise.


----------



## regular

nabil_05 said:


> *Aiyain----Baain----Shaain-----keep on trying---.*
> 
> * This kind of nonsense does not suit a former TT.
> 
> *Whomsoever gave the example of USS stark and cole---that was a bad example---.*
> 
> * yes it was out of context
> 
> *DBC gave a good example of explosion on an ACC------.*
> 
> * to a good extent..
> 
> *First of all--we need to see how far the JF17 would have to fly to get to the target---then we have to assess what assets the opponent has in the air to keep an eye on the jf17 and from what distance----thirdly what air superiority fighters does the opponent have to confront the jf17's and at what distance----fourthly----knowing that the jf17's are based on a certain base----would the opponent had taken out the base including its assets before they were launched----.*
> 
> * Assuming the ACC is in the vicinity of Arabian Ocean, i am talking in the light of a multitier attack which is not limited to fighter aircrafts alone but also include AshMs from various positions/ frigates, Submarines, even land based assets. In this kind of hypothetical attack, a massive force from air comprising of C-80x series, Exocets, Harpoons, for radar hunt, MAR-1s, for air to air combat, SD-10, Aim 120s, WVRs), from subs, Exocet, harpoon, C80x, torpedoes, and from land babur, C602, possibly C-80x series might be used. To add to their confusion, SRBMs with conventional warheads can be used as to create more panic, not necessarily to hit the ACC. The key word here is to inflict a massive thrust of incoming threats from various directions. No matter how fast their SAMS, how proficient their aircrafts, radars and jammers are, they will still sustain damage.
> 
> *We need a higher standard of postings by the TT members---it would have been better to discuss the positioning of acc battle groupd, deployment and launching of your assets and how they will get there using what resources----how many missiles will be launched and how many will get throug and what kind of sensors the missiles have that they can capture just the acc----.*
> 
> * Those who set parameters for selection know better than you and me what they are doing. You do not have to worry about this.
> 
> *I am not talking about single missile scenario----you guys were talking about it----I talked about maybe from 25---50 missiles being launched at the battle group----how would that happen and under what conditions----.*
> 
> *Please don't try to impress by telling us about your attending defence conferences---tell us how it will be done----. Right now the concensus is that the aircraft carrier cannot be targeted just by conventional missiles----.*
> 
> * MK, it would be better for you not to discuss things you have no knowledge about.
> 
> *You ought to have a large number of air assets just to get close-----and be able to suffer major losses just to take out the surface fleet---please discuss in form of real battle scenario. Thank you.*
> 
> * Yes any strike force will suffer major losses, no argument in this. Hitting the battle group is no joke and IF ever happened, the US will take it as a blow to their pride and will unleash their might. I will say it again, it is very difficult but not impossible.


U know nabil I have an idea I can tell U. that U can take over the aircraft without even shooting any missile at it. and I guess that is very easy. They will be amazed if its done....I guess we don't need to discuss everything over here cuz they will get our Ideas and get ready beforehand....we will get an inside mole.....thats so easy.......

---------- Post added at 08:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:54 PM ----------

we don't need to waste our so much energy for just a single aircraft carrier. Let Mastan Khan and US be happi....


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

regular said:


> I don't think that PAF even have gutts to attack the aircraft carrier. Upto now they couldn't shoot down a small drone how they gonna attack the biggest and the highest tech system within the US arsenal. We will believe when we will see it. Other than that everything is crap I guess. Right now the big claims to taking down the Aircraft carriers especially by us is mere exaggeration or to fool the public, yeah if we bring China into the equation,Yes! then we can do that


 
need i remind you that Pakistan was the first air force in the world to down a UAV using an air asset (an F16)

Pakistan could surely sink indian carrier and everything on it; however it would have to be during war-time when the gloves are off; obviously the carrier would be provided air support so there would obviously be resistance...its not a fishing boat, its carrying assets of the iaf

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Rafi

This thread is about the test firing of Babur, where did sinking carriers come into it. There will be no war between US and us, if the US attacked us, they have the capability to make us suffer heavily, but if they lost all influence, it will be like winning the battle and loosing the war, the last thing anybody needs is a hostile very large country on the Straits of Hormuz.

---------- Post added at 09:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:42 PM ----------




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> need i remind you that Pakistan was the first air force in the world to down a UAV using an air asset (an F16)
> 
> Pakistan could surely sink indian carrier and everything on it; however it would have to be during war-time when the gloves are off; obviously the carrier would be provided air support so there would obviously be resistance...its not a fishing boat, its carrying assets of the iaf



There carrier can only carry about 12 armed aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Windjammer said:


> *It may not be down everyone's ally, none the less the following makes an interesting read.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flying a few feet above the Arabian Sea, the two Mirage pilots are impressed by the awesome silhouette of the nuclear-powered Abraham Lincoln as the carrier looms gradually above the sea curvature, dead on the nose. The mission: To penetrate successfully the Carrier Task Force's early warning and perimeter defences and, to deliver a simulated Exocet guided missile attack on "the world's largest warship". The memorable sortie was flown during "Inspired Alert" - a Pakistan-US joint exercise. O.C. No. 8 Squadron, strictly following the ground rules, planned and led a simultaneous multidirectional attack profile against CVN-72, in an attempt to overload its defence. As two of the three Mirage pairs turned away, the lead Mirage carried out a simulated Exocet "launch" from several miles away, without meeting any of the ship's fighters. The Squadron Commander and his wingman later did a friendly fly by at the carrier's side, perhaps just as surprised as the Lincoln's crews, at the missed interception.
> 
> Wing Commander Asim Suleiman Leader and O.C. No 8 Squadron
> Flight Lieutenant Ahmed Hassan Wingman.



MK n Vcheng n others should take a look at this...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## karan.1970

Rafi said:


> There carrier can only carry about 12 armed aircraft.



Err.. Viraat can carry upto 30 planes and Vikramaditya upto 24


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

karan.1970 said:


> Err.. Viraat can carry upto 30 planes and Vikramaditya upto 24



Abe carries 90 helis n fixed wing aircrafts... yet it was painted red during a Pakistan-US joint exercise!

surprise!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## karan.1970

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> Abe carries 90 helis n fixed wing aircrafts... yet it was painted red during a Pakistan-US joint exercise!
> 
> surprise!



just responding to Rafi's post of viraat carrying only 12 planes


----------



## Dazzler

Rafi bhai, 

I hate to drift from topic but i had to give an answer what MK sahib wrote


----------



## Rafi

nabil_05 said:


> Rafi bhai,
> 
> I hate to drift from topic but i had to give an answer what MK sahib wrote



No problem bro, your posts are always informative - and I look forward to them.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Dazzler

I have heard something but without any confirmation so any info in that regard would be much appreciated. The current version that was tested is SUPPOSEDLY a 1000 km Naval version but range was restricted to 700-750. Also, each Babur version tested to date has something new. Last one a better TERCOM mode.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## HANI

Windjammer said:


> *It may not be down everyone's ally, none the less the following makes an interesting read.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flying a few feet above the Arabian Sea, the two Mirage pilots are impressed by the awesome silhouette of the nuclear-powered Abraham Lincoln as the carrier looms gradually above the sea curvature, dead on the nose. The mission: To penetrate successfully the Carrier Task Force's early warning and perimeter defences and, to deliver a simulated Exocet guided missile attack on "the world's largest warship". The memorable sortie was flown during "Inspired Alert" - a Pakistan-US joint exercise. O.C. No. 8 Squadron, strictly following the ground rules, planned and led a simultaneous multidirectional attack profile against CVN-72, in an attempt to overload its defence. As two of the three Mirage pairs turned away, the lead Mirage carried out a simulated Exocet "launch" from several miles away, without meeting any of the ship's fighters. The Squadron Commander and his wingman later did a friendly fly by at the carrier's side, perhaps just as surprised as the Lincoln's crews, at the missed interception.
> 
> Wing Commander Asim Suleiman Leader and O.C. No 8 Squadron
> Flight Lieutenant Ahmed Hassan Wingman.



Brother can u tell me the date of that Exercise i wana read more about the Great work of our boys


----------



## VCheng

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> MK n Vcheng n others should take a look at this...



I know of this episode. Just like the Chinese sub incident, sometimes it is wiser to let the adversary overestimate themselves.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## unicorn

Secur said:


> Nothing happens next ... We are just discussing scenarios to sink Aircraft Carriers ...



No offense but Advocating US superiority in every post is his moral duty.



Santro said:


> That incident was apparently "allowed" by the American forces to get congress to "DO more"..
> According to most.. the US knew the sub was coming, even the Carriers own sonar had it picked up.



Kitty Hawk was decommissioned in 2009.This fact contradicts with what you are saying.

What you are saying should only be considered a conspiracy.I am not saying that it is but it may be.


----------



## Birbal

In general I don't think it is right to compare the Brahmos and the Babur. The Brahmos is supersonic, which makes it harder to intercept but gives it shorter range. It is more useful if you can afford a large navy and air force to be able to get within range of a carrier battle group and destroy it. The Babur is subsonic, which makes it easier to intercept but gives it longer range. For Pakistan to defend itself from an American carrier battle group, the Brahmos would not be that useful because it would be hard to get in range. The Babur on the other hand would be useful.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VCheng

Secur said:


> Nothing happens next ... We are just discussing scenarios to sink Aircraft Carriers ...


 


unicorn said:


> No offense but Advocating US superiority in every post is his moral duty.
> 
> .......................



I merely state facts, logically and impartially.

How can you discuss scenarios to sink any aircraft carrier without realizing that ANY power that is able to field an ACC in this day and age will have a significant number of other military assets too. You sink the ACC, then you must also consider what will happen next.

It is only logical.


----------



## unicorn

VCheng said:


> I merely state facts, logically and impartially.
> 
> How can you discuss scenarios to sink any aircraft carrier without realizing that ANY power that is able to field an ACC in this day and age will have a significant number of other military assets too. You sink the ACC, then you must also consider what will happen next.
> 
> It is only logical.



I didn't say that what you are saying is wrong. But the topic we are discussing here is not about the possible retaliation of US.


----------



## VCheng

unicorn said:


> I didn't say that what you are saying is wrong. But the topic we are discussing here is not about the possible retaliation of US.



I understand that too.

All I am saying is that one must always be aware of the consequences of any action being considered that is clearly an open act of war, no matter who does it and against whomsoever.


----------



## unicorn

VCheng said:


> I understand that too.
> 
> All I am saying is that one must always be aware of the consequences of any action being considered that is clearly an open act of war, no matter who does it and against whomsoever.



Yes all you are saying is also understandable but it is turning the direction of the on going discussion. It will be very appreciable if you enlighten us and share some of your knowledge with us regarding the possibilites of attacking ACC.

Incase of India and Pakistan I see submarines as the best option against their carriers in future. What is your thought in that???


----------



## VCheng

unicorn said:


> Yes all you are saying is also understandable but it is turning the direction of the on going discussion. It will be very appreciable if you enlighten us and share some of your knowledge with us regarding the possibilites of attacking ACC.
> 
> Incase of India and Pakistan I see submarines as the best option against their carriers in future. What is your thought in that???



I think that a few submarine-launched nuclear-tipped sea-skimming supersonic missiles from three different locations simultaneously should have a pretty good chance of destroying their target, with a huge counter-attack to inevitably follow.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## unicorn

Regarding US carriers this is the only argument by a poster aka (GAMBIT) in this forum that seems reasonable.



> The USS Enterprise came within a step of dying on 14 January, 1969. Exploding weapons on the flight deck blew the ship apart all the way down to the waterline. Flaming jet fuel from the thirty two aircraft involved cascaded down through those many great wounds firing the interior of the ship.



bigEfire.com Ordeal of the USS Enterprise

The US learned much from WW II on large warship designs regarding *compartmentalization* to reduce the odds of sinking. If the above was at wartime, the Enterprise would have effect emergency deck repairs and continue to prosecute the war. Air operations would be limited but not completely ceased. One hit would not sink it.


----------



## VelocuR

Guys, Anyone forgot to sink Aircraft carrier by using.......see below!

Qing Submarines!, a similar Sweden Gotland Submarine AIP sinking US Aircraft Carrier undeteched.


----------



## unicorn

*Diesel-Electric Submarines, the U.S. Navy&#8217;s Latest Annoyance*


The Navy in recent months has had to contend with several provoking episodes at sea &#8212; Iranian small boats speeding at its cruisers, destroyers and frigates; Russian bombers flying over its carriers; and Chinese subs shadowing its warships.

Hard-to-detect submarines &#8212; such as quiet, diesel-electric boats &#8212; are particularly vexing, Navy officials say. They contend that an undersea arms race already has begun in the western Pacific.

Nations there in recent years have begun to acquire stealthy diesel-electric submarines. Some of those nations, say Navy officials, could one day threaten U.S. access to strategic coastal areas of the world or interrupt the flow of commerce around the globe.

Although the Navy has the world&#8217;s most technologically advanced fleet &#8212; including state-of-the-art nuclear attack submarines &#8212; officials acknowledge that these comparatively low-tech diesel-electric boats could give an enemy an asymmetric advantage.

&#8220;The beauty about a diesel submarine is that it has the potential to be far quieter than a nuclear submarine,&#8221; says Guy Stitt, president of AMI International, a Bremerton, Wash.-based company specializing in naval market analysis. Diesel boats are propelled by batteries when submerged and move through the water by diesel engines when on the surface.

Once they have powered up their batteries, the submarines can sail to the bottom of coastal waters and remain undetected for days. Though they can&#8217;t travel long distances or sail very quickly, advancements in technologies, such as air-independent propulsion and fuel cells, have allowed diesel submarines to extend their operational ranges underwater.

But perhaps their best selling point is their relatively inexpensive price tags. The Russians have sold diesel submarines for as little as $200 million and the French have exported their Scorpene submarines for $300 million.

&#8220;It is within the scope of many, many countries to be able to afford them. They don&#8217;t need a lot of them. They don&#8217;t need to sail them very far, and they don&#8217;t have to be particularly proficient with them,&#8221; says Vice Adm. Samuel Locklear, commander of the Navy&#8217;s Third Fleet, which prepares strike groups to deploy to the Pacific and the Middle East.

More than 39 nations possess diesel submarines. One of the latest tallies indicates a total of 377 ships in the world, says Richard Dorn, an analyst at AMI International. And there could be an uptick in the next few years.

With China continuing to increase the size of its navy, a number of neighboring nations also have begun to develop their undersea capabilities.

&#8220;There&#8217;s a push on in Asia that really seems to be driven by China,&#8221; says Stitt. Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia all have closed deals on diesel submarines, and now Thailand is following suit.

Driving the market in part is Russia, which during the past 18 months has been aggressively selling ships, including its Kilo-class diesels.

&#8220;We&#8217;ve seen a huge increase in the number of sales that they&#8217;re booking for Kilos, primarily motivated by the need for funds to strengthen their second tier shipbuilding groups,&#8221; says Stitt.

Since the end of the Cold War, Russia has lost many of its secondary shipyard suppliers &#8212; the engine, pump and valve manufacturers, piping companies and the like. But Russia is attempting to revitalize those small companies.

&#8220;They&#8217;re going out and making all these deals to sell submarines and ships and using those funds to reinvigorate the industry, which in turn will also benefit them in building up the Russian fleet,&#8221; says Stitt.

Russia has exported 30 Kilos around the globe and 26 are still in active service. It will deliver two more submarines to Algeria by 2010, five to Venezuela by 2020, and six to Indonesia by 2018. China received its 12th and final Kilo last year.

The number of Kilos that are being sold is particularly concerning because many of the submarines are equipped with Klub anti-ship cruise missiles.

Some nations have a desire for regional hegemony and want to strengthen their influence in an area. That&#8217;s most definitely the reason for President Hugo Chavez buying subs for Venezuela, says Stitt.

But for other nations, the reasons are less clear.

&#8220;There&#8217;s a wide array of military assets you can buy, so why would you buy a diesel-electric submarine? As far as I know, it&#8217;s not to protect your own port,&#8221; says Locklear in an interview at Third Fleet headquarters perched atop Point Loma in San Diego.

That China&#8217;s submarines are surfacing boldly near U.S. warships is a telltale sign of newer advanced technologies, such as acoustic tiles and cavitation-reducing propellers, that are being employed on the submarines, says Stitt.

China&#8217;s new Song-class diesel submarines have tracked U.S. Navy ships operating in the seas near Japan and Taiwan. Last November, after China denied the USS Kitty Hawk&#8217;s port call in Hong Kong at the last minute, a Chinese submarine shadowed the carrier as it entered the Taiwan Straits on its return voyage to Yokosuka, Japan. In the late fall of 2006, a Song-class submarine surfaced within torpedo range of the Kitty Hawk off the coast of Okinawa, Japan.

Despite the tensions, those episodes and the topic of submarines did not come up directly in conversations with Chinese officials in January, when the commander of Pacific Command, Adm. Timothy Keating, visited the nation.

&#8220;We watch them carefully. It&#8217;s an area of warfare at which they&#8217;re stretching a little bit,&#8221; he told reporters during a breakfast meeting in Washington, D.C. &#8220;Their numbers of submarines are increasing. The capabilities resident in those submarines are not unimpressive. They&#8217;re pretty good &#8212; we&#8217;re better.&#8221;

China&#8217;s fleet of nuclear and diesel submarines includes 10 Song class, 12 Kilo class, one Yuan class and 32 Romeo class. 
&#8220;We know that they are continually expanding their reach in what they view as their own areas of interest, and that their submarine force is vital to expanding that reach,&#8221; says Locklear.

The proliferation of diesel submarines in the Pacific is one of the major factors behind the Navy&#8217;s decision to move six submarines from the Atlantic Fleet to the Pacific Fleet, says Rear Adm. Joseph Walsh, commander of the Pacific Submarine Force. Because more than 140 diesel subs are within reach of critical &#8220;choke points&#8221; in the area, anti-submarine warfare is Pacific Fleet&#8217;s top war-fighting priority, he adds.

The Navy saw its anti-submarine warfare skills diminish after the end of the Cold War. In those days, enemy Soviet nuclear submarines were noisy, and could be detected with passive sonar.

But modern-day diesel submarines are not as easily heard, particularly in regions of the seas where biological life and merchant shipping can camouflage their acoustic signatures. It is there, in the noisy waters of the littorals, where detecting submarines can be a cat-and-mouse game, Navy officials say.

Rear Adm. John Waickwicz, who was the head of the Naval Mine and Anti-Submarine Warfare Command until he retired in January, says the Navy is looking at anti-submarine warfare in new ways.

&#8220;When you talk about countries that have 30, 40, or 50 submarines, you can&#8217;t wait until they&#8217;re around you, because they&#8217;re going to overwhelm you,&#8221; he says.

Potential enemies have figured that to defeat the U.S. Navy, they must &#8220;go out and buy submarines, and buy mines,&#8221; he says.

The mine and anti-submarine warfare command is calling for the deployment of a network of sonobuoys over a wide expanse of ocean to detect enemy submarines. But the project has been marred by technological and funding problems. The most significant hitch is that the data collected by the sensors takes too long to analyze, says Waickwicz. &#8220;You need to do it in real time to take action on it.&#8221;

False alarm rates on many of the fleet&#8217;s current detection technologies are too high, Waickwicz adds. That forces commanders to waste resources on non-existent threats.

Officials insist that the Navy&#8217;s anti-submarine warfare capabilities are the best in the business, but they acknowledge that it will take some time to hone the skills to combat stealthy diesel submarines. Waickwicz says that training has improved in recent years, but some individual units are not adequately prepared for at-sea operations.

For example, some units have demonstrated sonar operator proficiency on simulations that are not sophisticated enough to replicate the real environment, which puts the sailors at a disadvantage when they conduct operations at sea, says Rear Adm. Frank Drennan, the new commander of the Naval Mine and Anti-Submarine Warfare Command.

&#8220;The requirements are still the same &#8212; they just have to work on them in a challenging environment so that operators are truly proficient when they go to sea,&#8221; he says.

Hunting for quiet diesel submarines in the shallow waters of the littorals is akin to trying to identify the sound of a single car engine in the din of a major city, he says.

There are variations in the underwater topography, with sand bars, coral reefs and channels. Different depths of water and changing salinity and temperatures alter how sounds propagate. Marine life and merchant shipping also complicate the search by generating ambient noise.

The only technology that the Navy considers suitable for detecting and tracking diesel submarines is active sonar. It disperses signals out into the water where they bounce off of objects. Those echoes are captured by hydrophones and interpreted by sonar technicians.

Contrary to popular belief, sonar is not like radar, which gives complete visibility of &#8220;hits&#8221; in the air. What sonar technicians see is a screen that is filled with vertical lines representing echoes from objects in the water. Discerning which line is a submarine and which one is a coral reef is a difficult and complex task, sailors say.

The Navy spent 40 years building a training range on the coast of Southern California &#8212; one of the most extensive in the world, officials say. Underwater sensors track ships&#8217; locations and record operations during exercises.

Because the water and ocean bottom conditions are representative of many areas around the world, the range is an ideal location for training strike groups in anti-submarine warfare, says Locklear.

But the Navy&#8217;s training there has been curtailed by ongoing litigation over the harmful effects of active sonar on marine mammals.

Under a federal judge&#8217;s ruling, ships were forbidden from using active sonar within 12 nautical miles of shore and had to steer clear of waters between the Santa Catalina and San Clemente islands during a joint training exercise in January for the Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group. Sightings of marine mammals at certain distances also prompted ships to take protective measures, such as powering down sonar or shutting the sensors off completely.

&#8220;We&#8217;re not able to employ the sonar, given those restrictions, in a realistic manner, and it just makes it real tough to assess whether the fleet is proficient at using the technology,&#8221; says Capt. Pete Tomczak, deputy director for training at Third Fleet.

The use of sonar by the Navy has been linked to mass marine mammal strandings on beaches in the Bahamas and the Canary Islands. Pending necropsy results, the death of a northern right whale dolphin that washed up Jan. 29 on the Navy&#8217;s San Nicolas Island could be connected to sonar use.

Locklear says the Navy tries to balance its responsibility to protect the environment with its job to prepare sailors for war. He expresses concern that the judge&#8217;s ruling, if extrapolated beyond Southern California, could hamper Navy training around the world.

&#8220;If this becomes precedence setting, I think it will be very difficult for the United States Navy,&#8221; he says. &#8220;If there was a new technology on the horizon that made this irrelevant, we would be all over it. We just haven&#8217;t found it yet.&#8221;

With prospects of at-sea training diminishing, not only because of the litigation, but also as a result of rising fuel costs and other budget constraints, the Navy is searching for alternative ways to prepare its sailors for anti-submarine warfare.

One option is to rely on simulators, says Waickwicz. But he points out that current simulations in the Navy do not replicate sonar accurately.

&#8220;It&#8217;s like playing &#8216;Pong&#8217; in today&#8217;s game world,&#8221; he says. While the submarine forces have higher fidelity trainers, much of the rest of the fleet &#8212; especially surface ships &#8212; have sub-par simulations.

&#8220;Computer simulations can only go so far. There is still no substitute for at-sea practice against a real submarine,&#8221; says Pacific Fleet&#8217;s Walsh.

Because the U.S. Navy no longer operates diesel-electric submarines, it invites allied countries that own these boats to participate in exercises at Navy ranges on the east and west coasts.

*The Swedish Navy&#8217;s HMS Gotland collaborated most recently with various Navy commands in San Diego.

&#8220;It was very advantageous to have a diesel submarine crew for two years, to see how they thought, how they approached the issues to go against the ships,&#8221; says Waickwicz. &#8220;It really opened our eyes to diesel submarines and how active sonar is what you have to have in the strike group.&#8221;

The experience led to recent changes in the Navy&#8217;s anti-submarine warfare doctrine and tactics.*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## newdelhinsa

We are discussing the scenario of striking ACC after when it is located, isn't it ? 

At present no one has such capabilities to detect US ACC, especially during war time when it will be floating arrogantly alert.

Only Pakistan's submarine fleet has the range and capability to detect Indian AAC assume 2000-3000 nautical miles away from Pakistan's littoral waters and then it can go for an attack or feed(contineously) to others to plan a strike with other available assets.

Air recon with the help of refueler can also help detecting ACC but again it wouldn't be a stealthy sneaky operation against a floating battle group sniffing everything even, above and beneath. 

An ambushing submarine at the bottom for a very long time can do the trick but needs sheer luck.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Birbal

newdelhinsa said:


> We are discussing the scenario of striking ACC after when it is located, isn't it ?
> 
> At present no one has such capabilities to detect US ACC, especially during war time when it will be floating arrogantly alert.
> 
> Only Pakistan's submarine fleet has the range and capability to detect Indian AAC assume floating 2000-3000 nautical miles away from Pakistan's littoral waters and then can go for an attack or feeds (contineous) to others to plan a strike with other available assets.
> 
> Air recon with the help of refueler can also help detecting ACC but again it wouldn't be a stealthy sneaky operation against a floating battle group sniffing everything even, above and beneath.
> 
> An ambushing submarine at the bottom for a very long time can do the trick but with sheer luck.



Finding a US ACC is easy. Just send a swarm fishing trawlers and what not to the general location of the aircraft carrier. Keep the boats unarmed so they can't be attacked. Now, locate enemy aircraft carrier and fire your missile.


----------



## newdelhinsa

Birbal said:


> Finding a US ACC is easy. Just send a swarm fishing trawlers and what not to the general location of the aircraft carrier. Keep the boats unarmed so they can't be attacked. Now, locate enemy aircraft carrier and fire Babur missile!




Oh its getting fictional. : )

Ever heard no fly zone and no fishing zone  before war. Anything approaching will be intercepted and murdered mercilessly many hundred miles before. And the earth is spherical you know what i mean as far as visualizing ACC is concern. And and and even a 20 nautical mile speed is quite quick; if you have seen a ship sailing.


----------



## VCheng

newdelhinsa said:


> ................. even a 20 nautical mile speed is quite quick; if you have seen a ship sailing.



The top speed of US ACCs presently in service is classified, but rest assured is _far _above 20 knots.


----------



## Birbal

newdelhinsa said:


> Oh its getting fictional. : )
> 
> Ever heard no fly zone and no fishing zone  before war. *Anything approaching will be intercepted and murdered mercilessly many hundred miles before.* And the earth is spherical you know what i mean as far as visualizing ACC is concern. And and and even a 20 nautical mile speed is quite quick; if you have seen a ship sailing.



In international waters?


----------



## VCheng

Birbal said:


> In international waters?



Yes. Anything within several hundred miles of any CVBG will be intercepted.


----------



## Birbal

VCheng said:


> Yes. Anything within several hundred miles of any CVBG will be intercepted.


 
Within several hundred miles? That's the entire Indian Ocean west of India. Have fun explaining to dozens of countries why all their civilian ships are getting sunk in international waters.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

6 King class subs,3 agosta 90Bs,2 agosta 70s... plus more in future will be a real pain for the indian navy.


----------



## Windjammer

VCheng said:


> I know of this episode. Just like the Chinese sub incident, sometimes it is wiser to let the adversary overestimate themselves.



Hence we are willing to give credit to all else except the deserving......specially if it's the Pakistan armed forces. !! ?/


----------



## DV RULES

> MK n Vcheng n others should take a look at this...



PN
Bios programming in computer not easy to change... 

Pakistan-US war worse scenario than Pak-India war scenario. Pakistan has to work out all possibilities for damn worst conditions of war.


----------



## VCheng

Birbal said:


> Within several hundred miles? That's the entire Indian Ocean west of India. Have fun explaining to dozens of countries why all their civilian ships are getting sunk in international waters.



I said "intercepted", not "sunk". Big difference.



Windjammer said:


> Hence we are willing to give credit to all else except the deserving......specially if it's the Pakistan armed forces. !! ?/



Not at all, credit where credit is due: The Mirages did indeed fly a daring mission, and are to be commended for that. 

I am merely noting the exercise conditions, not a real war situation, under which it was carried out, and also to provide recognition to the many layers of thinking behind thinking that permeate modern tactics.


----------



## Super Falcon

well good going but pakistan should also upgrade the technology of the cruise missile rather than only focusing on the ranges they also must focus on how to makes our cruise missile technically ahead of our enemy countermeasurs too


----------



## Windjammer

VCheng said:


> Not at all, credit where credit is due: The Mirages did indeed fly a daring mission, and are to be commended for that.
> 
> I am merely noting the exercise conditions, not a real war situation, under which it was carried out, and also to provide recognition to the many layers of thinking behind thinking that permeate modern tactics.



Agreed that boards don't hit back but surely doesn't anticipation takes out the element of surprise.


----------



## Birbal

VCheng said:


> I said "intercepted", not "sunk". Big difference.



Okay... So you're busy intercepting every ship in the Western Indian Ocean. Never mind if your CBG is actually big enough to do that. What do you do next? Are you going to sink any ships whose trajectory takes them past your carrier?


----------



## regular

Birbal said:


> Finding a US ACC is easy. Just send a swarm fishing trawlers and what not to the general location of the aircraft carrier. Keep the boats unarmed so they can't be attacked. Now, locate enemy aircraft carrier and fire your missile.


Yes! pretty smart way...but why we dont sattelite to track them down..its so quick and easy.....


----------



## Major Sam

regular said:


> Yes! pretty smart way...but why we dont sattelite to track them down..its so quick and easy.....



i think its a very smart idea? but in reality is it possible


----------



## VCheng

Birbal said:


> Okay... So you're busy intercepting every ship in the Western Indian Ocean. Never mind if your CBG is actually big enough to do that. What do you do next? Are you going to sink any ships whose trajectory takes them past your carrier?



The route of the ships as well as the CVBG is carefully plotted continuously. Any more details are not for a public forum.


----------



## SQ8

unicorn said:


> No offense but Advocating US superiority in every post is his moral duty.
> 
> 
> 
> Kitty Hawk was decommissioned in 2009.This fact contradicts with what you are saying.
> 
> What you are saying should only be considered a conspiracy.I am not saying that it is but it may be.



The Kitty Hawks decommissioning has nothing to do with "blowing" up a threat to keep your shiny news toys coming in.
The Indians do it all the time, We do it.. so what.. the Americans are some godsend honest saints??


----------



## Birbal

VCheng said:


> The route of the ships as well as the CVBG is carefully plotted continuously. Any more details are not for a public forum.



In other words you want to claim that America can protect its carriers even though you have zero evidence to back that up.


----------



## VCheng

Birbal said:


> In other words you want to claim that America can protect its carriers even though you have zero evidence to back that up.



Yes, *I openly admit that you are correct*, inasmuch that I cannot present any evidence about what you want to know in this public forum.


----------



## MastanKhan

Birbal said:


> Finding a US ACC is easy. Just send a swarm fishing trawlers and what not to the general location of the aircraft carrier. Keep the boats unarmed so they can't be attacked. Now, locate enemy aircraft carrier and fire your missile.



Birbal,

Kid---some of your posts were intelligent--so you had some respect from the board----now this post and a couple after this-----they don't look and sound good---so, I guess that you also have a shrtage of books to read in india---do you want me to build a couple of librairies for you in india as I would in pakistan after I win my lottery!!!!!

During the time of war---u s CBG has a minimum 200 miles radius exclusion zone----any aircraft or other vessel would be taken out----I am sorry----there is no exclusion zone during time of war---my apoligies----you are there you are out .

Technically when the u s cbg is this close to the enemy shore---the enemy fishing trawlers would be nowhere close to floating because all the civilian operators would have run away---.

Secondly-----which fishing trawler can see 200 miles away and diferentiate between an ACC. ---Thirdly if there was any possibility---the transmissions would be jammed---fourthly---they would be obliterated even before getting closer to the exclusion zone---wars are terrible.

---------- Post added at 03:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:39 PM ----------




Birbal said:


> In other words you want to claim that America can protect its carriers even though you have zero evidence to back that up.



Birbal---I didnot know that people wanting evidence still exist to this day!!!


----------



## Darth Vader

badass ; lol we dont need more f16 just make couple of million of these and incrs their range upto 10000 km so no problem =))
bum bam bum =))) wo even say a word


----------



## VCheng

MastanKhan said:


> ............................
> Birbal---I didnot know that people wanting evidence still exist to this day!!!



.... so how does _any _dogmatic religion exist then?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

VCheng said:


> .... so how does _any _dogmatic religion exist then?



Zinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnng

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------

