# Pakistani Ballistic Missiles: Indigenous Content & Development



## The Deterrent

*Pakistani Ballistic Missiles : How much Pakistani are they?*

_"Defense is the right of every country.And the credible capability to defend or deter an enemy attack should be achieved,by any available means."_

There have been many foreign reports,which claim Pakistani Ballistic missiles to be simply "copies" of Chinese and North Korean missiles.Unfortunately,most of the people (foreigners) believe such reports blindly and accuse Pakistan of only performing the "Paint job".This article is intended to remove those confusions,and pin-point the developments made by Pakistan.However,there is no doubt that the very basic origins of the ballistic missiles of Pakistan lie in China and North Korea.

In the following paras,we will see all of them one by one.

*Hatf-1 /Hatf-1A /Hatf-1B BRBM (Range 70-100km,Warhead Payload 500 kg)
*

*Development History :*
Hatf-1 was developed by SUPARCO and was first tested in March,1989.By that time SUPARCO had achieved significant expertise,because it had been developing and launching Solid-fueled sounding rockets since the 1970s.Hatf-1 had a poor accuracy(400-500 m CEP),with a very simple INS and a range of 70 km.

*Origins :*
It was based on the French Dauphin Sounding Rocket.But contrary to Dauphin,Hatf-1 was an Artillery Rocket launched at an angle.Notable differences between the two systems include:

Aerodynamic tail fins on Hatf-1
Altitude of 50km approx (150 km of Dauphin)
500 kg payload (150 kg of Dauphin)
1500 kg launch weight (1132 kg of Dauphin)
Length 6.0m (6.21m of Dauphin)

However,the diameter of both systems was same,i.e. 0.56m.

*French Dauphin Sounding Rocket:*






*Pakistani Hatf-1 Ballistic Missile:*






*What Pakistan did :*
In two years,Hatf-1 underwent an upgrade.The upgraded version was named Hatf-1A.It had an increased range of 100 km with increased accuracy.
Later on,another upgrade was made to Hatf-1A.This time,its accuracy was further improved by adding an advanced INS which was made from the experienced gained during the development of other projects.Thus the CEP was decreased to 10-15 m.It was tested in 2000,and was designated Hatf-1B as a Guided Ballistic Missile.
As of now,all previous Hatf-1 versions have been completely replaced by Hatf-1B.

So,Hatf-1 is this much Pakistani :

1. Modified aerodynamic (chopped) tail fins.
2. Locally developed launch rail supported on a towed platform.
3. Powerful Motor installed on Hatf-1A,increasing its range by 30 km.
4. A simple INS integrated on Hatf-1A,reducing the CEP to 100 m.
5. An advanced INS integrated on Hatf-1B,further reducing its CEP to 15 m.

In effect,Pakistan transformed a sounding rocket into a Guided Ballistic Missile.


*Hatf-2 Shadoz SRBM (Range 300 km,Warhead Payload 500 kg) * *"Cancelled"*


*Development History :*
Initially,Hatf-2 had the name of "Shadoz".It was developed by SUPARCO and was tested in 1989.
Its accuracy was poor,relative to the newer Abdali.

*Origins :*
The first Hatf-2 was a two-stage version of the Hatf-1.It was based on the two stage French Sounding Rocket Eridan.It bore somewhat the same relative differences from Eridan,as Hatf-1 did from Dauphen.
Later,the project was terminated,in favor of the more advanced M-11 missiles.

*French Eridan Sounding Rocket:*





*Pakistani Hatf-2 Shadoz Ballistic Missile:*






*What Pakistan did :*
It is clear that Hatf-2 Shadoz was heavily based on Eridan.But,it was this much Pakistani :

1. Modified aerodynamic (chopped) tail and second stage fins.
2. Locally developed launch rail supported on a towed platform.
3. A simple INS installed,giving a CEP of ~200 m.

*French Dragon (background),Centaure (middle) and Belier (foreground) Sounding Rockets*





*Note :* Though the Centaure and Belier appear similar to preious Hatf-I and II,they were smaller in dimensions.

*Diagram of Initial Pakistani Hatf-1,Hatf-2,Hatf-3 SRBMS*





*Hatf-2 Abdali SRBM (Range 180 km,Warhead Payload 500 kg)*


*Development History :*
This system is advanced,modern and has a new design than the previous missiles in the series (regarding origins).Development was initiated by NDC around 1997-8,and continued by SUPARCO.The system was first tested in 2002.

*Origins :*
It does not resembles any foreign missile system in dimensions and the technologies used.
The design incorporates technologies from Hatf-1 and Hatf-3 Ghaznavi missiles.It can be termed as the hybrid of the two systems.


*What Pakistan did :*
Over the decade,it was upgraded again and again.The latest version has a CEP of 25m approx (by using a modern INS which is assisted by satellite guidance),drastically shortened launch rail and probably fold-able tail fins.


*Hatf-2 Abdali SRBM (2007) *





*Hatf-2 Abdali SRBM (2011) *





So,Hatf-2 Abdali is this much Pakistani :

1. Indigenous airframe design.
2. Locally developed solid-fueled propulsion system.
3. Locally developed shortened launch rail.
4. Local INS,giving a CEP of ~25 m.

Overall,an indigenous missile with technologies incorporated from newer (larger) missile systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
23


----------



## The Deterrent

*Hatf-3 Ghaznavi SRBM (Range 290 km,Warhead Payload 500 kg [Total 600 kg])*


*Development History :*
Pakistan Army had a wide gap of local missile capabilities,with Hatf-1 having 100 km range and Shaheen-I having 700 km range,because Hatf-2 and 3 were cancelled.Therefore,around 1997-8,NDC (NESCOM) started the development of the Ghaznavi missile,with Abdali being developed in parallel by SUPARCO.The system was first tested in May,2002.

*Origins :*
In early 1990s,China provided Pakistan with 30-40 M-11 (DF-11) SRBMs,to help it strengthen its Armed forces.These missiles had a range of ~300 km,with a payload of 500 kg and a CEP of 500-600 m.

In appearance and capabilities,Ghaznavi remarkably resembles M-11.In the 1990s,Pakistan also procured critical equipment and machinery for developing missiles locally.Initially,it was decided to mass-produce the M-11s with similar capabilities.Later on,it was decided to make an advanced version of M-11,equipped with modern technologies. 

*Chinese DF-11A (CSS-7 Mod 2),an advanced version of DF-11/M-11*





*Pakistani Hatf-3 Ghaznavi (IDEAS,2008)*






*What Pakistan did :*
The local version,tested as late as 2002,had a better solid-fueled motor downgraded from Shaheen-1.Pakistan moved ahead of China,and inducted the aero-spike in the design,which enhanced the performance of the missile in dense atmosphere,enabling it to follow a depressed ballistic trajectory.Later on,China also inducted the aero-spike,in later versions of CSS-7 Mod 2 (DF-11A).Yet another major modification was made,and a locally developed advanced INS was installed,giving the missile a CEP of <50m (As stated by Chairman NESCOM) by aiding the warhead vehicle with a precise Post-separation Attitude Correction System.

*Pakistani Hatf-3 Ghaznavi (Azm-e-Nau 3 exercise,2010)*





Although Ghaznavi is an off-shoot of M-11 (which itself was an advanced version of Scud-B),induction of indigenous technologies show that Pakistan had the capability of designing SRBMs.But since it was really short on time,Pakistan chose M-11 as a platform and instead did R&D on improving it, according to the modern requirements of Pakistan Army.No doubt,Ghaznavi is the most advanced missile of the two systems, DF-11 (CSS-7) and Scud-B.

So,Hatf-3 Ghaznavi is this much Pakistani :

1. Introduction of the drag-reducing aero-spike on the warhead cone.
2. Locally developed advanced INS,giving a CEP of ~50 m, assisted by
3. Locally developed Post-separation Attitude Correction System.

In effect,indigenously developed Warhead Assembly mounted on "license-produced" missile motors.


*Hatf-4 Shaheen-1 SRBM (Range 800 km,Warhead Payload 600 kg [Total 700 kg])*


*Development History :*
Pakistan Army required a longer range SRBM,other than the Hatf-2 and 3 to strike a bit deep inside Indian territory, because of the lessons learned from Iran-Iraq War.Hence,development of Shaheen-1 started around 1993 by newly formed NDC.The system was first tested in April,1999.Development for Shaheen-1 was given more priority than Abdali and Ghaznavi because of its psychological impact,therefore Ghaznavi and Abdali appeared late.

*Origins :*
According to several Western (US) analysts,Shaheen-1 is a locally produced version of M-9 (DF-15).Others suggest it to be a bigger version of the M-11 (DF-11) missile.However,this is not entirely correct.

Shaheen-1 does not resembles that much to M-9 (DF-15) ,neither in appearance (shape/dimensions) nor in capabilities.
Shaheen-1 is 2.9 m longer and carries 200 kg heavier payload to 150 km more distance than the M-9 (DF-15). Furthermore,Shaheen-I has a launch weight of 9500 kg as compared to 6200 kg of DF-15.

*Chinese DF-15 (M-9)*






*Pakistani Shaheen-1 (IDEAS,2008)*






*What Pakistan did :*
Shaheen-1 has incorporated technologies which were locally developed by extensively studying the M-11 missile and its components.The same facilities set up by the help of China to make M-11 type missiles were given the task to develop Shaheen-1.Some very critical components were bought from China,and the first version of Shaheen-1 was ready by 1999.

*Pakistani Shaheen-1 *(The black patches near the small stabilizing fins may be antennae intended to service very accurate satellite navigation systems : RD Fisher)





*Further development :*
Shaheen-1 V1 (version 1) used only Post-separation Attitude Correction System,which correct the trajectory of the Re-entry Vehicle (ReV) immediately after termination of boost phase.Therefore its accuracy was relatively poor,and lied in the same range as of DF-15 (300-500 m).
However,in early 2000s,NDC began development of a modern version,version 2.The Shaheen-1 V2 was more accurate,giving a CEP of <90 m.The new version included Terminal Correction System which corrected the warhead's trajectory in terminal phase by using thrusters mounted in the warhead assembly.Also included was an improved design for the ReV,which enabled it to re-enter the atmosphere at higher speeds.

*Shaheen-1 V1 (1999)*





*Shaheen-1 V2 (Azm-e-Nau 3 exercise,2010)* {zoom to see the changed shape of ReV cone}






It can be assumed that though Shaheen-1 has incorporated technologies from M-11 and M-9,still it cannot be termed as an M-9 copy,because it is far more advanced than the M-9.Rather,it is a highly improved and modified version of M-9.

So,it is this much Pakistani :

1. Locally developed, much powerful missile motor giving more range and payload capacity.
2. Locally developed Post-separation Attitude Correction System.
3. Indigenously developed Terminal Correction System.Both are assisted by
4. Indigenously developed Satellite guidance system,which also corrects the errors developing in INS during flight.

Overall,a locally developed advanced missile using the M-11/M-9 as a base.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
20


----------



## The Deterrent

*Hatf-5A Ghauri-1 MRBM (Range 1300 km,Warhead Payload 600 kg [Total 750 kg])*


*Development History :*
The development of Ghauri-1 started around 1993,by Khan Research Laboratories (KRL). As a liquid fueled missile,this system was first tested in April 1999.Ghauri-1 gave a significant boost to Pakistan's strategic offensive capabilities.

*Origins :*
This system is infamous for being exactly similar to North Korean Nodong-1 Missile,both in appearance and capabilities.In Mid-1990s,North Korea exported around 10-15 Nodong missiles,in component form.North Korea also provided some necessary machinery for producing these missile locally.Therefore,Pakistan immediately started replicating the components and assembling them to form Ghauri-1 missiles.In other words,Pakistan "License-produced" Nodongs.

Strange thing,but North Korea itself deployed the Nodongs as late as 1998 (despite the first Nodong was tested in 1990),about 9 of them,according to US Rumsfield report.The North Korean delay was caused by technical difficulties and economic sanctions.This suggests that either Pakistan was given more priority to North Korean Armed Forces,or Pakistan obtained only some components in mid-1990s and perfected the design much quickly.

The CEP of Nodong and Ghauri-1 systems was previously thought to be very poor i.e. around 1000 m.However,the FAS and Missilethreat have admitted in their reports that both systems use the spinning mechanism of missile before the separation of warhead,which remarkably increases accuracy.This mechanism is not found in Scud-C missile,of which the Nodong is highly advanced version,with twice the range and payload.The "revised" CEP of these system is 190 m.

There are very little (1 or 2) authentic pictures available of the Nodong-1 system.Most of the pictures display the diagram only,the rest show the Musudan-1 missile,which is very different from the Nodong-1.

*North Korean Nodong-1 MRBM *(the best picture I found)





*Pakistani Hatf-5A Ghauri-1 MRBM (1998)*






*What Pakistan did :*
So,Hatf-5A Ghauri-1 is this much Pakistani :

1. Locally developed Re-entry Vehicle (ReV).
2. Local improved INS,giving a CEP of ~150 m.

Overall,Ghauri-1 constitutes of Pakistani ReVs mounted on locally produced Nodong missile motors.

*Hatf-5B Ghauri-2 MRBM (Range 2300 km,Warhead Payload 1000 kg [Total 1200 kg])
*

*Development History :*
Development of the single stage Ghauri-2 started two years later than Ghauri-1's by KRL..First tested in April 1999,Ghauri-2 proved itself to be much more advanced than Ghauri-1.

*Origins :*
Some western reports claim Ghauri-2 to be a local version of Nodong-2.However,this is not correct.Nodong-2 was never materialized,due to technical flaws and economic restraints.Instead,all efforts were converged on the Musudan missile,which is a different and separate missile from the Nodong (its thicker and shorter,with a differently shaped ReV).


*What Pakistan did :*
Ghauri-2 was 2.1 m longer, 1950 kg heavier and delivered a warhead payload of 300 kg more to 1000 km more distance than its predecessor.In effect,Ghauri-2 achieved these capabilities by adding just 1000 kg of higher quality propellents.This also means that a more advanced and powerful liquid-fueled rocket engine was designed for it.The diameter of Ghauri-2 was same as Ghauri-1,i.e. 1.35 m.

In 2010,Ghauri-2 was tested at just 1300 km range,which is the max range of Ghauri-1.Also,all the tests occurring from 2002 were of Ghauri-2 actually.Therefore,it would be safe to assume that Ghauri-1 has been retired from service,because Ghauri-2 has similar dimensions as Ghauri-1,but advanced capabilities.

*Pakistani Hatf-5B Ghauri-2 MRBM*





Though Ghauri-2 is a highly upgraded version of Ghauri-1,which itself was a license-produced Nodong,it would not be fair to give it North Korean origins,since the modifications/upgrades were solely made and tested by Pakistan.

So,Hatf-5B Ghauri-2 is this much Pakistani :

1. Locally developed much more powerful missile engine.
2. Locally developed higher quality propellents.
3. Locally developed Re-entry Vehicle (ReV).

Overall,a very advanced,local version of Nodong-1.

*Hatf-6 Shaheen-2 MRBM (Range 2500 km,Warhead Payload 1000 kg [Total 1250 kg])*

*Development History :*
Development started around 1999,and the system was first tested in 2004.

*Origins :*
Several western reports claim Shaheen-2 is a copy of M-18.Now,according to FAS,Missilethreat and Globalsecurity,the M-18 is a two stage missile and has a range of 1000 km with a max payload of 500 kg.
So strictly speaking,Shaheen-2 carries twice the payload to 2.5 times longer range.These facts negate the possibility of Shaheen-2 being even derived from M-18 (there is NO credible picture available of the M-18). 


*What Pakistan did :*
The re-entry vehicle carried by the Shaheen-2 missile has a mass of 1250 kg, which includes the mass of a nuclear warhead and a terminal guidance system.This re-entry vehicle is unlike that of the Shaheen-1 (which has four moving delta control fins at the rear) and has small liquid-propellant side thrust motors, which are used to orientate the re-entry vehicle before and during re-entry to improve accuracy by providing stabilization during the terminal phase. This can also be used to fly evasive maneuvers and change the trajectory several times during the terminal phase, making it immensely problematic for existing anti-ballistic missile (ABM) defense systems to successfully intercept the missile. The re-entry vehicle is also stated to utilize a satellite guidance system to provide updates on its position, further improving its accuracy and reducing the CEP.

*Pakistani Hatf-6 Shaheen-2 MRBM (2006)*





*Pakistani Hatf-6 Shaheen-2 MRBM (2008)*





So,Hatf-6 Shaheen-2 is this much Pakistani :

1. Totally indigenous design (airframe + propulsion system).
2. Indigenous ReV design,which is maneuverable,by incorporating an
3. Indigenously developed Terminal Correction System,which works by four side-mounted thrusters.
4. Indigenously developed Satellite guidance system,which also corrects the errors developing in INS during flight.

Overall,a 95% Pakistani missile.

*Hatf-9 Nasr SRBM (Range 60 km,Payload unknown)
*
I don't need to explain this system,since it can be very clearly assumed from its capabilities and pictures,that it is a 100% Pakistani product.


*
References :*

1. Dauphin
2. Sud Aviation Rockets
3. Sounding Rocket Data
4. Hatf-1 - Pakistan Missile Special Weapons Delivery Systems
5. MissileThreat :: Hatf 1
6. ASIAN DEFENCE: Pakistani ballistic missiles: Original of the Hatf Series
7. Pakistan Military Consortium :: www.PakDef.info
8. Abdali-I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
9. MissileThreat :: Hatf 3
10. DF-15 [CSS-6 / M-9] - China Nuclear Forces
11. MissileThreat :: Hatf 4
12. Dr. Samar Mubarakmand's Interview with Geo TV
13. International Assessment and Strategy Center > Research > Pakistan&#8217;s Long Range Ballistic Missiles: A View From IDEAS
14. No-Dong 1 - North Korea
15. MissileThreat :: No Dong 1
16. MissileThreat :: Hatf 5
17. The North-Korean Nodong missile family (R-18, Nodong, Ghauri, Shahab, Ghadr)
18. M-18 - China Nuclear Forces
19. MissileThreat :: M-18
20. Shaheen-II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
35


----------



## HANI

So in simple words u wana say that non of our missiles are fully indigenous and all are based on other missiles from different countries???

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Safriz

HANI said:


> So in simple words u wana say that non of our missiles are fully indigenous and all are based on other missiles from different countries???



The same can be said about any invention in the world..If you read about anything ever invented...you will find that two or more people independently made the same thing and all claim to be inventors of that thing...
About Pakistani missiles..Unless its Hypermoronic Hazoomazunga Daftonic technology...somebody somewhere wil have something similar and no matter how indigenous Pakistan created her missiles..since somebody else had it before Pakistan..Pakistani missiles will always be called copy...

Reactions: Like Like:
22


----------



## Hulk

HANI said:


> So in simple words u wana say that non of our missiles are fully indigenous and all are based on other missiles from different countries???



Not only that, he is also saying that changes done were minor as compared to development effort.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

HANI said:


> So in simple words u wana say that non of our missiles are fully indigenous and all are based on other missiles from different countries???



Yes,they are not "fully indigenous"...but we have made considerably advanced modifications and development,which prove that we could develop systems of our own,if we had more time and money...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## The Deterrent

safriz said:


> The same can be said about any invention in the world..If you read about anything ever invented...you will find that two or more people independently made the same thing and all claim to be inventors of that thing...
> About Pakistani missiles..Unless its Hypermoronic Hazoomazunga Daftonic technology...somebody somewhere wil have something similar and no matter how indigenous Pakistan created her missiles..since somebody else had it before Pakistan..Pakistani missiles will always be called copy...



Agreed...Even the Russian Scuds themselves originated from the R-11 missile,which was a direct reverse-engineered copy of German V-2 rocket.

The thing is,by going through this "copying" logic,all of the missiles of China,North Korea,Pakistan,Iran,Iraq originated from the basic Scuds,which in turn originated from V-2 rocket.The thing that counts is,how many modifications and upgrades did a coubtry make...

Scuds formed the basic design of all ballistic missiles of the above mentioned countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## longbrained

All missiles are based on German V-2's. There is no need to invent the wheel again. Once a nation builds something under sanctions just Pakistan did under 1990's sanctions, it is a home grown technology. Simple as that. Now we can talk about the level of sophistication of that technology be it missiles or cars but the truth stands that once a nation is building something it means that they have the technology. All these missiles are as Pakistani as any missile can get. But it is a good thing to learn about the history of development. If Pakistan had not started with sounding rockets and would say, oh, it is French, we would not have Shaheen-2. You have to start somewhere. US and Russia started by copying V-2. Pakistan started by copying French sounding rockets. China started by copying Scud-A. Iran by copying Scud-B. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Indonesia and Sudan did not copy anything, so they still have no technology yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## The Deterrent

Hafizzz said:


> AhaseebA is an Indian Troll hiding behind a Pakistani Flag !



Whoa whoa...slow down...

I know the thread title is misleading...it gives a sense that Pakistani missiles are just copies...but I have written this article to highlight the opposite thing,in a neutral way.I don't mean to defame anyone/anything...Read the whole article carefully,then I'm sure how much I have resolved the allegation of Pakistani missiles being mere copies...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## The Deterrent

longbrained said:


> All missiles are based on German V-2's. There is no need to invent the wheel again. Once a nation builds something under sanctions just Pakistan did under 1990's sanctions, it is a home grown technology. Simple as that. Now we can talk about the level of sophistication of that technology be it missiles or cars but the truth stands that once a nation is building something it means that they have the technology. All these missiles are as Pakistani as any missile can get. But it is a good thing to learn about the history of development. If Pakistan had not started with sounding rockets and would say, oh, it is French, we would not have Shaheen-2. You have to start somewhere. US and Russia started by copying V-2. Pakistan started by copying French sounding rockets. China started by copying Scud-A. Iran by copying Scud-B. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Indonesia and Sudan did not copy anything, so they still have no technology yet.



A mature post indeed...that is my whole point.There is no shame in accepting it.Afterall,it was necessary for the country's defence.If we hadn't done it,we wouldn't be at this stage of development.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Deterrent

indianrabbit said:


> Not only that, he is also saying that changes done were minor as compared to development effort.



Minor Changes?

Read it again...the minor changes were done only in the primitive design,such as Hatf-2 (cancelled),and Ghauri-1.

The other systems have been massively upgraded,and systems like Shaheen-1,Shaheen-2 and Ghauri-2 are almost new sysetms,as I have compared them with the missiles they are said to be copies of.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Only capable of threatening India with your BMs is not enough, remember the biggest threat for your nation is USA.

So Pakistan needs some 20-30 MIRVed ICBMs to defence itself from USA, since hundred of them are too expensive to be maintained for the current economy of Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## muse

> Pakistani Ballistic Missiles : How much Pakistani are they?


 
Girlfriend, Pleez! What difference does it make? Whoever gets on the wrong side of these will end up just as dead -- or will some then be asking, How dead?

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## fd24

AhaseebA said:


> Whoa whoa...slow down...
> 
> I know the thread title is misleading...it gives a sense that Pakistani missiles are just copies...but I have written this article to highlight the opposite thing,in a neutral way.I don't mean to defame anyone/anything...Read the whole article carefully,then I'm sure how much I have resolved the allegation of Pakistani missiles being mere copies...



I think as long as they defend Pakistan or act as a deterant i couldnt care less about anything else. 
BTW AhaseebA sahib i find it strange a guy from Pindi lives literally on IDF? Strange coz i think the activity is painfully slow on their. Whats the fascination with India? Do they have ballistic missiles that they have are better?


----------



## Imran Khan

you missed few missiles sir please upgrade the list 







raad





babur


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Guys...Every country needs to import some of technology.Just forget past how we got it.Just think about future what else we have to enhance further to counter future threats....
Waiting for some good news for more superior ballistic and cruise missile to be tested by Pakistan.


----------



## Ibr0kEmYrAz0r

Some interesting readings, and nice pictures. As I understand it, Pakistan has come a long way from making early generations of rockets to indigenously made sophisticated MRBM's. Tremendous achievement, especially considering by a country with far less resources.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Safriz

AhaseebA said:


> Agreed...Even the Russian Scuds themselves originated from the R-11 missile,which was a direct reverse-engineered copy of German V-2 rocket.
> 
> The thing is,by going through this "copying" logic,all of the missiles of China,North Korea,Pakistan,Iran,Iraq originated from the basic Scuds,which in turn originated from V-2 rocket.The thing that counts is,*how many modifications and upgrades did a coubtry make*...
> 
> Scuds formed the basic design of all ballistic missiles of the above mentioned countries.



There is a saying i am sure you may have heard or read? 

"if it works don't fix it"

If a certain design of missile comlies with Pakistan's requirements,why should Pakistan make any changes to that?
And then there is the technical bit.....YOu cannot make a Ballistic missile square,it has to be tubular..You cannot make many changes to the fins of a missile,they look pretty much the same anywhere in the world.So there are technical limitations to how much innovation and modification can be made to an existing missile design.
In all the claims on media about Pakistan being a copycat in missile tech..never have i read a detailed analysis of why they say so? Is the rocket engine a replica of DingDong missile of Northy Korea? Or is the Inertial Navigation system designed by Iran? All claims of copying missiles are only based on Physical appearance of Pakistani missiles which cannot be different from existing Ballistic missiles...as i said..it cant be a square shape,it has to be a metal tube.
Pakistan's simple design depicts Pakistan's non aggressive and purely defensive strategy,as the missile design stick to the bare essentials,and that confirms Pakistan's commitment o maintaining minimum deterrent,not a world domination force.


----------



## The Deterrent

muse said:


> Girlfriend, Pleez! What difference does it make? Whoever gets on the wrong side of these will end up just as dead -- or will some then be asking, How dead?



Thats the point exactly.....all that matters is that do they work or not.They do,100%.

The title is named so as to invite as many as I can,the people who think that Pakistani missiles won't work or they are just copies...it is a fact representer for them.


----------



## The Deterrent

superkaif said:


> I think as long as they defend Pakistan or act as a deterant i couldnt care less about anything else.
> BTW AhaseebA sahib i find it strange a guy from Pindi lives literally on IDF? Strange coz i think the activity is painfully slow on their. Whats the fascination with India? Do they have ballistic missiles that they have are better?



Actually I'm active in PDF but only in this section...I cannot manage to post in other sections too...

IDF is small (now even smaller),and I post there more to interact as much as I can with Indians.Also,I try to represent Pakistan there along with Jungibaaz.

I don't post there more because their missiles are better,though the fact is that their "under-development" missiles are better...


----------



## The Deterrent

Imran Khan said:


> you missed few missiles sir please upgrade the list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> raad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> babur



I know Sir,

The article is about the present (operational/tested) missiles...

If you are being sarcastic,that I forgot to mention Ra'ad (because its pure local product)...I didn't mention Ra'ad because this article is about Ballistic missiles only.However,I will Post about the cruise missiles too in a while,in this thread...


----------



## The Deterrent

safriz said:


> There is a saying i am sure you may have heard or read?
> 
> "if it works don't fix it"
> 
> If a certain design of missile comlies with Pakistan's requirements,why should Pakistan make any changes to that?
> And then there is the technical bit.....YOu cannot make a Ballistic missile square,it has to be tubular..You cannot make many changes to the fins of a missile,they look pretty much the same anywhere in the world.So there are technical limitations to how much innovation and modification can be made to an existing missile design.
> In all the claims on media about Pakistan being a copycat in missile tech..never have i read a detailed analysis of why they say so? Is the rocket engine a replica of DingDong missile of Northy Korea? Or is the Inertial Navigation system designed by Iran? All claims of copying missiles are only based on Physical appearance of Pakistani missiles which cannot be different from existing Ballistic missiles...as i said..it cant be a square shape,it has to be a metal tube.
> Pakistan's simple design depicts Pakistan's non aggressive and purely defensive strategy,as the missile design stick to the bare essentials,and that confirms Pakistan's commitment o maintaining minimum deterrent,not a world domination force.



Well,as I said,the problem with M-11 was poor accuracy and primitive design.So instead of mass producing exactly the M-11,instead Pakistan installed its own INS in it alongwith Post Separation Attitude Correction System (so ~50 m CEP achieved),introduced a more powerful engine,and with the help pf aero-spike,Ghaznavi was made able to follow a depressed trajectory.
The result...a highly advanced version of M-11,which creats a little bit problem for the ABMs too.

Ghuari-1 had a limited range and poor accuracy.So NDC designed the indigenous ReV for it,and KRL made a very powerful engine for making Ghauri-2.The result....Ghauri-2,more capable than its North Korean and Iranian counter parts.


Well,the rocket engine for both Ghauri-1 and Ghaznavi were replicas...yes the missiles resemble very much,thats why they are alleged to be totally copied...


----------



## The Deterrent

*Pakistani fellow members,please...

Stop reading only the headings and the picture comparisons...I am arguing about the myths about Pakistani missiles being mere copies...

I have clearly described how Shaheen-1 has almost nothing to with the M-9,and Shaheen-2 is totally different from M-18...so both have almost indigenous designs...and they were made by the experienced earned while studying M-11 and making Ghaznavis...

In the end,all that matters is that your weapon works or not,because in the war nobody is going to ask about the origins of the weapon...people will see how much damage they can do.And by the Grace of Allah,our missiles are designed to execute the job there and then without any failure.*


----------



## SQ8

Let me give a you a little addition to that ..
The origin theory is fairly accurate, However.. the CEP of Shaheen-1 is much much better than stated..take my word for it.
And the CEP was much much better in 1999.. 
The The Ghaznavi was the M-11..and initially in test firings the Ghaznavi with its locally modified engine wasnt ready.. so a M-11 body was mated to a rudimentary guidance system and launched. Current missiles are much more Pakistani than Chinese.

Still, a lot of changes were made to the NDC series of missiles.. The guidance system was a design based on a certain non-Chinese country.. and taking that design forward.. the current crop of missiles from NDC are a different beast from their varied origins.

Its another story when it comes to the Ghauri series.
The first Ghauri was a repainted Nodong... they did not even bother to change the serials on the bird written in Korean.
The second is also a Nodong.. which also answers AQ's many trips to NK.. 
Which were not exchange trips.. but cash purchases... and he wasnt the only one involved, a whole list of top brass and GOP honchos at the time were in it. They all decided to make him the scapegoat to save their skins...in the name of "protecting the nation".

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## The Deterrent

Santro said:


> Let me give a you a little addition to that ..
> The origin theory is fairly accurate, However.. the CEP of Shaheen-1 is much much better than stated..take my word for it.
> And the CEP was much much better in 1999..
> The The Abdali was the M-11..and initially in test firings the Ghaznavi with its locally modified engine wasnt ready.. so a M-11 body was mated to a rudimentary guidance system and launched. Current missiles are much more Pakistani than Chinese.
> 
> Still, a lot of changes were made to the NDC series of missiles.. The guidance system was a design based on a certain non-Chinese country.. and taking that design forward.. the current crop of missiles from NDC are a different beast from their varied origins.
> 
> Its another story when it comes to the Ghauri series.
> The first Ghauri was a repainted Nodong... they did not even bother to change the serials on the bird written in Korean.
> The second is also a Nodong.. which also answers AQ's many trips to NK..
> Which were not exchange trips.. but cash purchases... and he wasnt the only one involved, a whole list of top brass and GOP honchos at the time were in it. They all decided to make him the scapegoat to save their skins...in the name of "protecting the nation".



Thank you for the information...I understand that ypur sources are based in NDC.

The CEP of Shaheen-1 was 90 m in a test flight,as said by Dr Samar.However,he has been retired for a while now,and we can expect the CEP to be less than 50 m in latest version.

But Abdali is shorter than M-11.I understand that its motor was directly derived from the M-11,but its dimensions are a bit different.Also,it uses a rail for launching,while M-11/Ghaznavi don't.Just a confusion,please elaborate.

The non-chinese country...My guess is a former Soviet state.

Agreed with the thing about Ghauri-1,it was a local Nodong.But Ghauri-2 has no proven counterpart in North Korea.Still,I take your word for it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

AhaseebA said:


> Thank you for the information...I understand that ypur sources are based in NDC.
> 
> The CEP of Shaheen-1 was 90 m in a test flight,as said by Dr Samar.However,he has been retired for a while now,and we can expect the CEP to be less than 50 m in latest version.
> 
> But Abdali is shorter than M-11.I understand that its motor was directly derived from the M-11,but its dimensions are a bit different.Also,it uses a rail for launching,while M-11/Ghaznavi don't.Just a confusion,please elaborate.
> 
> The non-chinese country...My guess is a former Soviet state.
> 
> Agreed with the thing about Ghauri-1,it was a local Nodong.But Ghauri-2 has no proven counterpart in North Korea.Still,I take your word for it.



My bad... I was going to write something about the abdali but changed my mind at the last moment..
In any case.. Its better admitting we were able to equalize the missile gap quicker and at 1/20th of the cost... by using existing hardware as a foundation and building on that.

The ghauri-II is nothing but an enlarged Ghauri with a second stage.
And a co-developed guidance system.

The non-Chinese country.. is not a former soviet state..

The initial CEP of shaheen-I.. Lets just say Dr Samar was being modest.. and the people at the target sight saw the target flag flying off into the distance.
However.. subsequent tests achieved the average of <90m.

Those were the initial days, when these nuclear scientists had just stepped into the field of rocket design.
Today is a different game.. and there is a lot more NDC can achieve in terms of delivery systems.. if certain quarters and pockets allow it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Deterrent

Santro said:


> The ghauri-II is nothing but an enlarged Ghauri with a second stage.
> And a co-developed guidance system.



No,Ghauri-2 uses a single rocket motor...It is only 2 m longer than Ghauri-1.There is no proof available that Ghauri-2 has two stages.The ReV cannot be regarded as a second stage.


----------



## Bratva

Santro said:


> My bad... I was going to write something about the abdali but changed my mind at the last moment..
> In any case.. Its better admitting we were able to equalize the missile gap quicker and at 1/20th of the cost... by using existing hardware as a foundation and building on that.
> 
> The ghauri-II is nothing but an enlarged Ghauri with a second stage.
> And a co-developed guidance system.
> 
> The non-Chinese country.. is not a former soviet state..
> 
> The initial CEP of shaheen-I.. Lets just say Dr Samar was being modest.. and the people at the target sight saw the target flag flying off into the distance.
> However.. subsequent tests achieved the average of <90m.
> 
> Those were the initial days, when these nuclear scientists had just stepped into the field of rocket design.
> Today is a different game.. and there is a lot more NDC can achieve in terms of delivery systems.. if certain quarters and pockets allow it.



A little question arises in my mind. During the testing of missiles. Let's just say it is designed for maximum 600 KM, how do they know that particular missile will travel that far? Based on how much fuel is poured in the missile?

And before the firing of BM, Did they put co-ordinates in it to hit the particular place? And Is there any mid course update module in our Ballistic missiles? If there is any, then how this module works? Is it that this module attached with sat link.?

Third thing. The Missile accurately hit the Flag. Does it means that the co-ordinates put in to Missile was accurately and precisely followed?

And if Missile hit the the target 200 Meters back or forward, then what does it mean, the atmospheric conditions made guidance system blurry that's why it didn't hit the target accurately?

One more thing, upgrading the engine of Missile means that it's speed and thrust increases both. so my question is, Does upgraded thrust means, The missile can carry more payload?


----------



## Patriot

It does not matter how much Pakistani they are as long as they deliver the payload successfully.


----------



## The Deterrent

Although you didn't ask me,but here is my answer...



mafiya said:


> A little question arises in my mind. During the testing of missiles. Let's just say it is designed for maximum 600 KM, how do they know that particular missile will travel that far? Based on how much fuel is poured in the missile?



Calculations,mostly computer based.Inputs used are the force of the missiles motor (which is measured in ground testing i.e. the missile motor is strapped down to the ground against a huge concrete wall,and it is fired),flight time,altitudes etc.Basically very complex calculations.



> And before the firing of fire, Did they put co-ordinates in it to hit the particular place? And Is there any mid course update module in our Ballistic missiles? If there is any, then how this module works? Is it that this module attached with sat link.?



Yes,the satellite guidance that Pakistan uses is one of the two:

1. Commercially available GPS (which is accurate at 30-50 m)
2. Or the Chinese limited satellite guidance. (not sure exactly how do they use it).

The satellite guidance corrects the errors which develop in the Inertial Navigation System,hence achieving good CEP.

Now,for your question...

Yes the co-ordinates are fed into the missile prior to launch.By Mid-course update,if you mean to further correct any errors,I have already explained how.For systems like Ghauris,Shaheens,The trajectory is corrected after ReV separation,which can give a CEP of 100+ m.This is further enhanced by the Terminal Correction System.

By Mid-course updates,if you mean assigning a new target,located in the proximity of the previous one,then this is not possible for current Pakistani Ballistic Missiles.



> Third thing. The Missile accurately hit the Flag. Does it means that the co-ordinates put in to Missile was accurately and precisely followed?



The missile is never that accurate to hit the flag.It usually falls 15-200 m away,depending on the range and speed of the ballistic missile.Still,that means the missile was very accurate,because the slightest of divergence can cause it to fall thousands of meters away.



> And if Missile hit the the target 200 Meters back or forward, then what does it mean, the atmospheric conditions made guidance system blurry that's why it didn't hit the target accurately?



The atmospheric (external) conditions are mostly responsible for the deviation of the missile from its path (However,they don't matter much if the speed of the missile is very high,i.e. it is of ICBM class).Not only that,an extra uncorrected jerk made during separation,thrust fluctuation in the missile motor,slightest of flaw in the aerodynamic design can cause it to fall hundreds of meters away.


> One more thing, upgrading the engine of Missile means that it's speed and thrust increases both. so my question is, Does upgraded thrust means, The missile can carry more payload?



By upgrading a missile motor,you can do one of the two things.....either give it more range with same payload...or increase the payload with same range.
Or,if the upgrade is massive,then you can increase both range and payload.It depends on the final thrust of the upgraded rocket motor.

---------- Post added at 02:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:16 PM ----------




Patriot said:


> It does not matter how much Pakistani they are as long as they deliver the payload successfully.



Agreed,it does not matters...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Windjammer

Guys, you often see footage of Pakistani Missile launches but never the end result, like the projectile striking the designated target.
I however had the privilege to witness such material during a visit to the ISPR's media section.
The footage was of a Shaheen-1 test, the designated target area was marked by two yellow flags, the missile after allegedly travelling some 600 Kms, hit the ground between the flags. A lot of earth kicked up but apparently there were no explosives carried in the test.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Deterrent

Windjammer said:


> Guys, you often see footage of Pakistani Missile launches but never the end result, like the projectile striking the designated target.
> I however had the privilege to witness such material during a visit to the ISPR's media section.
> The footage was of a Shaheen-1 test, the designated target area was marked by two yellow flags, the missile after allegedly travelling some 600 Kms, hit the ground between the flags. A lot of earth kicked up but apparently there were no explosives carried in the test.



BTW no explosives are carried unless it is a cold test.And a cold test is normally an air-burst.


----------



## SQ8

AhaseebA said:


> No,Ghauri-2 uses a single rocket motor...It is only 2 m longer than Ghauri-1.There is no proof available that Ghauri-2 has two stages.The ReV cannot be regarded as a second stage.


 
Its not the ReV I refer to..
They added a second booster tank to the one already in place.. The whole idea was to have the thing separate later on.. but that never materialized. Even toyed with the idea of a TV nozzle. 
They kept the second "stage" tanks and just piped it to the first booster..nice modular approach.. but that's it.
This info infact.. has been rolling around these forums way before I came on def.pk.
Also, many elements of both Ghauri and Shaheen series may not have similar components.. older batches may have a steel tank.. the newer ones aluminium.. 
The newer Shaheen's have very.. VERY accurate guidance systems compared to say something tat rolled off the line in 2002.

In any case, KRL has taken the backseat now... 
Expect no more Ghauri's to come out.

---------- Post added at 04:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:37 AM ----------




AhaseebA said:


> BTW no explosives are carried unless it is a cold test.And a cold test is normally an air-burst.



Not in this case.. 
Ive seen that very same video.. and the associated comment of "sir jee jhanda urr gaya hai".

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Deterrent

Santro said:


> Its not the ReV I refer to..
> They added a second booster tank to the one already in place.. The whole idea was to have the thing separate later on.. but that never materialized. Even toyed with the idea of a TV nozzle.
> They kept the second "stage" tanks and just piped it to the first booster..nice modular approach.. but that's it.
> This info infact.. has been rolling around these forums way before I came on def.pk.
> Also, many elements of both Ghauri and Shaheen series may not have similar components.. older batches may have a steel tank.. the newer ones aluminium..
> The newer Shaheen's have very.. VERY accurate guidance systems compared to say something tat rolled off the line in 2002.
> 
> In any case, KRL has taken the backseat now...
> Expect no more Ghauri's to come out.
> 
> ---------- Post added at 04:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:37 AM ----------
> 
> 
> 
> Not in this case..
> Ive seen that very same video.. and the associated comment of "sir jee jhanda urr gaya hai".



So you are saying that only another tank of propellent was added,not a separable second stage,right?

and of course there is no use of investing anymore in Ghauris...


----------



## The Deterrent

Santro said:


> Not in this case..
> Ive seen that very same video.. and the associated comment of "sir jee jhanda urr gaya hai".



Then maybe high explosives were used...fuzed by a proximity fuze.


----------



## SQ8

AhaseebA said:


> So you are saying that only another tank of propellent was added,*not a separable second stage*,right?
> 
> and of course there is no use of investing anymore in Ghauris...



They wanted to.. that second tank.. or the Lox with catalyst was a separate system.. to be part of a second stage.
This was 2000, the Shaheen was in its infancy.. and KRL wanted to take the lead comprehensibly.
However, they could not get the whole separation system and electronics right.. and so simply took whatever progress they had made.. and "bolted" it on the existing Ghauri.
If you get to see a high resolution photo of a ghauri 2, you can see the place where they extended the old ghauri.
This should have added more weight , however due to the new tanks and systems made of aluminium alloys rather than high grade steel, it was lighter.. and allowed them to keep the existing warhead. Albeit with lesser range than initially planned.


----------



## Windjammer

Sorry ! misunderstood the quote. !!


----------



## SQ8

AhaseebA said:


> Then maybe high explosives were used...fuzed by a proximity fuze.



No need, high velocity object.. desert ground.. the impact generated enough force to throw these flags off..
they were nothing more than bamboo sticks with cloth on them.. you dont need explosives to throw them off.


----------



## The Deterrent

Santro said:


> No need, high velocity object.. desert ground.. the impact generated enough force to throw these flags off..
> they were nothing more than bamboo sticks with cloth on them.. you dont need explosives to throw them off.



That is what I was saying before...no need of explosives in usual tests...


----------



## Maler

It is a well established fact that Pakistani Missiles are just copies nothing more nothing less. 

Question is not about that Pakistani missiles are copies or manufactured by technology transfer of similar Chinese or South Korean missiles. Actually, the question is, "is it legal to copy or transfer of missile technology keeping in mind the frame work of International laws about missile technology"? and if coping/transfer of missile technology is so simple, readily available and legal, as tried to generalized by most PDF members, then every Tom, Dick, Harry country have had missile technologies today.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Safriz

Maler said:


> It is a well established fact that Pakistani Missiles are just copies nothing more nothing less.
> 
> Question is not about that Pakistani missiles are copies or manufactured by technology transfer of similar Chinese or South Korean missiles. Actually, the question is, "is it legal to copy or transfer of missile technology keeping in mind the frame work of International laws about missile technology"? and if coping/transfer of missile technology is so simple, readily available and legal, as tried to generalized by most PDF members, then every Tom, Dick, Harry country have had missile technologies today.


 
since no country has come up with a law suit against pakistan...i guess the missiles are legal.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## somebozo

Local or reverse engineered, the fact that we are not trolling the world and chest humping about our indigenous capabilities and at time of need what is all needed is for these missiles to work as expected and they will pack enough punch for the enemy.


----------



## Developereo

Patriot said:


> It does not matter how much Pakistani they are as long as they deliver the payload successfully.



The question of indigenous design can be framed thus: in time of need, can Pakistan roll them off the assembly line, or do we need to wait for the import shipments to arrive?


----------



## DrSomnath999

> AhaseebA is an Indian Troll hiding behind a Pakistani Flag !


*Original Post *By *Hafizzz*

u should be ashamed of saying this .Asheeba is a true patriot & true pakistani ,just come to indian defe*** forum u would see it .
Is that necessary to prove everyone that ur a pakistani simply by abusing india & indians ? just tell me .I had many bitter fight with this guy over many issue just check india* def*** forum .
Well that's not all even if i am indian i posted top 10 future weapons of pakistan & how would pakistan counter india's abm .Then some indian member started bashing me that i am pakistani under indian flag .Shame on them who think that way .IF a person thinks in a neutral way will it make him a traitor

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## The Deterrent

Maler said:


> It is a well established fact that Pakistani Missiles are just copies nothing more nothing less.
> 
> Question is not about that Pakistani missiles are copies or manufactured by technology transfer of similar Chinese or South Korean missiles. Actually, the question is, "is it legal to copy or transfer of missile technology keeping in mind the frame work of International laws about missile technology"? and if coping/transfer of missile technology is so simple, readily available and legal, as tried to generalized by most PDF members, then every Tom, Dick, Harry country have had missile technologies today.



Dude,If you even read the whole thing,I'm sure you shitted all the info...

MTCR restricts transfer of weapon products having range of more than 300 km and payload if more than 500 kg.MTCR is applicable to those countries which are signatory to it,or have promised to abide by its rules.Both China and Pakistan were "free" to do transfers in the 1990s...

The Tom,Dick and Harry need local infrastructure and know-how of developing missiles technology.Thats why Pakistan,Iran and other states have them.

So get rid of ignorance and try to accept the truth that Pakistan is going to kick the enemy's ar$e anyway...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SBD-3

Maler said:


> It is a well established fact that Pakistani Missiles are just copies nothing more nothing less.
> 
> Question is not about that Pakistani missiles are copies or manufactured by technology transfer of similar Chinese or South Korean missiles. Actually, the question is, *"is it legal to copy or transfer of missile technology keeping in mind the frame work of International laws about missile technology"? and if coping/transfer of missile technology is so simple, readily available and legal, as tried to generalized by most PDF members, then every Tom, Dick, Harry country have had missile technologies today.*


the questions was good initially then it turned confusing and ultimately illogical i must say.....The problem is that I bet most of us dont even have the first hand knowledge about Pakistani Missiles.....So whatever published material I read on the issue, I unintentionally incorporate the inherent bias of authors. Thats why I always look for authentic and established writers on a particular issue. While I do agree that the start from Ghauri was rather "imported" one but subsequent developments have been commendable. Transformation from Liquid Fuel Ghauri to Solid fuel, Multistage, MIRV capable advanced designs like Shaheen II have been a remarkable achievement. It takes a while to grow a breed of scientists/Engneers and I think with recent developments from NESCOM, I can grossly say that we have come at fair distance from where we were in late 90s. As the time passes, skill sets mature, operation requirements intensify, we can expect more advanced, indigenous designs rolling out of NESCOM for PA.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

Developereo said:


> The question of indigenous design can be framed thus: in time of need, can Pakistan roll them off the assembly line, or do we need to wait for the import shipments to arrive?



WTF???

I already explained that we are producing every bit of our missiles inside Pakistan.The technology transfer,once done,has no further role to play...Of course the missiles are available anytime we want them to deploy.This is what "Operational System" means...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

DrSomnath999 said:


> this type of thinking should be changed ,every person has the right to express his views



Agreed...now back to the topic.

In fact I was much surprised how FAS,missilethreat and globalsecurity stated Shaheen-2 to be "similar" to Chinese M-18...I was like  when I read their own specs about M-18.

The M-18 has been displayed only once,and there are no pictures of that system available.How could Shaheen-2 be a "copy" of M-18,when Shaheen-2 carries twice the payload to 2.5 times longer distance than M-18?....stupid Americans....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Firemaster

AhaseebA said:


> Agreed...now back to the topic.
> 
> In fact I was much surprised how FAS,missilethreat and globalsecurity stated Shaheen-2 to be "similar" to Chinese M-18...I was like  when I read their own specs about M-18.
> 
> The M-18 has been displayed only once,and there are no pictures of that system available.How could Shaheen-2 be a "copy" of M-18,when Shaheen-2 carries twice the payload to 2.5 times longer distance than M-18?....stupid Americans....



May be based on M-18 with Indigenous and heavy modifications .


----------



## Bratva

Firemaster said:


> May be based on M-18 with Indigenous and heavy modifications .



Any proof they are based on M-18? if not then don't talk from your behind

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

mafiya said:


> Any proof they are based on M-18? if not then don't talk from your behind


actually its a valid question that can this much heavy modification possible for this feat to happen ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

A.Muqeet khan said:


> actually its a valid question that can this much heavy modification possible for this feat to happen ?



What are you trying to say?...didn't get you?


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

oh just a tuant that is it possible to actuallt modify the m18 this much to create a new breed of missle i was actually refering to an indian fellow


----------



## The Deterrent

A.Muqeet khan said:


> oh just a tuant that is it possible to actuallt modify the m18 this much to create a new breed of missle i was actually refering to an indian fellow


Yup exactly...just because M-18 was two stage,doesn't mean that Shaheen-2 was a copy of it...it can't be,this is simply illogical...


----------



## Firemaster

A.Muqeet khan said:


> oh just a tuant that is it possible to actuallt modify the m18 this much to create a new breed of missle i was actually refering to an indian fellow



Can you not use its systems in your missiles?
I was just referring to FAS,missilethreat and globalsecurity

---------- Post added at 09:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:21 PM ----------




mafiya said:


> Any proof they are based on M-18? if not then don't talk from your behind


 Why listening from your nose
I was just referring to FAS,missilethreat and globalsecurity Articles


----------



## The Deterrent

Firemaster said:


> Can you not use its systems in your missiles?
> I was just referring to FAS,missilethreat and globalsecurity



Yes,some systems can be used...but which ones exactly?

I already busted the "story" of these "reporters" with their own articles...


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Any idea when *shaheen 3 OR Ghauri 3* would tested..?
May be as an answer to *Agni v.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

Cool_Soldier said:


> Any idea when *shaheen 3 OR Ghauri 3* would tested..?
> May be as an answer to *Agni v.*



Ghauri 3 was cancelled/dropped,a long while ago...

The missile having characteristics of Shaheen-3 may be tested within 1-2 years,but there is a lot of international pressure on Pakistan...We already have postponed two cruise missile tests because of the OBL episode...

And their is no need for an answer to Agni-V....Agni-V is for China,not for Pakistan....further more we don't need that much longer range,just MIRVs...


----------



## farhan_9909

AhaseebA said:


> Ghauri 3 was cancelled/dropped,a long while ago...
> 
> The missile having characteristics of Shaheen-3 may be tested within 1-2 years,but there is a lot of international pressure on Pakistan... *Wealready have postponed two cruise missile tests because of the OBL episode...
> *
> And their is no need for an answer to Agni-V....Agni-V is for China,not for Pakistan....further more we don't need that much longer range,just MIRVs...


 
sir ji plz care to explain this

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pakfoj

to all those who are talking about "copying" missiles, here is the reality:

During the end of World War II, the Nazi scientists has invented the first Ballistic missile as we know it. But it was too late for the missile to prove itself because Germany lost. the factories where these missiles were made were captured by the allied forces. Some missiles were taken by Americans and some by Russians. and anything created after that was based on the originals which a lot of u are calling "copy". So Every country has "copied" the same principles from one or another missiles. including France, India, Pakistan, etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## karan21

pakfoj said:


> to all those who are talking about "copying" missiles, here is the reality:
> 
> During the end of World War II, the Nazi scientists has invented the first Ballistic missile as we know it. But it was too late for the missile to prove itself because Germany lost. the factories where these missiles were made were captured by the allied forces. Some missiles were taken by Americans and some by Russians. and anything created after that was based on the originals which a lot of u are calling "copy". So Every country has "copied" the same principles from one or another missiles. including France, India, Pakistan, etc.


sorry but u cntg compare the two, yes americans and russsians learnt from german missile but that was the first missile in history. 

but pakistan developed its missiles in late 20 century and now there was a lot of info available and ther was no need to import from china. pakistan could have done it own its own. didnt iran do it?? didnt india do it?? pakistan imported missiles from china and partnered with nk, loll pakistan couldnt find a better partner.


----------



## pakfoj

karan21 said:


> sorry but u cntg compare the two, yes americans and russsians learnt from german missile but that was the first missile in history.
> 
> but pakistan developed its missiles in late 20 century and *now there was a lot of info available* and ther was no need to import from china. pakistan could have done it own its own. *didnt iran do it?? didnt india do it?? pakistan imported missiles from china and partnered with nk, loll pakistan couldnt find a better partner*.


well first of all when u say that india made it on its own u are mistaken big times what evidence is there that india did not get help from Russia because it did. If I started giving u evidence, it would take me some usefull time which i wont waste trying to explain something sophisticated to a child.. u fail to realize that the basics philosophy stays the same. obviously the missile from outside will look similar to any missile out there in the world. yes there is a lot on info available now so what. Do u expect the military officials to come out and tell u exactly what they have??? you expect them to give you every single detail of the weapons. I suppose u r not a rocket scientist so u have no idea of what kind of technology is used in such missiles and u have no idea whether these missiles are "imported" from china. or America for that matter. Secondly when u say that Pakistan couldn't find a better partner, China is the best partner for Pakistan than any other. to understand Geopolitics you need to be mature and educated, but u r talking like a child. so don't worry about this "sort of stuff", go to bed and dont forget to brush ur teeth. sweet dreams! (and please dont reply, i would feel dumb trying to argue with u)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OrionHunter

HANI said:


> So in simple words *u wana say that non of our missiles are fully indigenous and all are based on other missiles from different countries???*


*So what's the big deal?* It's wiser not waste time, effort and money to re-invent the wheel. *Even super power America's F-35 isn't indigenous! And America's Space Shuttle isn't too! 
*
The end product is what counts. 

Cheers!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## The Deterrent

farhan_9909 said:


> sir ji plz care to explain this



Of course, after the OBL raid event (May 2, 2011), Pakistan had to delay the tests due to international pressure. Nasr, which was tested 3 days ago, was also dragged into the propaganda of Taliban taking over Pakistan's nukes, specially tactical ones. IMO, thats why Pakistan ended up testing 6 missiles within 90 days this year, after the things settled down a bit.



OrionHunter said:


> *So what's the big deal?* It's wiser not waste time, effort and money to re-invent the wheel. *Even super power America's F-35 isn't indigenous! And America's Space Shuttle isn't too!
> *
> The end product is what counts.
> 
> Cheers!



Exactly. All I wanted to do was to revisit the CORRECT facts, and try to put an end to all the speculations.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## killerx

So every one is copying and improving it thats a good thing cost effective brothers and the Americans British Russian copied German Tec not just rockets to hats off the Germans. We are thank full to the china help in missile Tec sharing  and indians should thank the Russians to 



OrionHunter said:


> *So what's the big deal?* It's wiser not waste time, effort and money to re-invent the wheel. *Even super power America's F-35 isn't indigenous! And America's Space Shuttle isn't too!
> *
> The end product is what counts.
> 
> Cheers![/QUOTE
> i dont see F35 in the title bro

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xyxmt

Its such a childish thinking to prove something indigenous. If you can make it and it hurts it doesnt matter where you learn to make it. lets assume we copy 100% of some Korean missile and war breaks out and we drop it on india. do you think people hurt in the explosion will say "thank God it wasnt an indigenous missile"


----------



## The Deterrent

xyxmt said:


> Its such a childish thinking to prove something indigenous. If you can make it and it hurts it doesnt matter where you learn to make it. lets assume we copy 100% of some Korean missile and war breaks out and we drop it on india. do you think people hurt in the explosion will say "thank God it wasnt an indigenous missile"



You are right to say that it doesn't matters in a war, that whose product is indigenous. The only thing that matters is their performance.
But, analyzing the indigenous efforts helps us to determine the local capabilities and evaluate the possible future developments.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Alfa-Fighter

Well , few years back India captured one North Korea Ship having High end lathe machine for missile and some missile parts, on instance of Peace Talk between USA and NK , India released the ship. but the ship component highly exposed the nature to which indigenous content pak missile have.


----------



## REHAN NIAZI FALCON

end product matters , how much it serve our needs because we need useful product ............ there is nothing wrong with improving something and make it useful for u...


----------



## Cool_Soldier

any new missile test coming up for pak ?


----------



## turbo charged

pls tell how much thrust is created by raad cruise missile's engine....and can raad also gain height or it keeps gliding downwards once it is released from the airplane....also those small wings on raad....are they enough to generate lift?.........

also the rocket motor used in raad...is it disposable....like filled in factory or it is filled while it is attached to the plane.....

also in future can this rocket motor be used on jet ski's and water scooters?


----------



## Peaceful Civilian

turbo charged said:


> pls tell how much thrust is created by raad cruise missile's engine....and can raad also gain height or it keeps gliding downwards once it is released from the airplane....also those small wings on raad....are they enough to generate lift?.........
> 
> also the rocket motor used in raad...is it disposable....like filled in factory or it is filled while it is attached to the plane.....
> 
> also in future can this rocket motor be used on jet ski's and water scooters?


This thread is about Ballistic missile, Not a cruise missile thread.


----------



## regular

The RAAD is solid fuel missile get filled within the factory. its not liquid fuel......


----------



## Safriz

Rehbar-I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article claims that Pakistan first entered Rocketery through production on sounding rockets in 1961.
The well known Polish-Pakistani Airforce officer was one of the pioneers of Pakistan's rocket program,later turned missile program.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IND151

Very good thread AhaseebA

thanks for detailed information

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Safriz

SUPARCO had conducted more than 200 solid fuel rocket launches and tests in 1960s and 70s.
Most solid fuel rockets of Pakistan are derivatives of these early experiments.
SUPARCO can build a rocket large enough for being an ICBM...but that will create many diplomatic issues..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GURU DUTT

he he he he what a thread good job @ Ahaseeba


----------



## The Deterrent

Safriz said:


> SUPARCO had conducted more than 200 solid fuel rocket launches and tests in 1960s and 70s.
> Most solid fuel rockets of Pakistan are derivatives of these early experiments.
> SUPARCO can build a rocket large enough for being an ICBM...but that will create many diplomatic issues..



Only Hatf-I made it out as a successful derivative, the rest were one way or the other based on DF-11 technology (except Ghauri, Shaheen-IA, Shaheen-II).
SUPARCO can, but they lack the expertise of developing large rocket motors like that of NDC and KRL.


----------



## Nishan_101

Heard that Ghouri Series Missiles have been put in Bunkers because it has some faults.... Also Ghouri-3 has been stopped for the same purpose...


----------



## janantv

Salam PAK Fauj <3


----------



## nafsiati

Thanks for summarizing the information! great work AhaseebA


----------



## AUz

Nishan_101 said:


> Heard that Ghouri Series Missiles have been put in Bunkers because it has some faults.... Also Ghouri-3 has been stopped for the same purpose...



Pakistan is retiring Ghauri Missile series and further consolidating solid-fueled Shaheen series.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nishan_101

AUz said:


> Pakistan is retiring Ghauri Missile series and further consolidating solid-fueled Shaheen series.




Bad news for Pakistan....


----------



## AUz

Nishan_101 said:


> Bad news for Pakistan....



No. It actually shows us how advance and powerful our ballistic missile program has become, Mashallah.

Ghauris were liquid-fueled weapon-systems. We don't need them anymore since we have much more advance and sophisticated options.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussain0216

Nishan_101 said:


> Bad news for Pakistan....


 
The shaheen series is a superior platform & is solid fuel..

It is also more effective, if you look at the developments on The Shaheen 1-A the missile is more effective and able to hit its target.

I suspect the uprade/improvements will be implemented on the othere missiles in the series.


The reality is at the end of the 1990's and early 2000's Pak and India were largely equal, since then however we have had no $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

So we have had to pick and choose our fights & developments, money is allocated to vital requirments, so once we reach a milestone on one platform we take a breather keed the development going on a slower basis and keey an eye on our enmies and world development of technologies so we dont get behind

At the same time money is then allocated to the next vital military requirment



If we had the money we already would have had 6 new subs, a long range missile etc


But because money is short its more important that we make the weapon systems we have effective, so its more important to make sure our missile hit india rather then make some 5000km missile when we dont have an immediate threat at that range


Having said all that, the plans are in place to buy a whole range of platforms from Subs, to jets, it will just take time


----------



## gslv mk3

hussain0216 said:


> The reality is at the* end of the 1990's and early 2000's* Pak and India were largely equal, since then however we have had no $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$



The 'grand dad' of all Indian Solid fuel missiles,SLV tasted its first Success in 1980,when it successfully launched a satellite to LEO.
First test of Agni TD was on 1989( range of 2,500 km and a payload of 1,000 kg ).The development of Agni III,Shaurya started in late 1990s as well as first test of Agni II.

Not largely equal,India always had an edge,due to the ' spin offs' of Space program & extensive R&D.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Jf Thunder

gslv mk3 said:


> The 'grand dad' of all Indian Solid fuel missiles,SLV tasted its first Success in 1980,when it successfully launched a satellite to LEO.
> First test of Agni TD was on 1989( range of 2,500 km and a payload of 1,000 kg ).The development of Agni III,Shaurya started in late 1990s as well as first test of Agni II.
> 
> Not largely equal.


you are right, Pakistan is greater than India in terms of military strength ^_^

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Manindra

Jf Thunder said:


> you are right, Pakistan is greater than India in terms of military strength ^_^


With world record of more than 93000 POW after WWII.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## gslv mk3

Jf Thunder said:


> you are right, Pakistan is greater than India in terms of military strength ^_^



Wow thats what you inferred from my post?? You are truly a genius....


----------



## Jf Thunder

Manindra said:


> With world record of more than 93000 POW after WWII.


you just be happy on that



gslv mk3 said:


> Wow thats what you inferred from my post?? You are truly a genius....


yes i am a genius, no doubt


----------



## gslv mk3

Jf Thunder said:


> you just be happy on that
> 
> 
> yes i am a genius, no doubt



Now,Mr Genius can you explain to me,how you came to this conclusion ''Pakistan is greater than India in terms of military strength'' ??


----------



## Jf Thunder

gslv mk3 said:


> Now,Mr Genius can you explain to me,how you came to this conclusion ''Pakistan is greater than India in terms of military strength'' ??


just like you came to the conclusion that India and Pakistan are not equal lol


----------



## gslv mk3

Jf Thunder said:


> just like you came to the conclusion that India and Pakistan are not equal lol



A Pakistani member was making a claim that 'at the* end of the 1990's and early 2000's* Pak and India were largely equal in missile technology'

I have proved that India was ahead back then in post #87.Read it first.


----------



## Jf Thunder

gslv mk3 said:


> A Pakistani member was making a claim that 'at the* end of the 1990's and early 2000's* Pak and India were largely equal in missile technology'
> 
> I have proved that India was ahead back then in post #87.Read it first.


you have your own opinion, me my own, so end of this discussion and back to the topic


----------



## gslv mk3

Jf Thunder said:


> you have your own opinion, me my own, so end of this discussion and back to the topic



Facts do not depend on someones opinion.If you think Pakistan was equal to India in missile technology,back then you can prove it.


----------



## Jf Thunder

gslv mk3 said:


> Facts do not depend on someones opinion.If you think Pakistan was equal to India in missile technology,back then you can prove it.


i need to prove nothing, because this topic is not about India Vs Pakistan, can you just tell me why you are even in a discussion involving Pakistani Basaltic missiles?


----------



## Janmejay

Jf Thunder said:


> i need to prove nothing, because this topic is not about India Vs Pakistan, can you just tell me why you are even in a discussion involving Pakistani Basaltic missiles?


tell this to that pakistani memeber who brought India first...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jf Thunder

Janmejay said:


> tell this to that pakistani memeber who brought India first...


who?


----------



## gslv mk3

Jf Thunder said:


> who?





hussain0216 said:


> The reality is at the end of the 1990's and early 2000's Pak and India were largely equal, since then however we have had no $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## farhan_9909

This missile is usually shown as M-18 Because of its chinese caption but in reality it is Shaheen II covered by chinese media with 100% Identicle paint job as the other pic of Shaheen II we have seen.







Shaheen II Other Pic with 100% similar paint job

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Deterrent

@farhan_9909 
Yeah, both missiles were displayed in the same 23rd March military parade, on two separate vehicles moving in tandem. 
The above one (top 2 photos with Chinese captions) is Shaheen-II on a Transporter, while the last one is another Shaheen-II on a Transport Erector Launcher.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bratva

The Deterrent said:


> @farhan_9909
> Yeah, both missiles were displayed in the same 23rd March military parade, on two separate vehicles moving in tandem.
> The above one (top 2 photos with Chinese captions) is Shaheen-II on a Transporter, while the last one is another Shaheen-II on a Transport Erector Launcher.



Is Shaheen-II operationally deployed? As per last year report, it is still in development?


----------



## The Deterrent

mafiya said:


> Is Shaheen-II operationally deployed? As per last year report, it is still in development?


Yes it is. Back in 2008, a Strategic Missile Group conducted a training exercise of launching Shaheen-II.
I guess you are referring to Hans M. Kristensen's report, he referred it to as _"in the process of being deployed", _which means that it is still in production.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RAMPAGE

The Deterrent said:


> Yes it is. Back in 2008, a Strategic Missile Group conducted a training exercise of launching Shaheen-II.
> I guess you are referring to Hans M. Kristensen's report, he referred it to as _"in the process of being deployed", _which means that it is still in production.


Sirjee koi khushkhabri de dou na please ???

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## farhan_9909

The Deterrent said:


> @farhan_9909
> Yeah, both missiles were displayed in the same 23rd March military parade, on two separate vehicles moving in tandem.
> The above one (top 2 photos with Chinese captions) is Shaheen-II on a Transporter, while the last one is another Shaheen-II on a Transport Erector Launcher.



This is what i meant

But some fanboys are claiming it to be m-18 of which even Dr carlo kopp claimed that no pic or even a basic design model is available to public apart from the specs of 1000-1200km range and only 10t weight compared to 2000-2500km range of shaheen II and more than 25t weight

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal.

@The Deterrent Dr. Samar used to say that the apogee of Shaheen 2 is 600-700 km which is consistent with ~3000 km range. Any comments on that?


----------



## The Deterrent

farhan_9909 said:


> This is what i meant
> 
> But some fanboys are claiming it to be m-18 of which even Dr carlo kopp claimed that no pic or even a basic design model is available to public apart from the specs of 1000-1200km range and only 10t weight compared to 2000-2500km range of shaheen II and more than 25t weight


Exactly!


Bilal. said:


> @The Deterrent Dr. Samar used to say that the apogee of Shaheen 2 is 600-700 km which is consistent with ~3000 km range. Any comments on that?


When and where did he say that?
Regardless, Shaheen-II's range is confirmed to be 2000 km.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal.

The Deterrent said:


> Exactly!
> 
> When and where did he say that?
> Regardless, Shaheen-II's range is confirmed to be 2000 km.



Very old tv and news paper interviews. He used to say it flies at 700 km rendering ABMs useless.


----------



## The Deterrent

Bilal. said:


> Very old tv and news paper interviews. He used to say it flies at 700 km rendering ABMs useless.


Dr. Samar is a respectable scientist and the Father of Pakistan's Ballistic and Cruise Missile Program. That being said, from time to time he states some things which are incorrect but I consider them to be disinformation/propaganda on purpose to boost the morale of the people/military.
Sure thing that mid-course interceptors haven't been developed yet to take out targets that high but we both know that any ballistic missile is vulnerable to an terminal ABM shield unless equipped with MARV/Countermeasures.

It is also possible that you heard him wrong or the press messed it up.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal.

The Deterrent said:


> Dr. Samar is a respectable scientist and the Father of Pakistan's Ballistic and Cruise Missile Program. That being said, from time to time he states some things which are incorrect but I consider them to be disinformation/propaganda on purpose to boost the morale of the people/military.
> Sure thing that mid-course interceptors haven't been developed yet to take out targets that high but we both know that any ballistic missile is vulnerable to an terminal ABM shield unless equipped with MARV/Countermeasures.
> 
> It is also possible that you heard him wrong or the press messed it up.



Probably but that does not negate him quoting a 700km altitude in multiple interviews, ABM or no ABM.


----------



## Bilal.

Even other characteristics like weight/length/diameter is similar to ~3000km ranged missiles. Unless our propellant tech is far lagging.


----------



## The Deterrent

Bilal. said:


> Probably but that does not negate him quoting a 700km altitude in multiple interviews, ABM or no ABM.


Do try to find and post the video/newspaper link.


Bilal. said:


> Even other characteristics like weight/length/diameter is similar to ~3000km ranged missiles. Unless our propellant tech is far lagging.


They are similar to ~3000km range missiles which are much more advanced than Pakistani missiles. The weight is high because of use of maraging steel in both stages (no composites at all), and the propellent grains are of the basic geometrical design which have low efficiency.


----------



## Bilal.

The Deterrent said:


> Do try to find and post the video/newspaper link.
> 
> They are similar to ~3000km range missiles which are much more advanced than Pakistani missiles. The weight is high because of use of maraging steel in both stages (no composites at all), and the propellent grains are of the basic geometrical design which have low efficiency.



I have been searching but those old sources are not to be found on the net it seems...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AUz

@The Deterrent

Yar one technical question...

So Pakistani missiles/space vehicles (SLVs, if any) use/depend on GPS and other such systems for navigation. Isn't it a threat? America/West can just shut down their navigation tools for Pakistan and our missiles etc. will be just sitting ducks..or there is something I'm missing?

For a missile of medium-long ranges, don't you need satellites to guide it? If so, Pakistan doesn't have many satellites up there..so we are dependent on others and their navigation technology for our survival...Isn't this pathetic?

Or things don't work the way I am thinking they do?


Please clarify!

@Manticore @Hyperion @Xeric @Aeronaut and other senior members can chip in too to clarify things for the readers.


----------



## Luftwaffe

AUz said:


> @The Deterrent
> 
> Yar one technical question...
> 
> So Pakistani missiles/space vehicles (SLVs, if any) use/depend on GPS and other such systems for navigation. Isn't it a threat? America/West can just shut down their navigation tools for Pakistan and our missiles etc. will be just sitting ducks..or there is something I'm missing?
> 
> For a missile of medium-long ranges, don't you need satellites to guide it? If so, Pakistan doesn't have many satellites up there..so we are dependent on others and their navigation technology for our survival...Isn't this pathetic?
> 
> Or things don't work the way I am thinking they do?
> 
> 
> Please clarify!



Adoption of Beido I/II.

China to build additional Beidou satellite network stations in Pakistan

Although I do not agree with part of the article where it says..."American website Defensenews.com reported early May that Pakistani military experts were in favour of using the Chinese system, even though the availability of the signal could not be guaranteed in case of conflict."

Beido I/II can cover entire Pakistan and rest of Asia so its availability is certain and strong.


----------



## AUz

Luftwaffe said:


> Adoption of Beido I/II.
> 
> China to build additional Beidou satellite network stations in Pakistan
> 
> Although I do not agree with part of the article where it says..."American website Defensenews.com reported early May that Pakistani military experts were in favour of using the Chinese system, even though the availability of the signal could not be guaranteed in case of conflict."
> 
> Beido I/II can cover entire Pakistan and rest of Asia so its availability is certain and strong.



Doesn't matter still.

The fact remains that we are dependent on others for our own survival.

Chinese aren't blind idiots. They are very interest-based people who don't have any friendships...ever. If it was in interest of China to shut down Pakistan's missile navigation signal..guess what? *THEY WILL!*

Its all about interests...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

AUz said:


> @The Deterrent
> 
> Yar one technical question...
> 
> So Pakistani missiles/space vehicles (SLVs, if any) use/depend on GPS and other such systems for navigation. Isn't it a threat? America/West can just shut down their navigation tools for Pakistan and our missiles etc. will be just sitting ducks..or there is something I'm missing?
> 
> For a missile of medium-long ranges, don't you need satellites to guide it? If so, Pakistan doesn't have many satellites up there..so we are dependent on others and their navigation technology for our survival...Isn't this pathetic?
> 
> Or things don't work the way I am thinking they do?
> 
> 
> Please clarify!
> 
> @Manticore @Hyperion @Xeric @Aeronaut and other senior members can chip in too to clarify things for the readers.


For ballistic missiles, GPS enhances accuracy. The systems are still good to go for delivering nuclear weapons with INS and Celestial Guidance,


----------



## AUz

The Deterrent said:


> For ballistic missiles, GPS enhances accuracy. The systems are still good to go for delivering nuclear weapons with INS and Celestial Guidance,



INS is like inbuilt system for navigation, right? Like Pakistani missiles will have Pakistani-build INS and it can guide a ballistic missile to a right location for nuclear strike---without having to depend on any "non-Pakistani" structure (like Satellite, computers whatever)...right? or wrong?

What is Celestial Guidance? 

Sitaroon ko dekh k missile to nahi chalanay ka keh rahay?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

AUz said:


> INS is like inbuilt system for navigation, right? Like Pakistani missiles will have Pakistani-build INS and it can guide a ballistic missile to a right location for nuclear strike---without having to depend on any "non-Pakistani" structure (like Satellite, computers whatever)...right? or wrong?
> 
> What is Celestial Guidance?
> 
> Sitaroon ko dekh k missile to nahi chalanay ka keh rahay?


Yes, INS is based on a combination of accelerometers and gyroscopes, and gives a CEP of 0.1% of range (figure for DF-11, Pakistani systems would have similar capability). All the components (INS, Flight computer etc) are built/sourced in Pakistan, so we are absolutely independent in launching a nuclear strike.

Shaheen-II has been speculated to have utilized celestial guidance for correction of trajectory after the boost phase. 
From wikipedia:


> Celestial guidance was first used in the American Snark missile (Nortronics stellar-inertial guidance) first flown on 06/08/1953. It uses star positioning to fine-tune the accuracy of the inertial guidance system after launch. As the accuracy of a missile is dependent upon the guidance system knowing the exact position of the missile at any given moment during its flight, the fact that stars are a fixed reference point from which to calculate that position makes this a potentially very effective means of improving accuracy. In the Trident system this was achieved by a single camera that was trained to spot just one star in its expected position (it is believed that the missiles from Soviet submarines would track two separate stars to achieve this), if it was not quite aligned to where it should be then this would indicate that the inertial system was not precisely on target and a correction would be made.


----------



## Informant

@The Detergent are any MRIV in the making by the Great Satan's ally?


----------



## The Deterrent

Informant said:


> @*The Detergent* are any MRIV in the making by the Great Satan's ally?


WTF  Its "The Deterrent"! not Detergent! 

If you mean Pakistan, yes.
Pakistan Seeks To Counter Indian ABM Defenses | Defense News | defensenews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MilSpec

The Deterrent said:


> WTF  Its "The Deterrent"! not Detergent!
> 
> If you mean Pakistan, yes.
> Pakistan Seeks To Counter Indian ABM Defenses | Defense News | defensenews.com



ha ha ha ROFL


----------



## Informant

The Deterrent said:


> WTF  Its "The Deterrent"! not Detergent!
> 
> If you mean Pakistan, yes.
> Pakistan Seeks To Counter Indian ABM Defenses | Defense News | defensenews.com



No Detergent is better. Temme about these ABM shields, do they work. And what do you believe the successful interception rate is.


----------



## The Deterrent

Informant said:


> No Detergent is better. Temme about these ABM shields, do they work. And what do you believe the successful interception rate is.



There is no definite answer to this question, a lot of variables are involved. India won't be able to *FIELD/DEPLOY* a multi-tier BMD shield in multiple cities till 2020 (it is my personal estimate), and before that the Pakistani solutions will arrive.


----------



## Informant

The Deterrent said:


> There is no definite answer to this question, a lot of variables are involved. India won't be able to *FIELD/DEPLOY* a multi-tier BMD shield in multiple cities till 2020 (it is my personal estimate), and before that the Pakistani solutions will arrive.



Why dont we have these shields? No money and no honey?

Why we poor, please pay your taxes. Dont deter taxmen


----------



## Luftwaffe

AUz said:


> Doesn't matter still.
> 
> The fact remains that we are dependent on others for our own survival.
> 
> Chinese aren't blind idiots. They are very interest-based people who don't have any friendships...ever. If it was in interest of China to shut down Pakistan's missile navigation signal..guess what? *THEY WILL!*
> 
> Its all about interests...



Not good to reach conclusion yet, Pakistan is in no financial position to develop its own solution and won't for the next 25 years. "they will" is a too early assumption they might only if their land dispute with india is resolved but that is not going to happen for decades to come.


----------



## SQ8

Considering the level of corruption within the key organizations, and the rate at which our economy is going down the drain. I would not be so sure about rapid developments. 

All that you hear these days within the grapevines is not about developments but about how much commission or how much perks the people incharge of our most sensitive secrets have bamboozled away.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Xeric

AUz said:


> @The Deterrent
> 
> Yar one technical question...
> 
> So Pakistani missiles/space vehicles (SLVs, if any) use/depend on GPS and other such systems for navigation. Isn't it a threat? America/West can just shut down their navigation tools for Pakistan and our missiles etc. will be just sitting ducks..or there is something I'm missing?
> 
> For a missile of medium-long ranges, don't you need satellites to guide it? If so, Pakistan doesn't have many satellites up there..so we are dependent on others and their navigation technology for our survival...Isn't this pathetic?
> 
> Or things don't work the way I am thinking they do?
> 
> 
> Please clarify!
> 
> @Manticore @Hyperion @Xeric @Aeronaut and other senior members can chip in too to clarify things for the readers.


Is baray mai shariat khamosh hai...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Secur

Xeric said:


> Is baray mai shariat khamosh hai...



Maulana Sahab , Zaeef riwayat mei INS ka zikar bhi milta hai

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AUz

Xeric said:


> Is baray mai shariat khamosh hai...



Tab hi to apka fatwa manga hai sarkar  

Shariat ki khamooshi ki wajah se hi alim k paas aya hun

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Umair Nawaz

The Deterrent said:


> Dr. Samar is a respectable scientist and the Father of Pakistan's Ballistic and Cruise Missile Program. That being said, from time to time he states some things which are incorrect but I consider them to be disinformation/propaganda on purpose to boost the morale of the people/military.
> .


then what we consider yr info? a moral downing or something? And how exactly r u so confident that u know the exact range of missiles and specs? Its one of the most tightly guarded state kept secrets.

In simple words we hardly know u to believe yr info over Dr Samar's. Unless yr also a reputation scientist related to Missile boys of pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

Umair Nawaz said:


> then what we consider yr info? a moral downing or something? And how exactly r u so confident that u know the exact range of missiles and specs? Its one of the most tightly guarded state capt secrets.
> 
> In simple words we hardly know u to believe yr info over Dr Samar's. Unless yr also a reputation scientist related to Missile boys of pakistan.


Believe what you want to, I'm not shoving anything down anybody's throat.


----------



## xyxmt

Indigenous Industries is a Russian company making things for India, Pakistan does not have access to indigenous industries hence we need to make Xerox copies


----------



## Capt.Popeye

xyxmt said:


> Indigenous Industries is a Russian company making things for India, Pakistan does not have access to indigenous industries hence we need to make Xerox copies



Oh wow! xerox copies on a North Korean photo-copying machine then, ehh?


----------



## Xeric

Secur said:


> Maulana Sahab , Zaeef riwayat mei INS ka zikar bhi milta hai





AUz said:


> Tab hi to apka fatwa manga hai sarkar
> 
> Shariat ki khamooshi ki wajah se hi alim k paas aya hun


We have a few things up our sleeves too. Shariat unkay baray mai khamosh hai bhai

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Oscar said:


> Considering the level of corruption within the key organizations, and the rate at which our economy is going down the drain. I would not be so sure about rapid developments.
> 
> All that you hear these days within the grapevines is not about developments but about how much commission or how much perks the people incharge of our most sensitive secrets have bamboozled away.




Is it lucrative to join Pak Army and become a general some day?

Apart from the obvious allocated land on top of the real estate business (key corps), how much are the commissions generally speaking?

I am thinking to send my kids in the army when I have one.


You think it will pay off?

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1


----------



## SQ8

saad445566 said:


> Is it lucrative to join Pak Army and become a general some day?
> 
> Apart from the obvious allocated land on top of the real estate business (key corps), how much are the commissions generally speaking?
> 
> I am thinking to send my kids in the army when I have one.
> 
> 
> You think it will pay off?



Possibly it might.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Xeric said:


> We have a few things up our sleeves too. Shariat unkay baray mai khamosh hai bhai



Hello Xeric. 

What are the recent developments?


----------



## AUz

saad445566 said:


> Hello Xeric.
> 
> What are the recent developments?



He won't know...or tell.

Recent developments aren't known by Army officers...but rather high-level generals/scientists working in secret nuclear/missile program.


----------



## najeeb ahmed

Shaheen 2 is a great invention ok pakistan army...


----------



## Windjammer

Found this piece of interesting info on FB, wonder how accurate is it, can you guys shed some light on it.

@The Deterrent @Oscar @Manticore @Xeric


----------



## SQ8

Pretty much what most ballistic missiles do when it comes to flight. 
The mentioned targeting system may not be accurate or if so not in widespread use.


----------



## Bilal.

Oscar said:


> Pretty much what most ballistic missiles do when it comes to flight.
> The mentioned targeting system may not be accurate or if so not in widespread use.



Does the said targeting system, even if not in widespread use, open the possibility of targeting enemy aircraft carrier with a BM?


----------



## Windjammer

Oscar said:


> Pretty much what most ballistic missiles do when it comes to flight.
> The mentioned targeting system may not be accurate or if so not in widespread use.


Glad you are still with us dear, .....what about the said speed and the flight deviation tactics.


----------



## The Deterrent

Windjammer said:


> Found this piece of interesting info on FB, wonder how accurate is it, can you guys shed some light on it.
> 
> @The Deterrent @Oscar @Manticore @Xeric



Fantasies, mostly taken from wikipedia (referring to the _"zaawiya"_ and _"radar"_ part, on the right hand side).

The speed might be exaggerated, and the altitude mentioned is ambiguous...so can't say much about Speed & Altitude, as no accurate figures are available for comparison.


----------



## Xeric

Windjammer said:


> Found this piece of interesting info on FB, wonder how accurate is it, can you guys shed some light on it.
> 
> @The Deterrent @Oscar @Manticore @Xeric


Not accurate.


----------



## shaheenmissile

Haseeb,Windy,Oscar. the Infographic was created by me. I bumped into this thread and you guys rubbishing my hard work. Very naughty of you 

The stats were based on a similar Indian missile Agni-3 . Same/similar range hence the Apogee must be same or similar. Terminal velocity of Agni-3 is stated as greater than mach-12 , but in high high trajectory it can reach mach 15. Agni-3 Apogee for a range of 2200 Km was 384Km. I wrote Shaheen-2 Apogee for 2000Km as 300Km which was a safe estimate based ion known facts about a similar missile.

terminal radar guidance has been mentioned by many defense analysts. Pakistan has been working on a radar based terminal guidance system for many years. So that is not fantasy .

Changing trajectory for dodging Incoming ABM fire was an assumption made on the basis of sideways rocket motors fitted to warhead assembly of shaheen-2. Earlier pics had black dots on sides of the warhead. You can google those pics. Those round black dots were said to be sideways rocket motors by many.

A telemetry video for Agni-3 is available on youtube and vimeo search for
*AGNI 3 BALLISTIC MISSILE LAUNCH NUCLEAR MISSILE , INDIA* |(i cannot post video or url)|

Based on this video of a similar missile to shaheen-2 a calculation was done by me



> We have Data for 240.4 seconds.
> 
> 674.5 (when sensors go offline) Minus 434.1 seconds when the missile is at Apogee (I am taking apogee point as start point as the missile enters greatest acceleration after this)
> 
> So in 240.4 seconds the missile travels 2162 KM (last known Range) Minus 1218 KM (Range at apogee)
> Thats 944 KM travelled in 240.4 seconds
> 
> This gives us a speed of 3.93 KM per seconds at Altitude of 182.5 KM (Last known Altitude)..thats distance covered in horizontal Plane?
> 
> 
> Also the missile Apogee was 348 KM and last reading was 182.5 KM. Thats a change in altitude downwards of 165.5 KM in same time 240.4 seconds
> That means a distance of 165.5 KM traveled in z axis or vertical plane.
> 
> 
> This gives us a Right angle triangle with Perpendicular of 165.5 KM and a Base of 944 KM
> 
> Now solve the Right angle triangle.
> 
> 
> Thats 958 KM angular distance covered in 240.4 seconds
> 
> or 3.98 KM per second.
> 
> No we take 3980 Meter/Second as initial velocity , acceleration due to Gravity as 9.8 m/s and distance traveled as 60500 meters (thats the difference between the altitude at which speed calculated and that was 182.5 KM minus Re-entry into atmosphere altitude of 122KM)
> 
> Now using newtonian equations and assuming the missile a free falling body with Initial velocity of 3980 M/S.
> 
> The Velocity at altitude 122KM (Assumed Re-entry altitude) will be 4126 M/s or 4.1 KM/S
> 
> Thats Mach 12 on Re-entry



I divided the parabolic path in two right angle triangles for simplicity and the resultant speed was mach 12. But if i had done true spherical trigonometric calculations the distance covered in the same time must have come ot to me bore and speed must have come out to be more than mach 12. hence the assumption of mach-15 for Sheheen-2.

So there you go..the infographic in question was not a bunch of doodaa and was based on realistic comparisons and well founded assumptions.

hope it helps.


----------



## Thirdfront

shaheenmissile said:


> Haseeb,Windy,Oscar. the Infographic was created by me. I bumped into this thread and you guys rubbishing my hard work. Very naughty of you
> 
> The stats were based on a similar Indian missile Agni-3 . Same/similar range hence the Apogee must be same or similar. Terminal velocity of Agni-3 is stated as greater than mach-12 , but in high high trajectory it can reach mach 15. Agni-3 Apogee for a range of 2200 Km was 384Km. I wrote Shaheen-2 Apogee for 2000Km as 300Km which was a safe estimate based ion known facts about a similar missile.
> 
> terminal radar guidance has been mentioned by many defense analysts. Pakistan has been working on a radar based terminal guidance system for many years. So that is not fantasy .
> 
> Changing trajectory for dodging Incoming ABM fire was an assumption made on the basis of sideways rocket motors fitted to warhead assembly of shaheen-2. Earlier pics had black dots on sides of the warhead. You can google those pics. Those round black dots were said to be sideways rocket motors by many.
> 
> A telemetry video for Agni-3 is available on youtube and vimeo search for
> *AGNI 3 BALLISTIC MISSILE LAUNCH NUCLEAR MISSILE , INDIA* |(i cannot post video or url)|
> 
> Based on this video of a similar missile to shaheen-2 a calculation was done by me
> 
> 
> 
> I divided the parabolic path in two right angle triangles for simplicity and the resultant speed was mach 12. But if i had done true spherical trigonometric calculations the distance covered in the same time must have come ot to me bore and speed must have come out to be more than mach 12. hence the assumption of mach-15 for Sheheen-2.
> 
> So there you go..the infographic in question was not a bunch of doodaa and was based on realistic comparisons and well founded assumptions.
> 
> hope it helps.


Your basic assumption, viz similar rage = similar apogee, is wrong.


----------



## rana shamsher

Nuclear Economics should play a great role, if our policy maker use it.




__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=303345783163935


----------



## The Deterrent

shaheenmissile said:


> Windy,Oscar. the Infographic was created by me. I bumped into this thread and you guys rubbishing my hard work. Very naughty of you


Welcome to the forum. 


> The stats were based on a similar Indian missile Agni-3 . Same/similar range hence the Apogee must be same or similar. Terminal velocity of Agni-3 is stated as greater than mach-12 , but in high high trajectory it can reach mach 15. Agni-3 Apogee for a range of 2200 Km was 384Km. I wrote Shaheen-2 Apogee for 2000Km as 300Km which was a safe estimate based ion known facts about a similar missile.


The assumption here that similar ranges will give similar apogees is a bit flawed. It depends on the quality of fuel grain and therefore speed. So if the speed is higher the apogee would be lesser (trajectory flattening). So basically these are all assumptions unless accurate data is provided.



> terminal radar guidance has been mentioned by many defense analysts. Pakistan has been working on a radar based terminal guidance system for many years. So that is not fantasy .


Negative, those analysts are wrong. There is absolutely no indication of any physical structure present on the warhead which could house a radar seeker (reference Pershing-II, biconical nose design with no carbon-carbon reentry shield).



> Changing trajectory for dodging Incoming ABM fire was an assumption made on the basis of sideways rocket motors fitted to warhead assembly of shaheen-2. Earlier pics had black dots on sides of the warhead. You can google those pics. Those round black dots were said to be sideways rocket motors by many.


Again that is an assumption. There is also probability that the black dots are in fact antenna arrays for communication or optics windows for a celestial navigation system, and the course correction is instead achieved by a gimballed hydrazine engine.
Coming to the "dodging" part, there is only enough fuel for the correction system to correct the trajectory in space. Furthermore, the reentry vehicle has to be put on the correct course as soon as the boost phase terminates to avoid cumulative error. So there isn't any time for "dodging".



> A telemetry video for Agni-3 is available on youtube and vimeo search for
> *AGNI 3 BALLISTIC MISSILE LAUNCH NUCLEAR MISSILE , INDIA* |(i cannot post video or url)|
> 
> Based on this video of a similar missile to shaheen-2 a calculation was done by me
> 
> 
> 
> I divided the parabolic path in two right angle triangles for simplicity and the resultant speed was mach 12. But if i had done true spherical trigonometric calculations the distance covered in the same time must have come ot to me bore and speed must have come out to be more than mach 12. hence the assumption of mach-15 for Sheheen-2.
> 
> So there you go..the infographic in question was not a bunch of doodaa and was based on realistic comparisons and well founded assumptions.
> 
> hope it helps.



Thats some hard work but at the end of the day, they are all assumptions. I'm not saying they are wrong, I do not know the exact figures myself so I think the infographic cannot be considered based on true facts.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rashid Mahmood

blueaxe_101 said:


> Can Pakistan help Middle Eastern countries to do JV with Pakistan over Liquid and Solid Fuel Rocket system so that they can produce their own missiles and SLVs? Or they need to do JV with N.Korea or China?




*Nishan 101* is back.......


----------



## nomi007



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## shaheenmissile

defpk123 said:


> So the Ghauri system is being completed phased out. What would happen to the missiles??? and also about the short range ones like M-11s and all those before Abdali and Ghaznavi???


Used as practice firing during military exercises


----------



## nomi007




----------



## Malghani




----------



## Bratva

A.Q Khan gloating about his Ghauri series while belittling Dr.Samar Mubarakmand Shaheen series 

@Oscar @The Deterrent apparently Shaheen series had it's share of failures as well 

Dr A Q Khan
Monday, September 29, 2014 
From Print Edition


104 42 48 0






Part - XIII

Random thoughts

Last week I wrote something about Dr M Alam. Besides being a very competent and able colleague who designed the atom bomb, he was also an ardent hitchhiker. He, together with Dr Tahir Rasul (colleague of Eng Khokhar and a very competent mechanical engineer who made invaluable contributions to the success of our programme, now professor at Air University), founded a hiking club. 

We built a club building and obtained excellent hiking equipment from Germany, free of cost, from our friend, Dr Heinz Mebus. Dr Alam, Dr Tahir, a few other colleagues and Dr Anisur Rahman, a well-known dental surgeon in Islamabad, regularly visited the northern areas for hiking. Their club building has many beautiful photos of the excursions.

One of my priorities was to concentrate, not only on the work, but also on the comfort of my staff. Kahuta was thus turned into a model town with flowers, fruit trees, a swimming pool, dairy, poultry/quail farms, a cricket ground, a football field, tennis and squash courts, a guesthouse at the dam (built by us) for senior staff, utility store, marriage hall, gymnasium, riding club, golf course, bus services for students and a bus service to and from Islamabad/Rawalpindi for families for shopping. 

All the plantation and road works were taken care of by Brig Sajawal Khan, DG SWO who was a competent, no-nonsense officer who always delivered as promised. More than six feet tall, fit and well-built, he had a dominating personality and was willing and able to accomplish tasks at top speed. He came as a Lt-Col together with Gen Zahid, was promoted to full colonel with Gen Anis and then became brigadier and DG SWO after Gen Anis was posted as surveyor general of Pakistan. Most of the construction work inside the plant was completed during his tenure. He used to accompany me on my daily inspection of the plant. After retirement from the army I made him DG Maintenance and General Services, a job he performed with excellence.

In April 1998 when we were ready to launch the Ghauri missile from the site prepared at Kahuta, we were told to fire it from Tilla, Jhelum instead. We only had two days in which to make the alternate arrangements – an arduous task with bad roads, sharp turns, obstructing trees, low electric wires, etc. To transport such huge missiles on launchers together with the fuel and other equipment required was an enormous task. Thanks to Brig Sajawal, all went well. 

The decision to shift sites at the last minute came from a general at the GHQ who was our liaison. He was afraid that the missile would fly over Rawalpindi and, if there was a mishap, the GHQ and more would be wiped out. He was obviously not aware of the fact that most failures occur during launching or immediately after. This missile was capable of reaching 360 km speed within a few seconds, then, after releasing the warhead, the fuselage falls a few hundred kilometres away. The warhead, pre-programmed to a specific target, would fly ballistically at high speed.

*Dr Hashmi, Dr Mirza, Engineers Nasim Khan, Khokhar, Nazir Mirza, Badrul Islam, Brig Behram and many other senior officers were already at the site. On April 6 about 20 colleagues and I drove to Tilla Range by coaster. When we reached, those already there were just having breakfast. I sat down with Dr Hashmi and we got the shock of our lives when a crate snake slid between our legs. Our launching time was 7:30 am. At 7:22 I was informed by an army officer that the missile launch from Son Miani under Samar Mubarakmand had flopped. It had simply rolled over and burst into flame. There were reports of casualties, but these were never confirmed. *

*When I heard this, I was furious. It was obvious that the timing had been planned to steal our achievement by firing a copy of M-11 which KRL had developed at Khanpur. The drawings for that missile had been passed on to Samar Mubarakmand after we had handed over the factory to the army. I immediately gave the go-ahead and our missile was launched at 7:23. Slightly more than nine minutes later the warhead hit the ground near the target 1,300 km away. The army inspectors posted there confirmed the hit and gave a written report. A helicopter was also there to witness the event. There are many photographs recording the event. Since there were no proper facilities at Tilla Range, I later had weather-resistant sheds built there – bathrooms, cafeteria, kitchen, mosque, etc – which were then donated to the army.*

The Tilla Range, Jhelum, fell under the Corps Commander of Mangla, Gen Musharraf at the time. As a courtesy, I invited him to witness the historic launching of Pakistan’s first ballistic missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. He said that he had neither been informed, nor invited, by the COAS, Gen Jehangir Karamat. I told him I would inform the chief. He arrived by helicopter an hour before the launch. 

We all sat on the balcony of a building about 300 meters from the launching pad. Musharraf was sitting on one side of me with Gen Riaz A Chowhan, DG Medical Services, former surgeon general of Pakistan Army, on the other. Musharraf was reeking of alcohol and I told him that this was most inappropriate. I guess this did not go down well. Later, when he became president, he claimed that the launch had been a failure. It is hard to image this kind of behaviour from a head of state.

After the success of the launch I immediately informed PM Mian Nawaz Sharif. He was extremely pleased and asked me to come to PM House at about 10 pm with the video film. I rushed back to Islamabad and found Mushahid Hussain Syed, Saeed Mehdi and some others with the PM. After viewing the video, at the insistence of Mushahid, they decided to air it in the 1pm news bulletin.

At 11 am the PM addressed officers and participants at the National Defence College (now a university) and broke the news, to which there was thunderous applause. From Gen Zia’s statements the Indians knew that Pakistan had nuclear weapons, but the launching of a long-range ballistic missile capable of carrying these weapons from a mobile launcher took the wind out of their sales. It was soon realised by both countries that a large-scale war between the two was now a thing of the past. Neither could afford the costs and damages of a nuclear war.

Brig Sajawal had done an excellent job by providing the logistic support. He was also the one who provided the logistic support for the many nuclear cold tests we carried out from the beginning of 1983 to 1984. May Allah shower His blessings on him and his family and on all those who worked on the missile programme to its successful completion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

Bratva said:


> A.Q Khan gloating about his Ghauri series while belittling Dr.Samar Mubarakmand Shaheen series
> 
> @Oscar @The Deterrent apparently Shaheen series had it's share of failures as well


Failures were always a part of the development programs. In fact, Shaheen-I was the most troublesome of all, but the lessons were learned so well that Shaheen-II soared with success every time.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kompromat

The Deterrent said:


> Failures were always a part of the development programs. In fact, Shaheen-I was the most troublesome of all, but the lessons were learned so well that Shaheen-II soared with success every time.



Where is the development trajectory headed to?

Range or Surviveability?


----------



## The Deterrent

Horus said:


> Where is the development trajectory headed to?
> 
> Range or Surviveability?



Definitely not range, there will be no major extension in range. Survivability? Of what exactly?

Basically the trajectory is headed where it has always been heading; developing low-cost solutions to emerging threats (which may have the potential to disrupt the balance of M.A.D.) for strengthening deterrence. At the moment, those threats include Ballistic Missile Defense System and Swift Conventional Strikes (aka Cold Start). In addition to these, progress is also being made in the field of Limited Second Strike Capability, Platform Diversity, Conventional Warfare and Asset Robustness, Mobility & Survivability.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SQ8

Bratva said:


> A.Q Khan gloating about his Ghauri series while belittling Dr.Samar Mubarakmand Shaheen series
> 
> @Oscar @The Deterrent apparently Shaheen series had it's share of failures as well


Ask Dr Samar he will tell you that the Shaheen was built in house.. whatever the exact process.. at least it is not a repainted NoDong like the Ghauri is.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

@The Deterrent

Surviveability as in our ability to deliver payload to the targets protected by a BMDS.


----------



## The Deterrent

Horus said:


> @The Deterrent
> 
> Surviveability as in our ability to deliver payload to the targets protected by a BMDS.


Yes, that is being worked upon too.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## raazh

Bratva said:


> A.Q Khan gloating about his Ghauri series while belittling Dr.Samar Mubarakmand Shaheen series
> 
> He was afraid that the missile would fly over Rawalpindi and, if there was a mishap, the GHQ and more would be wiped out.
> 
> *When I heard this, I was furious. It was obvious that the timing had been planned to steal our achievement by firing a copy of M-11 which KRL had developed at Khanpur. The drawings for that missile had been passed on to Samar Mubarakmand after we had handed over the factory to the army. *
> 
> Musharraf was reeking of alcohol and I told him that this was most inappropriate. I guess this did not go down well. Later, when he became president, he claimed that the launch had been a failure.
> 
> View attachment 101417



This guy is the perfect real life troll  . He just cant keep it shut. He bad mouths all the people and creates fake mirch masala news headlines and try to pound our head on daily basis with the message that had it not been AQ Khan there would have been no Atom bomb and no missile system in Pakistan. All those who know abc of these programs know that all news coming from AQ are always 180 degrees opposite.


----------



## Dr. Strangelove

@The Deterrent
mate do you have any idea what is the blast yields of our warheads


----------



## The Deterrent

Dr. Stranglove said:


> @The Deterrent
> mate do you have any idea what is the blast yields of our warheads



Smallest could be subkiloton-1 kiloton (Nasr warheads), estimated by multiple analysts.
As for largest, back in '98 Pakistan aimed for ~40 kiloton, but evidently didn't achieve that objective. Given the modernization of design & manufacturing, and the availability of Plutonium as fissile material, not only the warheads have been miniaturized but also their (expected) yields must have been increased to the desired level. But it should be kept in mind that Pakistan will not go beyond that, as it is enough at strategic level deployment against counter-value targets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hurter

What about Ghauri & Shaheen Missles? How much destruction they can do without carrying any nuclear warheads?


----------



## The Deterrent

Junaid B said:


> What about Ghauri & Shaheen Missles? How much destruction they can do without carrying any nuclear warheads?


The same a 2,000 lb. JDAM does.


----------



## Hurter

The Deterrent said:


> The same a 2,000 lb. JDAM does.



Is 2000 lb enough for any ballistic missile whether its short range missile or long range?


----------



## The Deterrent

Junaid B said:


> Is 2000 lb enough for any ballistic missile whether its short range missile or long range?


Depends on payload. Obviously I meant Shaheen-II. But it is waste of a critical resource to use it as a conventional weapon, thats why it won't ever be used as one.


----------



## Bilal.

I would love to see Abdali developed inroads a SY-400 type system with 8 missile multiple launcher.


----------



## Hurter

The Deterrent said:


> Depends on payload. Obviously I meant Shaheen-II. But it is waste of a critical resource to use it as a conventional weapon, thats why it won't ever be used as one.



I thought they could destroy the entire city


----------



## Bilal.

Junaid B said:


> I thought they could destroy the entire city



Think about it... They carry roughly 2000 pound warhead how can they have anymore than a 2000 bomb? If a conventional warhead could destroy a whole city why would you need nuclear warhead?


----------



## Hurter

Bilal. said:


> Think about it... They carry roughly 2000 pound warhead how can they have anymore than a 2000 bomb? If a conventional warhead could destroy a whole city why would you need nuclear warhead?



Bro I have lack of technical knowledge about ballistic missiles. You might be right but if you see the size of any ballistic missile, it makes you wonder how destructive it can be.


----------



## The Deterrent

Junaid B said:


> Bro I have lack of technical knowledge about ballistic missiles. You might be right but if you see the size of any ballistic missile, it makes you wonder how destructive it can be.


However large the size may be, it is only the tip (warhead) that reaches the target.


----------



## engineermumtaz1

I am amazed how people are talking so much irresponsibly without any authenticity here about our missile systems. Most of the respected members are just getting information from web searches i.e. google/wikipedia who have information based on their own speculations but not based on internal facts. I can surely say that people who are talking about ghauri 2 and ghauri 3 know nothing about them. And i am amazed that they even have given the technical aspects of modifications as well :o . I can confirm that such modifications i.e. aluminium tanks, over all length etc were never made or tried to ghauri 1. In fact there is nothing like ghauri 2 or ghauri 3. KRL is still struggling hard to modify ghauri 1 at the moment which they havent been successful yet. One more thing, I admit that guidance system of ghauri 1 was modified and improved by NDC but nothing else was changed as far as mechanical structure of ghauri 1 is concerned so you can't call it as ghauri 2.
Please be noticed that here you can easily write that just a diameter or length of a missle was changed but by changing every single major dimension you have to change the jigs, fixtures and all the other testing facilities accordingly so its not a piece of cake which has not been done yet.


----------



## deArtist

Does anybody know about the Taimur ICBM (7000km range) that was allegedly under the works. It would be nice to have someone shed some light on that...


----------



## The Deterrent

engineermumtaz1 said:


> I am amazed how people are talking so much irresponsibly without any authenticity here about our missile systems. Most of the respected members are just getting information from web searches i.e. google/wikipedia who have information based on their own speculations but not based on internal facts. I can surely say that people who are talking about ghauri 2 and ghauri 3 know nothing about them. And i am amazed that they even have given the technical aspects of modifications as well :o . I can confirm that such modifications i.e. aluminium tanks, over all length etc were never made or tried to ghauri 1. In fact there is nothing like ghauri 2 or ghauri 3. KRL is still struggling hard to modify ghauri 1 at the moment which they havent been successful yet. One more thing, I admit that guidance system of ghauri 1 was modified and improved by NDC but nothing else was changed as far as mechanical structure of ghauri 1 is concerned so you can't call it as ghauri 2.
> Please be noticed that here you can easily write that just a diameter or length of a missle was changed but by changing every single major dimension you have to change the jigs, fixtures and all the other testing facilities accordingly so its not a piece of cake which has not been done yet.



You are right, the information posted in the start of the thread is based on information publicly available, most of which about Ghauri is misleading. It is true that a higher range variant of Ghauri was never deployed, maybe some experimentation was done which never succeeded. However the guidance was essentially improved as you said, and maybe thats why this variant of Ghauri (with better guidance) was named as Ghauri-II, causing confusion and misinformation.

I cannot edit the posts any longer, otherwise I would've rectified the errors.



deArtist said:


> Does anybody know about the Taimur ICBM (7000km range) that was allegedly under the works. It would be nice to have someone shed some light on that...


There is no use of shedding light in a dark vacuum.


----------



## engineermumtaz1

Nice to see such a respected response. Cheers mate


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

We await the Shaheen 3 or Tipu Missile news with patience

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

Umair Nawaz said:


> then what we consider yr info? a moral downing or something? And how exactly r u so confident that u know the exact range of missiles and specs? Its one of the most tightly guarded state kept secrets.
> 
> In simple words we hardly know u to believe yr info over Dr Samar's. Unless yr also a reputation scientist related to Missile boys of pakistan.



Sir,

I believe you are not a student of science----or were looking at girls while in school. The range of a missile is no guarded secret---you see by the size of the missile---you can determine the size of the fuel tank---type of rocket motor used---type of fuel is known---the weight of the missile and you can be within few hundred yards of the range of a missile.



Capt.Popeye said:


> Oh wow! xerox copies on a North Korean photo-copying machine then, ehh?



Sir,

Are Xerox copies different than copies made on any other copy machine.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WaLeEdK2

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> We await the Shaheen 3 or Tipu Missile news with patience
> 
> View attachment 120090



I've heard the tipu missile wasn't real.


----------



## Arsalan

WaLeEdK2 said:


> I've heard the tipu missile wasn't real.



They also say the earth was flat and revolves around the sun 

Pakistan is not in a position to test Long Range (Intercontinental Category) missiles. Also we do not need to do so in immediate future. For now, the focus is on better maneuverability of the already existing system, flight parameters refinement and MIRV development. When time comes, you will get to see an intercontinental missile as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hakan

I saw on wikipedia that pakistan is developing an ICBM called taimur or timur with 7000km range.

Does anyone have any details about that project? (I dont feel like reading through a 43 page thread on the topic)

Thanks.


----------



## RAMPAGE

Hakan said:


> I saw on wikipedia that pakistan is developing an ICBM called taimur or timur with 7000km range.
> 
> Does anyone have any details about that project? (I dont feel like reading through a 43 page thread on the topic)
> 
> Thanks.


No it isn't but it can.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## somebozo

Hakan said:


> I saw on wikipedia that pakistan is developing an ICBM called taimur or timur with 7000km range.
> 
> Does anyone have any details about that project? (I dont feel like reading through a 43 page thread on the topic)
> 
> Thanks.



Shall we say fanboy dreams?


----------



## Golden Eagle 007

i also read on Wikipedia about taimur Missile.


----------



## Bratva

@The Deterrent @HRK Was it Shaheen 1 or 1 A in 23 march parade ? Notice the presence of black color thrusters and fins on Shaheen 1 RV while absence of it in Shaheen 2 RV.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shaheenmissile

Bratva said:


> @The Deterrent @HRK Was it Shaheen 1 or 1 A in 23 march parade ? Notice the presence of black color thrusters and fins on Shaheen 1 RV while absence of it in Shaheen 2 RV.


I can see the fins,but where are the Thrusters?


----------



## Bratva

shaheenmissile said:


> I can see the fins,but where are the Thrusters?



First picture look under the fin

second, behind the white shade of flag

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Screambowl

shaheenmissile said:


> I can see the fins,but where are the Thrusters?


just below the Pakistan flag on missile cone. second photo.


----------



## shaheenmissile

Bratva said:


> First picture look under the fin
> 
> second, behind the white shade of flag


I don't deny the presence of Thrusters in all Shaheen series RV. But this Black spot looks more like explosive bolt for separation of warhead cowling.
All sheheen series follows Depressed/Shaped trajectory for shortening flight time and also to keep low altitude for late detection on Indian radars. So an RV re-targeting and stabilization system is required on all or the Warhead will be way off target.

The missile has Cropped delta fins on RV. That is a feature of Shaheen 1.
Shaheen 0 had Delta fins. Shaheen 1A has no fins


----------



## HRK

shaheenmissile said:


> but where are the Thrusters?








===============================



Bratva said:


> @The Deterrent @HRK Was it Shaheen 1 or 1 A in 23 march parade ? Notice the presence of black color thrusters and fins on Shaheen 1 RV while absence of it in Shaheen 2 RV.



it is difficult to guess the type of missile on the bases of exterior shaping as Shaheen-1(later version) & Shaheen-1A are very much similar, but the fins at RV of S-1A are relatively small then the fins of S-1, so on this basis I assume its S-1; for further reference






An old post of @The Deterrent which suggest about the post-separation attitude correction system was installed even in S-1V2



The Deterrent said:


> *Further development :*
> However,in early 2000s,NDC began development of a modern version,version 2.The Shaheen-1 V2 was more accurate,giving a CEP of <90 m.The new version included Terminal Correction System which corrected the warhead's trajectory in terminal phase *by using thrusters mounted in the warhead assembly*.Also included was an improved design for the ReV,which enabled it to re-enter the atmosphere at higher speeds.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shaheenmissile

HRK said:


> View attachment 206719
> 
> 
> ===============================
> 
> 
> 
> it is difficult to guess the type of missile on the bases of exterior shaping as Shaheen-1(later version) & Shaheen-1A are very much similar, but the fins at RV of S-1A are relatively small then the fins of S-1, so on this basis I assume its S-1; for further reference
> 
> View attachment 206720
> 
> 
> An old post of @The Deterrent which suggest about the post-separation attitude correction system was installed even in S-1V2


The missile is Shahhen-1 not 1A.
1 has Fins. 1A has none. Plus it says so on the missile in the parade 

Yes now that you pointed out,these look like thrusters,not explosive bolts as i thought .






Says Shaheen-I on the tin.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HRK

shaheenmissile said:


> The missile is Shahhen-1 not 1A.
> 1 has Fins. 1A has none. Plus it says so on the missile in the parade
> 
> Yes now that you pointed out,these look like thrusters,not explosive bolts as i thought .



my guess was also S-1 but not aware that S-1A have no fins thnx to inform .... 

=========================

@Bratva thrusters of S-II

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shaheenmissile

So that is proof enough that Pakistan has MARV.
*Maneuverable reentry vehicle*

Now check these older pics of Shaheen 1 and II.
You can clearly see the thrusters as Black circles. 







Shaheen zero with Delta fins showing Black circular thrusters on RV






Shaheen 1A with Cropped Delta fins, showing Black circles on RV

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Deterrent

@Bratva @shaheenmissile @HRK 

I believe you guys are jumping the gun, the Shaheen series has a correction system for adjusting the course, but side-mounted thrusters have little to do with it. In my opinion these are retro-thrusters, used for separating the warhead from the ReV after course is corrected above atmosphere.

Both Shaheen-I & II neither follow a depressed trajectory, nor they have maneuverable ReVs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## alimobin memon

The Deterrent said:


> @Bratva @shaheenmissile @HRK
> 
> I believe you guys are jumping the gun, the Shaheen series has a correction system for adjusting the course, but side-mounted thrusters have little to do with it. In my opinion these are retro-thrusters, used for separating the warhead from the ReV after course is corrected above atmosphere.
> 
> Both Shaheen-I & II neither follow a depressed trajectory, nor they have maneuverable ReVs.


Can These Long range ballistic missile change their trajectory or course as Nasr ? Is Ballistic missile classification able to carry such feature ?


----------



## HRK

The Deterrent said:


> @Bratva @shaheenmissile @HRK
> 
> I believe you guys are jumping the gun, the Shaheen series has a correction system for adjusting the course, but side-mounted thrusters have little to do with it. In my opinion these are retro-thrusters, used for separating the warhead from the ReV after course is corrected above atmosphere.
> 
> Both Shaheen-I & II neither follow a depressed trajectory, nor they have maneuverable ReVs.



just a little clarification from my side as well I was not suggesting that Pakistan has acquired MaRV capability

thnx for your educative post .....


----------



## The Deterrent

alimobin memon said:


> Can These Long range ballistic missile change their trajectory or course as Nasr ? Is Ballistic missile classification able to carry such feature ?


Nope, they can only _correct _their original trajectory, not change it on the run. Same is the case for Nasr.
However, advanced BMs such as DF-21 / HGVs (MaRV-equipped) can change their courses depending on location of the target or for deception.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Windjammer



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shaheenmissile

Thats ghauri launch...Goes striaight up.

This is Sjhaheen - 3 launch and after 40 seconds its al,ost Parallel to earth. How do you explain this @The Deterrent Deterrent?


----------



## Capt.Popeye

shaheenmissile said:


> View attachment 207083
> Thats ghauri launch...Goes striaight up.
> 
> This is Sjhaheen - 3 launch and after 40 seconds its al,ost Parallel to earth. How do you explain this @The Deterrent Deterrent?



A little odd question there..... Does Ghauri keep on going straight up? At what point in the time line was its picture taken?
While the Shaheen launches straight up vertically also, it then goes into a parabolic trajectory as BMs do; and as the Ghauri also does. So where is your question coming from?


----------



## shaheenmissile

When an RV has the ability to change direction,it is called MARV. Simple.
Course correction after stage septation does Involve RV changing direction,hence MARV.

All Shaheen series change path into a much flatter trajectory soon after launch. Any missile which follows non ballistic path is following depressed or shaped trajectory



Capt.Popeye said:


> A little odd question there..... Does Ghauri keep on going straight up? At what point in the time line was its picture taken?
> While the Shaheen launches straight up vertically also, it then goes into a parabolic trajectory as BMs do; and as the Ghauri also does. So where is your question coming from?


wath this ghauri vid and compare with shaheen vid.


----------



## Capt.Popeye

shaheenmissile said:


> When an RV has the ability to change direction,it is called MARV. Simple.
> Course correction after stage septation does Involve RV changing direction,hence MARV.
> 
> All Shaheen series change path into a much flatter trajectory soon after launch. Any missile which follows non ballistic path is following depressed or shaped trajectory
> 
> 
> wath this ghauri vid and compare with shaheen vid.




Do remember that what you are seeing is CONTROLLED by the Camera position relative to the aspect and orientation of the parabolic trajectory as it develops after the launch. So, if the camera position is different for both the missile launches or even for two launches of the same missile, then the trajectory will SEEM different to the viewer, so don't get taken in by that.
As for MARV/Depressed trajectory etc, @The Deterrent has already explained what Nasr, Ghauri and Shaheen can or cannot do. I'm afraid that he is correct.


----------



## shaheenmissile

Capt.Popeye said:


> Do remember that what you are seeing is CONTROLLED by the Camera position relative to the aspect and orientation of the parabolic trajectory as it develops after the launch. So, if the camera position is different for both the missile launches or even for two launches of the same missile, then the trajectory will SEEM different to the viewer, so don't get taken in by that.
> As for MARV/Depressed trajectory etc, @The Deterrent has already explained what Nasr, Ghauri and Shaheen can or cannot do. I'm afraid that he is correct.


i doubt that with india developing ABM,
Pakistan is still deploying highly predictable pure ballistic missiles with no means of dodging ABM


----------



## Capt.Popeye

shaheenmissile said:


> i doubt that with india developing ABM,
> Pakistan is still deploying highly predictable pure ballistic missiles with no means of dodging ABM



We can have our beliefs, doubts .... whatever. But the facts remain unchangeable as they are. So lend some credence to what @The Deterrent is saying. He does'nt say anything lightly.


----------



## shaheenmissile

The Deterrent said:


> @Bratva @shaheenmissile @HRK
> 
> I believe you guys are jumping the gun, the Shaheen series has a correction system for adjusting the course, but side-mounted thrusters have little to do with it. In my opinion these are retro-thrusters, u*sed for separating the warhead from the ReV* after course is corrected above atmosphere.
> 
> Both Shaheen-I & II neither follow a depressed trajectory, nor they have maneuverable ReVs.


You don't need thrusters for warhead separation. Earlier Missiles had no thrusters on RV but Warhead did separate.


----------



## Bratva

shaheenmissile said:


> You don't need thrusters for warhead separation. Earlier Missiles had no thrusters on RV but Warhead did separate.



How do you think Post-Separation Altitude Correction system works? thrusters are for PSAC not for MARV


----------



## shaheenmissile

Bratva said:


> How do you think Post-Separation Altitude Correction system works? thrusters are for PSAC not for MARV


No..the word MARV is used in a broader sense.
If the RV can change altitude in a non Ballistic way using own power not Kinetic energy given by Booster stages,it is MARV.
Now MARV can have other additional capabilities,or just that.


----------



## shaheenmissile

This is Minuteman III third stage or PSRE (Post separation Rocket Engine) as it is called.







Its Job is to correct all trajectory errors,before Jettisoning the Warhead at just the correct angle towards the target. The Warhead after separating from this stage has no means of changing directions.
Shaheen series has something similar.


This is how "MARV" works. All it does is to change Trajectory and make corrections. After the Warhead has been released,other than spinning,it cannot do anything else as it will enter atmosphere and any sudden changes in direction will be too much force for materials to take at that speed.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## The Deterrent

shaheenmissile said:


> View attachment 207083
> Thats ghauri launch...Goes striaight up.
> 
> This is Sjhaheen - 3 launch and after 40 seconds its al,ost Parallel to earth. How do you explain this @The Deterrent Deterrent?


I mentioned only Shaheen-I & II, not III.
Besides, Ghauri's motor has lesser thrust compared to its mass, so it has to gain some momentum before the pitch maneuver begins.


shaheenmissile said:


> When an RV has the ability to change direction,it is called MARV. Simple.
> Course correction after stage septation does Involve RV changing direction,hence MARV.


Err, not exactly. The RV has a fixed amount of fuel, and Shaheen-I & II might have only enough to correct their trajectory, not change it any further. 
The ability to conduct effective unpredictable maneuvers and later correct the course to hit the target is considered as MaRV.


shaheenmissile said:


> You don't need thrusters for warhead separation. Earlier Missiles had no thrusters on RV but Warhead did separate.


Yes you do, you always do. The ReV is composed of the warhead & correction system, which are separated via thrusters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RAMPAGE

The Deterrent said:


> I mentioned only Shaheen-I & II, not III.
> Besides, Ghauri's motor has lesser thrust compared to its mass, so it has to gain some momentum before the pitch maneuver begins.
> 
> Err, not exactly. The RV has a fixed amount of fuel, and Shaheen-I & II might have only enough to correct their trajectory, not change it any further.
> The ability to conduct effective unpredictable maneuvers and later correct the course to hit the target is considered as MaRV.
> 
> Yes you do, you always do. The ReV is composed of the warhead & correction system, which are separated via thrusters.


 To do it effectively, yes. It is possible to do so without thrusters.


----------



## RAMPAGE

@The Deterrent is spot on. The kind of manuevering it can perform, depends on the pressure and availability of fuel both of which are dependent on RV's design and bending of the plumbing.

A comparatively less complicated design capable of thrust vectoring.






The RV we just saw is an advanced one and if we can design it then i think that developing a true MARV might not be very difficult.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nomi007

Two great Pakistani nuclear physicists Dr. Ishfaq and Dr. Munir are credited among the persons who are called as "father of the Pakistan's atomic bomb project who worked hard on a Project started by Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan in 1968.

L to R: Dr. Munir Ahmad Khan, Chairman PAEC, Mr. Ghulam Ishaq Khan, then Minister for Finance and Coordination, General K.M. Arif, Vice Chief of Army Staff, and Dr. Ishfaq Ahmad, Member (Technical), PAEC. Circa 1983-84. Site: Kirana Hills during the cold tests.


----------



## RAMPAGE

nomi007 said:


> Two great Pakistani nuclear physicists Dr. Ishfaq and Dr. Munir are credited among the persons who are called as "father of the Pakistan's atomic bomb project who worked hard on a Project started by Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan in 1968.
> 
> L to R: Dr. Munir Ahmad Khan, Chairman PAEC, Mr. Ghulam Ishaq Khan, then Minister for Finance and Coordination, General K.M. Arif, Vice Chief of Army Staff, and Dr. Ishfaq Ahmad, Member (Technical), PAEC. Circa 1983-84. Site: Kirana Hills during the cold tests.


Delete your post. It has nothing to do with this thread.


----------



## zahidiqbalrana

What is the meaning if ballistic.... or what is the main differences between cruise and ballistic missile?


----------



## Shahbaz Afzaal

very nice info


----------



## Muhammad Jabran

We are now becoming more and more powerful


----------



## batmannow

Any news on TIPU project ?


----------



## Reichsmarschall

Either our allies are so generous that not only they send us these systems and then regularly send updates / upgrades , or our scientists are hard at work.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Any chance of near future extended range test of next version missile test?

Any gift before 23rd March...?


----------



## aziqbal

This is one one section of Pakistan military industry which a lot of people miss and so does the media 

Pakistan ballistic and nuclear capable missile capability 

This is the final equaliser in war, Pakistan has a very strong missile programme and huge advantage in ballistics over many country's 

Then to have the nukes just adds to the power, Turkey is strong but they don't have a ballistics programme as robust as Pakistan


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Yes, Pakistan armed forces are moving right ahead in Missile tech as well nuclear tech.
Moreover, Forces are paying attention towards traditional fire power.
InshaAllah soon more developments will come out.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dr Shaheryar

But we need to have equal potent SAM system for deterrence ad defense.


----------



## BattlespaceX



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Major Sam

BattlespaceX said:


>



Great work, the background music is from which song/movie ?


----------



## Incog_nito

Why not we discuss this possibility?

The threats are growing from Western Borders of Pakistan which includes Afghanistan - Iran - Tajikistan and other ex-soviet countries. India is out there since 2 decades or so and now have build a good capacity to attack Pakistan.

Pakistan needs to upgrades it's older Short Range and Medium range missiles with Baidu.
Also, buy on cheap price Chinese Short and Medium range missiles along with ICBMs which China is phasing out. Upgrade them with latest avionics and sensors.

Try to make use of Short and Medium range missiles - especially those which are really old ones. To target hideouts of Indian elements all across the Western side of Pakistan.

This will help Pakistan to give a very straight message to India and to the world. Moreover, this will help and enable Pakistan to start up R&D with China-Turkey over newer and much smarter missiles in the class of:
Short
Medium
Long Range


----------



## ghazi52




----------



## Ch abdullah

Now the pakistan require ICBM to make more strong its defence


----------



## Fabricio Tavares

Great videos and images.


----------



## HRK



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Dr Shaheryar

HRK said:


> View attachment 434945



Why not concerned over India making Agni 5 and receiving sensitive info and material from Israel. But then again its USA, so we can expect the usual bullshit.


----------



## Max

Dr Shaheryar said:


> Why not concerned over India making Agni 5 and receiving sensitive info and material from Israel. But then again its USA, so we can expect the usual bullshit.



its from 1995.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dr Shaheryar

Doesn't matter what date. With US it's the same.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Safriz

Nasr Missile 10 seconds Burnout time.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/882834258418688000


----------



## Bratva

*Shaheen II Official range has been declared up to 1500 KM. *

Source: The announcer in March 23 Parade


----------



## Maarkhoor

Bratva said:


> *Shaheen II Official range has been declared up to 1500 KM. *
> 
> Source: The announcer in March 23 Parade


Do you believe ?


----------



## Bratva

Maarkhoor said:


> Do you believe ?



2000 KM was stated in 2004 until 2015. Why a sudden downtick in range?


----------



## Hassan Guy

At the parade we saw the Shaheen 1A, Shaheen 2 and Shaheen 3.

Does that mean all the other ballistic missiles are being phased out?


----------



## Ultima Thule

Hassan Guy said:


> At the parade we saw the Shaheen 1A, Shaheen 2 and Shaheen 3.
> 
> Does that mean all the other ballistic missiles are being phased out?


I think All liquid fueled missile (GHAURI SERIES) are phased out just my 2 cent @Hassan Guy


----------



## Maarkhoor

Bratva said:


> 2000 KM was stated in 2004 until 2015. Why a sudden downtick in range?


First announced 2300 then 2000 and now 1500 kms only....

When you need to test new longer range missiles and don't want to make other countries panic just reduce the range of old missile (for media consumption) and test longer range missiles. Simple

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GumNaam

The Deterrent said:


> *Pakistani Ballistic Missiles : How much Pakistani are they?*


10%... oh no I think it is 50%, or maybe 90%?

IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MUCH PAKISTANI THEY THEY ARE BECAUSE THAT NASTY BLACKASS THAT THEY WILL EXPLODE INSIDE WILL BE 100% indian!!!


----------



## Readerdefence

Hi may be by the passage of the time missile ranges get decreased while lying in Arsenal
Thank you


----------



## Safriz

Hassan Guy said:


> At the parade we saw the Shaheen 1A, Shaheen 2 and Shaheen 3.
> 
> Does that mean all the other ballistic missiles are being phased out?


No they show different set of Majailz every year.



Bratva said:


> 2000 KM was stated in 2004 until 2015. Why a sudden downtick in range?


Likewise the announcer said that Raad ALCM can be launched from "All" PAF jets. Obviously that includes Thunder .



Readerdefence said:


> Hi may be by the passage of the time missile ranges get decreased while lying in Arsenal
> Thank you


No, it may have to do with changes in the intended trajectory .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## syed_yusuf

pakistanipower said:


> I think All liquid fueled missile (GHAURI SERIES) are phased out just my 2 cent @Hassan Guy


I think shorter range 290 km missile is still in use


----------



## Ultima Thule

syed_yusuf said:


> I think shorter range 290 km missile is still in use


you mean Gaznavi bro its solid fuel design
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghaznavi_(missile)


----------



## syed_yusuf

pakistanipower said:


> you mean Gaznavi bro its solid fuel design
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghaznavi_(missile)


Yes indeed


----------



## The Deterrent

Hassan Guy said:


> At the parade we saw the Shaheen 1A, Shaheen 2 and Shaheen 3.
> 
> Does that mean all the other ballistic missiles are being phased out?


No, everything except Hatf-1/2 (the old SRBMs of the 90s) is in service.



GumNaam said:


> 10%... oh no I think it is 50%, or maybe 90%?
> 
> IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MUCH PAKISTANI THEY THEY ARE BECAUSE THAT NASTY BLACKASS THAT THEY WILL EXPLODE INSIDE WILL BE 100% indian!!!


Thank you for your valuable input. I'm sure the author appreciates your generosity to reiterate his point.


----------



## GumNaam

The Deterrent said:


> No, everything except Hatf-1/2 (the old SRBMs of the 90s) is in service.
> 
> 
> Thank you for your valuable input. I'm sure the author appreciates the your generosity to reiterate his point.


I could care less about his point!


----------



## The Deterrent

GumNaam said:


> I could care less about his point!


----------



## Maarkhoor

@The Deterrent 
Why there is no more test of Shaheen III and Ababeel I?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

Maarkhoor said:


> @The Deterrent
> Why there is no more test of Shaheen III and Ababeel I?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ARSENAL6

US Air Force's National Air and Space Intelligence Center estimates that as of June 2017 no missiles were operationally deployed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Air_and_Space_Intelligence_Center

USA, A country that genocide one race enslaved another, only country to use atom bomb on a nation that surrendered, invaded many couturiers on false narrative, made so many terrorist groups support a terrorist Country (Israel) take blind eye on white supremacy terrorist groups within its country. as regime chage policy, back holocaust and genocide , all happened in the space of USA exsistance.


Mind your own business USA


----------



## Hasnat Khalid

how we are going to deal with such threat whereas we still not test ICBM 
Is not the right time now to test Taimoor


----------



## ghazi52



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ghazi52

1962: Rehbar-I was the Pakistan's first rocket launched into outer space by the Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPARCO), on 7 June 1962

Rehbar-I was the Solid fuel rocket with a combination of 2 different rocket stages. Various Rehbar Sounding rocket models were launched 200 times between 1961 and 1972. There were only 2 rocket launches of Rehbar XXIII and Rehbar XXIV with a Nike-Cajun launch vehicle, all in April 1972.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sunny4pak

History of Weapons Ep 02 | Pakistan's Missiles & History of Missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arsalan

Pakistan test fires surface to surface ballistic missile, Ghaznavi


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1166955085924130816
Night training launch


----------



## Sunny4pak

*Pakistan's Ghaznavi Missile Night Capability Test Aug 2019.*


----------



## Fawadqasim1

Arsalan said:


> Pakistan test fires surface to surface ballistic missile, Ghaznavi
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1166955085924130816
> Night training launch


Apparently a very clean solid propellant
Burn seems impressive.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

ghazi52 said:


>


WTH. Shaheen 3, Nasr and RA'AD are still in development? Haven't we deployed them in 27 Feb? @Dazzler @Oscar


----------



## Dazzler

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> WTH. Shaheen 3, Nasr and RA'AD are still in development? Haven't we deployed them in 27 Feb? @Dazzler @Oscar



Deployed and being improved. 

Where do you think Raad 2 come from?


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Dazzler said:


> Deployed and being improved.
> 
> Where do you think Raad 2 come from?


Ok. Here Ghauri 3 is also written? Is Ghauri 3 really being developed?


----------



## Dazzler

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Ok. Here Ghauri 3 is also written? Is Ghauri 3 really being developed?



Who knows


----------



## SABRE

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Ok. Here Ghauri 3 is also written? Is Ghauri 3 really being developed?



Ghauri-III was cancelled by General Musharaf around 2004.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Ok. Here Ghauri 3 is also written? Is Ghauri 3 really being developed?


Its might be old info graph, Pakistan armed forces had have canceled Ghauri-3 in favor of solid fueled Shaheen series of Ballistic missiles @Syed Hammad Ahmed

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ghazi52



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SQ8

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> WTH. Shaheen 3, Nasr and RA'AD are still in development? Haven't we deployed them in 27 Feb? @Dazzler @Oscar


We used H-2s and REK kits(both tactical stand off systems).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ghazi52

__ https://www.facebook.com/


----------



## Zarvan

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1172121526897926145

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1172122226642038784
@Path-Finder @Arsalan @Horus @Rafi

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SABRE

Zarvan said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1172121526897926145
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1172122226642038784
> @Path-Finder @Arsalan @Horus @Rafi



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

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TeesraIndiotHunter

Zarvan said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1172121526897926145
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1172122226642038784
> @Path-Finder @Arsalan @Horus @Rafi



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

Move on.....


----------



## Fawadqasim1

SABRE said:


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


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



Zarvan said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1172121526897926145
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1172122226642038784
> @Path-Finder @Arsalan @Horus @Rafi


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

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SABRE

Fawadqasim1 said:


> Sir
> We can't hit Israel with confidence using Shaheen III the bmds of Israel is such (and is improving and strengthening by the day) that a few Shaheen III hits may fail to achieve the objective thats why our warheads needs more speed ,maneuverability
> And penetration aids hence we need heavy lifters which can carry heavier loads to higher apogees so it's not just the range that heavy lifters increase it's the apogee the speed the number of penetration aids etc
> Which helps in penetrating dense bmd environment like that of Israel. So
> 
> 
> sir aap ke muh mein ghee shakkar lekin mujhe in khabroon par zyada aitbar naheen
> We absolutely need heavy lifters we can't survive long without them.



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


----------



## Fawadqasim1

SABRE said:


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


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

Shaheen III has already 3000 km range

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SABRE

Fawadqasim1 said:


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



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

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

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

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

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

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Fawadqasim1

SABRE said:


> Fine , I'll get back to my Ph.D. thesis on Pakistan's Ballistic Missile Programme.
> 
> BTW, when you say heavy-lifter what exactly do you intend to lift with it? Generally, heavy-lift rockets are intended for developing space vehicles. In principle, all rocket science is virtually the same but distinction is maintained when developing an SLV and long-range BM. If you intend for it to launch satellites in future then it would fall into completely different domain. Given the modest size of our space programme, which is likely to remain modest in the foreseeable future, heavy-lift launch vehicles (HLLV) and super heavy-lift launch vehicle (SHLLV) are definitely not required.
> 
> If you mean to launch a megaton (MT) warhead, something that we do not have or have not demonstrated, then it does not necessarily require heavy-lift unless you intend to have something like Soviet R-36 capable of launching MIRV with 10 warheads, each with 18-25MT yield, and up to 40 penetration aids. Even if we have acquired an untested MT capability I doubt it would be anywhere close to 18-25MT.
> 
> *BTW, American Jupiter medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) with 2400km range and Thor intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) with 1800-3700km range were capable of launching W49 warheads with over 1MT yield.*
> 
> If we want to launch our current 12-20KT warheads or even develop a warhead with 1MT to 1.5MT yield (that's the best we would be aiming for) and design something like R36 (even if to a lesser extent) to launch them then tell it is not an overkill? It will kill us economically/financially long before it kills the enemy. Under idol circumstances, especially the availability of resources, the economical thing would be to have a BM capable of launching MIRV with three 1MT-1.5MT warheads with a range 3500-3700km (this includes the weight of the warheads and fuel mass). It would serve as a good deterrent against all threats, whether regional or extra-regional. But I think we are a long way from that as well.


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

Sorry for my clumsy posts I am posting via mobile


----------



## Ultima Thule

Fawadqasim1 said:


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


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

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

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fawadqasim1

pakistanipower said:


> Solid fuel doesn't carry much weight (warhead/ ECM/Mylar balloon type countermeasures) as compare to Liquid fuel missile and Liquid fuel have ISp then solid fuel but Liquid fuel BM has own drawbacks like they are able to fire at will, takes hours to fuel and handling liquid fuel are highly dangerous even for highly trained people, and both solid and liquid fuel BMs has same reentry/orbital speed Mach-20+
> and what is the Shaheen series of BMs, isn't solid fuel BMs with mobile TELs (TRANSPORT ERECTOR LAUNCHER)
> 
> No we don't need heavy lifter BMs, there are other ways to evade ABM system like BOOST GLIDE VEHICLE/Maneuvering warheads/ depressed trajectories etc etc @Fawadqasim1


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

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

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


----------



## Ultima Thule

Fawadqasim1 said:


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


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

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



Fawadqasim1 said:


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


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


Fawadqasim1 said:


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


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


----------



## Fawadqasim1

pakistanipower said:


> solid fuel quick reaction BMs whereas liquid fuel are not, India will not buying THAAD or S-500 but S-400 which able to shoot down on Short ranged BMs like Ghaznavi/ Shaheen 1 but for MEDIUM RANGE BMs like Shaheen 2/3 and Ghauri 1/2 its useless against MRBM, our TELs already have off road capability, and you do need lots of research of BMs tech you can't make MRBM will reach a apogee of ICBM
> Ababeel has range of 2200 km less than Shaheen-2 range how can it need ICBM launcher,
> Ababeel has 2 stages 1st solid fuel (quick reaction time) and 2nd liquid fueled to lift heavier reentry bus and our Military strategic planner know better what are they doing
> 
> And MIRV and Mylar balloon decoys are old tech (since 70s) but latest Boost glide vehicle, Maneuvering Warheads/ Depress trajectories system are cheaper to develop as compare to MIRV/decoys as well as harder to intercept as compare to MIRV @Fawadqasim1
> 
> 
> India is/will not buying these ABM system any time soon @Fawadqasim1
> 
> you don't what are you talking about, Boost glide system when last stages of BMs eject warheads in orbits, warheads just only enter higher atmosphere and suddenly with a slight retro rocket thrust (small) they skip back to orbit again and drop on targets at different trajectories, Hence ABM guideness computer will not predict next projected trajectory preciously/accurately
> and depress trajectories means less apogee for example SHAHEEN-1 apogee is lets assume 750 km but depress trajectory Shaheen BMs has 400 km apogee hence less reaction time for the enemy to shoot down the warhead,
> 
> 
> pakistanipower said:
> 
> 
> 
> This tech is used in Russian TOPOL ICBM version with slightly less range as
> 
> 
> 
> compare to Conventional TOPOL ICBM @Fawadqasim1
Click to expand...

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

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

Who is talking about an icbm


----------



## Ultima Thule

Fawadqasim1 said:


> 1) we were talking about deterring Israel primarily.
> 2) how can you know india won't buy thaad and s500
> 3) why is the range reduced in the case of topol ICBM for a depressed trajectory
> because it requires more energy
> 4) Boost glide vehicle will require more r&d, money and time than 2M dia stages and still it will just be an rv not a versatile missile system which can be used to carry multiple types of rvs e.g mirv bus marv decoy bus to saturate enemy defences etc. So
> 
> 5) just compare ababeel's length with shaheen ii and iii if you can you will understand what i am talking about
> 
> Who is talking about an icbm


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


----------



## Fawadqasim1

pakistanipower said:


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


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


----------



## Ultima Thule

Fawadqasim1 said:


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


*LISTEN CAREFULLY BRO WE DON"T HAVE A DIRECT THREATS FROM ISRAEL ( ATTACK FROM ISRAEL FROM ANY KIND) ISRAEL HAS LEAST PRIORITY FOR PAKISTANI ARMED FORCES @Fawadqasim1 
*
First give me the length estimate of ABABEEL then i will compare to Shaheen-2 @Fawadqasim1


----------



## Fawadqasim1

pakistanipower said:


> *LISTEN CAREFULLY BRO WE DON"T HAVE A DIRECT THREATS FROM ISRAEL ( ATTACK FROM ISRAEL FROM ANY KIND) ISRAEL HAS LEAST PRIORITY FOR PAKISTANI ARMED FORCES @Fawadqasim1
> *
> First give me the length estimate of ABABEEL then i will compare to Shaheen-2 @Fawadqasim1


That's what I used to think( and how foolish I was) but we are facing a direct threat from indo Israeli nexuses.
Roughly 22m

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SABRE

Some of the things said in the past few posts do have their merit. But we need to distinguish between what's doable and what's desirable. I have a long comment for these posts but instead of going into long argument let me just come down to the conclusion: Israel may or may not be a threat but it certainly is not the priority. I don't see Pakistan developing Israel specific system for a while (a long while). A longer-range BM (most likely an IRBM but certainly not an ICBM) may be on the cards featuring BMD evading technologies but even if such a development is able to cover Israel in future it would mainly be developed keeping India in mind. Additionally, an overtly anti-Israel missile development will complicate matters for us both on the strategic and political levels. We are in no position to open up an extra-regional front. Our current focus should, however, remain on developing robust second-strike capability able to overcome Indian BMD systems. Anything, on the contrary, would certainly be surprising to me.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

Fawadqasim1 said:


> That's what I used to think( and how foolish I was) but we are facing a direct threat from indo Israeli nexuses.
> Roughly 22m


Wow and where do you get your this 22 M figures, its almost have a length of Minuteman/TOPOL ICBM 70+ feet and didn't reach a intercontinental Range and have a range of only 2200 km , and with a improved Shaheen-2/3 and Ghauri-2 engines (i assume) its have too much low THRUST TO WEIGHT RATIO FOR EVEN LIFTOFF @Fawadqasim1 
And FIRST PRIORITIES OF PAKISTAN ARMED FORCES IS/WILL BE TO OVERCOME INDIAN ABMs SYSTEMS NOT ISRAELI ABMs SYSTEMS @Fawadqasim1


----------



## YeBeWarned

Fawadqasim1 said:


> Shaheen III has already 3000 km range



2750 KM ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SABRE

pakistanipower said:


> Wow and where do you get your this 22 M figures, its almost have a length of Minuteman/TOPOL ICBM 70+ feet and didn't reach a intercontinental Range and have a range of only 2200 km , and with a improved Shaheen-2/3 and Ghauri-2 engines (i assume) its have too much low THRUST TO WEIGHT RATIO FOR EVEN LIFTOFF @Fawadqasim1
> And FIRST PRIORITIES OF PAKISTAN ARMED FORCES IS/WILL BE TO OVERCOME INDIAN ABMs SYSTEMS NOT ISRAELI ABMs SYSTEMS @Fawadqasim1



I think the figure is from the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) or similar source. NTI's estimation is 23M for Ababeel. Though I don't know how they reached this conclusion. Minuteman-III is 18.2M.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fawadqasim1

whatever rocks your boat sires
وَمَا عَلَيۡنَآ إِلَّا ٱلۡبَلَـٰغُ ٱلۡمُبِينُ
"And our duty is only to convey plainly (the Message)."

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Fawadqasim1 said:


> whatever rocks your boat sires
> وَمَا عَلَيۡنَآ إِلَّا ٱلۡبَلَـٰغُ ٱلۡمُبِينُ
> "And our duty is only to convey plainly (the Message)."


your message didn't make any sense sires @Fawadqasim1


----------



## Suff Shikan

Zarvan said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1172121526897926145
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1172122226642038784
> @Path-Finder @Arsalan @Horus @Rafi


Testing ICBM will only put more and more pressure on Pakistan, Pakistan can easily hit Israel and India both to their last corner with present declared assets. It will give boost to doubts and suspicions, their is no need for ICBM test.


----------



## Fawadqasim1

Suff Shikan said:


> Testing ICBM will only put more and more pressure on Pakistan, Pakistan can easily hit Israel and India both to their last corner with present declared assets. It will give boost to doubts and suspicions, their is no need for ICBM test.


closing one eyes to a clear and present threat. It will actually increase our bargaining chips.


----------



## Suff Shikan

Fawadqasim1 said:


> closing one eyes to a clear and present threat. It will actually increase our bargaining chips.


Its not about closing eyes, its about wht we are aiming at. Clear and present threat is India or Israel.


----------



## Fawadqasim1

Suff Shikan said:


> Its not about closing eyes, its about wht we are aiming at. Clear and present threat is India or Israel.


Both now


----------



## Suff Shikan

Fawadqasim1 said:


> Both now


Indeed, I used 'or' by mistake, must have used 'and'


----------



## Affanakad0t.

Will it be any missile test before September 30th?


----------



## Fawadqasim1

Affanakad0t. said:


> Will it be any missile test before September 30th?


No because there's no such programme


----------



## Ultima Thule

Fawadqasim1 said:


> closing one eyes to a clear and present threat. It will actually increase our bargaining chips.


What clear and present threats from Israel would for Pakistan please explain this @Fawadqasim1



Fawadqasim1 said:


> Both now


 As a threat perceptions,First priority India and then Israel for Pakistani armed forces @Fawadqasim1


----------



## Sunny4pak

*An Insight to NASR Missile Pakistan*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HRK

As no suitable thread is available I am putting this information in this thread for the sake of record 

Following link give information about all the launch from Sonmiani launch facility since 1962 in chronological order
http://www.astronautix.com/s/sonmiani.html

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Sunny4pak

*Pakistan & India Missile Program*


----------



## Sunny4pak

*Pakistan Missile System Specifications (Must Watch till the end)*





@Windjammer @Imran Khan @fatman17 @Trailer23 @Quwa

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sunny4pak

*Pakistan & Indian Missile Ranges Comparison*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Syed_Adeel




----------



## denel

can we agree to avoid using the quasi media youtube bogus rubbish please. It is pathetic.

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## fatman17

None of Pakistan’s warheads are thought to be deployed but kept in central storage, most in the southern parts of the country. More warheads are in production. Detailed overview here.


----------



## Syed_Adeel

fatman17 said:


> None of Pakistan’s warheads are thought to be deployed but kept in central storage, most in the southern parts of the country. More warheads are in production. Detailed overview here.
> View attachment 611138



Dear These are just estimates. No Country declares the real numbers and No 3rd party could know them in real.


----------



## fatman17

Syed_Adeel said:


> Dear These are just estimates. No Country declares the real numbers and No 3rd party could know them in real.



it says Estimated on the graph. where is the issue please?


----------



## SABRE

fatman17 said:


> None of Pakistan’s warheads are thought to be deployed but kept in central storage, most in the southern parts of the country. More warheads are in production. Detailed overview here.
> View attachment 611138



The demated storage of the missiles and warheads has been a stated policy of Pakistan since 1998-1999. Most of the nuclear weapons being stored in the Southern parts of the country is pure speculation.


----------



## fatman17

*Overview*

* Last Updated: April, 2017 
*
Pakistan embarked on a nuclear weapons program in the early 1970s, following its defeat and break-up in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971. Islamabad regards nuclear weapons and their delivery systems as essential to offsetting its conventional inferiority against India and maintaining the South Asian balance of power. The technological achievement associated with nuclear weapons and ballistic and cruise missiles is also closely tied to Pakistan's post-colonial identity as the first Muslim country to have acquired such capabilities. There is no reliable open source information to suggest that Pakistan has biological or chemical weapons.

* Nuclear*
In the mid-1970s, Pakistan took the uranium enrichment route to acquiring a nuclear weapons capability under the direction of A.Q. Khan. By the mid-1980s, Pakistan had a clandestine uranium enrichment facility, and Khan would later assert that the country had acquired the capability to assemble a first-generation nuclear device as early as 1984. [1] Shortly after India's testing series in May 1998, Islamabad conducted its own nuclear tests and declared itself a nuclear weapon state. Pakistan is not a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The country has also refused to sign the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), and has blocked consensus at the Conference on Disarmament on starting negotiations for a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT). [2] According to estimates by the International Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM) in 2013, Pakistan has accumulated a stockpile of 3 ± 1.2 tons of highly enriched uranium (HEU) and 0.15 ± 0.05 tons of weapon-grade plutonium. [3] Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is increasing, but the scope and pace of this growth is uncertain. In September 2016, satellite imagery depicted Pakistan constructing a new uranium enrichment facility. [4] Open source estimates predict that Pakistan will have between 220-250 warheads by the year 2025. [5] In October 2015, Pakistan’s foreign secretary, Aizaz Chaudhry, confirmed for the first time that Pakistan had developed low-yield, “tactical” nuclear weapons. This has sparked concerns among the international community about the potentially destabilizing effects of such weapons. [6]

* Biological*
Pakistan signed the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) in April 1972 and ratified it in 1974. In 2015, the US State Department found that there was no indication that Pakistan was out of compliance with its BTWC commitments. [7] Like many states, Pakistan possesses significant dual-use biotechnology capabilities, including well-equipped laboratories and trained scientists.

* Chemical*
Pakistan signed the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) in 1993 and ratified the treaty in 1997. In December 2013, the Pakistani representative to the OPCW stated that "Pakistan remains opposed to the use of chemical weapons by anyone under any circumstances, and finds it totally unacceptable.” [8] Pakistan is not listed in the US State Department's Condition 10 (C) Report. [9]

* Missile*
Pakistan is developing both solid- and liquid-fueled ballistic missiles, based extensively on foreign systems, including those from China and North Korea. Nuclear-capable ballistic missiles inducted by Pakistan into its strategic forces include the Ghaznavi (Hatf-3, range 400km); the Shaheen-I (Hatf-4, range 750 km); and the Ghauri (Hatf-5, range 1,200 km). [10] Missiles under development include the Shaheen-II (Hatf-6, range 2,000 km); the Shaheen-IA (an upgraded Hatf-4, range 2,500-3,000km); and the Nasr (Hatf-9, range 60 km), a short-range missile with the stated capability to "add deterrence value… at shorter ranges." [11] Pakistan successfully tested the Abdali (Hatf-2, range 180 km) on 15 February 2013, and Shaheen I on 10 April 2013, reportedly improving the missile’s design and increasing range to 900 km. [12] In November 2013 and September 2014 the Army successfully test fired the Hatf-9 (Nasr) BSRBM. [13] Pakistan last tested the Ghaznavi in April and May 2014, the Shaheen-II in Novermber 2014, and the Ghauri in April 2015. On 9 March 2015, Islamabad test-fired a Shaheen-III MRBM with a range of 2,750 km. [14] Pakistan successfully tested another Shaheen-III missile on 11 December 2015. [15] In January 2017, Pakistan successfully tested a MRBM missile called the Abadeel reportedly capable of delivering a payload 2,200 km. [16]

In addition to ballistic missiles, cruise missiles are increasingly part of Pakistan's nuclear delivery plans, including the ground-launched Babur (Hatf-7, range 600 km), and the air-launched Ra'ad (Hatf-8, range 350 km). Pakistan last tested the Ra’ad ALCM in February 2015, but has not tested the Barbur since 2012. [17] [18] Pakistan has also claimed that it is working on sea-based second-strike capabilities. [19] In January 2017, Pakistan tested a submarine launched cruise missile intended to serve in this capacity. [20]

*Sources:*
[1] "Interview with Abdul Qadeer Khan," _The News_ (Islamabad), 30 May 1998, http://nuclearweaponarchive.org.
[2] "Pakistan Rules Out Test Ban Treaty Endorsement," _Global Security Newswire_, 19 June 2009, www.nti.org; and "Statement by Ambassador Zamir Akram, Permanent Representative of Pakistan at the Conference on Disarmament (CD)," Geneva, _Reaching Critical Will,_ 27 August 2009, www.reachingcriticalwill.org.
[3] “Countries: Pakistan,” _International Panel on Fissile Materials_, 3 February 2013, www.fissilematerials.org.
[4] Karl Dewey and Charlie Cartwright, “Satellite imagery suggests Pakistan building uranium enrichment facility,” _IHS Jane’s Defense Weekly,_ 16 September 2016. www.janes.com
[5] “Weapons: Who Has What at a Glance,” _Arms Control Association_, June 2014, www.armscontrol.org; Hans M. Kristensen and Robert S. Norris, "Pakistan's Nuclear Forces, 2015," _Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists_, November 2015, www.thebulletin.org.
[6] Mohammad Ilyas Khan, “Why Pakistan Is Opening Up Over Its Nuclear Program,” _BBC,_ 21 October 2015, www.bbc.com
[7] US Department of State, "2015 Report on Adherence to and Compliance with Arms Control, Nonproliferation, and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments," 5 June 2015, www.state.gov.
[8] Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, "Statement by H.E. Mr. Moazzam Ahmad Khan- Permanent Representative of the OPCW to Pakistan, at the Eighteenth Session of the Conference of the States Parties," C-18/NAT.9, 3 December 2013, www.opcw.org.
[9] US Department of State, "Compliance with the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction Condition 10(C) Report," 15 April 2015, www.state.gov.
[10] Hans M. Kristensen and Robert S. Norris, "Pakistan's Nuclear Forces, 2011," _Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists_, Vol. 67 No. 4, July/August 2011, http://bos.sagepub.com; "Pakistan Successfully Test-Fires Hatf-IV Ballistic Missile," _DAWN_ (Pakistan), 25 April 2012, www.dawn.com; "Press Release No PR98/2012-ISPR," _Inter Services Public Relations,_ 25 April 2012, www.ispr.gov.pk.
[11] "Press Release No PR94/2011-ISPR," _Inter Services Public Relations,_ 19 April 2011, www.ispr.gov.pk; "Pakistan Successfully Test-Fires Hatf-IV Ballistic Missile," _DAWN_ (Pakistan), 25 April 2012, www.dawn.com; "Pak Tests Nuclear-Capable Short Range Hatf-IX Missile," _Indian Express_, 29 May 2012, www.indianexpress.com.
[12] “Pakistan Successfully Test Fires Hatf-II Abdali Missile,” _Geo TV News_, 15 February 2013, www.geo.tv; “Pakistan Conducts Successful Launch of Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile,” _BBC Worldwide Monitoring_, 10 April 2013, www.lexisnexis.com.
[13] Shakil Shaikh, “Pakistan Test-Fires Hatf-IX,” _The News International_, 20 April 2011; "Pakistan test-fires short range missile Hatf IX," _The Times of India_, 26 September 2014, http://timesofindia.com.
[14] "Shaheen 3 Missile Test," _Inter Services Public Relations,_ Press Release No PR61/2015-ISPR, 9 March 2015, www.ispr.gov.pk; Hans M. Kristensen and Robert S. Norris, "Pakistan's Nuclear Forces, 2015," _Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists_, November 2015, www.thebulletin.org.
[15] “Pakistan Test-Fires Its Most Advanced Nuclear-Capable Ballistic Missile,” _RT,_ 11 December 2015, www.rt.com.
[16] Inter Services Public Relations, Press Release, 24 January 2017, www.ispr.gov.pk.
[17] “Press Release No PR16/2016-ISPR,” _Inter Services Public Relations,_ 19 January 2016, www.ispr.gov.pk.
[18] Hans M. Kristensen and Robert S. Norris, "Pakistan's Nuclear Forces, 2011," _Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists_, Vol. 67 No. 4, July/August 2011, http://bos.sagepub.com; Rahul Udoshi and James Hardy, “Pakistan Tests Ra’ad ALCM,” _Jane’s 360,_ 2 February 2015, www.janes.com.
[19] Franz-Stefan Gady, “Does Pakistan Have a Sea-Based Second Strike Capability?” _The Diplomat,_ 13 March 2015, www.thediplomat.com.
[20] Joshua Berlinger, “South Asia's nuclear one-upmanship ramps up with Pakistan missile test,” _CNN,_ 10 January 2017, www.cnn.com

*Related Downloads*

Pakistan Treaty Membership
Pakistan Missile Chronology
Pakistan Nuclear Chronology
Pakistan Chemical Chronology

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## babrum

my question is how much time is required for enrichment of weapons grade uranium


----------



## Safriz

HRK said:


> As no suitable thread is available I am putting this information in this thread for the sake of record
> 
> Following link give information about all the launch from Sonmiani launch facility since 1962 in chronological order
> http://www.astronautix.com/s/sonmiani.html


Their data is neither accurate nor reliable. Been following them for a while.



babrum said:


> my question is how much time is required for enrichment of weapons grade uranium


Depends on your method and available resources.
For nuclear weapons the Uranium required had to be 90% enriched at least.
A single centrifuge only makes a few grams of weapons grade uranium per year.
And for that reason centrifuge farms are used. Hundreds or may be thousands of centrifuge working together, each making a small quantity and commulativity making kilo's of weapons grade material.
The cost of building such centrifuge farms and ruining them is too high. 
That's why the final cost of a single strategic yield nuclear warhead is anywhere from half a billion USD and more.
There was a research program launched by General Musharraf in which the idea was to ditch the centrifuges and shift the fissile material via laser. The project was making enough progress to rattle US intelligence circles who were very concerned.
If succeeded then the time and money required to produce Weapons grade fissile material will reduce by many magnitudes.



fatman17 said:


> None of Pakistan’s warheads are thought to be deployed but kept in central storage, most in the southern parts of the country. More warheads are in production. Detailed overview here.
> View attachment 611138


25 to 27 warheads are deployed at any given time. The rest are in storage.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

fatman17 said:


> None of Pakistan’s warheads are thought to be deployed but kept in central storage, most in the southern parts of the country. More warheads are in production. Detailed overview here.
> View attachment 611138


Hmmm the mentioned warheads of Pakistan, India and Israel I have been seeing from years
BTW, Aren't NASRs always hot?


----------



## Sine Nomine

شاھین میزایل said:


> The project was making enough progress to rattle US intelligence circles who were very concerned.
> If succeeded then the time and money required to produce Weapons grade fissile material will reduce by many magnitudes.


It continued or was put in cold storage?
And how they come to knew about that?


----------



## Safriz

Sine Nomine said:


> It continued or was put in cold storage?
> And how they come to knew about that?


Search wiki leaks. It was mentioned in their internal emails.
They got the hint after Pakistan started sending doctorate students abroad for laser isotope separation thesis.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## The Accountant

شاھین میزایل said:


> Their data is neither accurate nor reliable. Been following them for a while.
> 
> 
> Depends on your method and available resources.
> For nuclear weapons the Uranium required had to be 90% enriched at least.
> A single centrifuge only makes a few grams of weapons grade uranium per year.
> And for that reason centrifuge farms are used. Hundreds or may be thousands of centrifuge working together, each making a small quantity and commulativity making kilo's of weapons grade material.
> The cost of building such centrifuge farms and ruining them is too high.
> That's why the final cost of a single strategic yield nuclear warhead is anywhere from half a billion USD and more.
> There was a research program launched by General Musharraf in which the idea was to ditch the centrifuges and shift the fissile material via laser. The project was making enough progress to rattle US intelligence circles who were very concerned.
> If succeeded then the time and money required to produce Weapons grade fissile material will reduce by many magnitudes.
> 
> 
> 25 to 27 warheads are deployed at any given time. The rest are in storage.


What about plotonium based warheads ? How much cost and time they need? And how much do we have plotnium based facilities


----------



## Safriz

The Accountant said:


> What about plotonium based warheads ? How much cost and time they need? And how much do we have plotnium based facilities


I don't have exact figures but plutonium is artificial and made on reactors, and separation of required isotopes is easier compared to Uranium where you sift through tons of natural ore.
But plutonium has another problem. The actual weapon core made of plutonium creates tiny bubbles due to production of Helium as a result of radioactive decay. Over a period of many years these bubbles increase and reduce blast yield of the weapon. Hence the weapon has to be dismantled, plutonium core melted and Re-cast and weapon rebuilt. That adds to the cost and complexity.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SABRE

شاھین میزایل said:


> I don't have exact figures but plutonium is artificial and made on reactors, and separation of required isotopes is easier compared to Uranium where you sift through tons of natural ore.
> But plutonium has another problem. The actual weapon core made of plutonium creates tiny bubbles due to production of Helium as a result of radioactive decay. Over a period of many years these bubbles increase and reduce blast yield of the weapon. Hence the weapon has to be dismantled, plutonium core melted and Re-cast and weapon rebuilt. That adds to the cost and complexity.



"Artificial" is not the correct term for Plutonium (Pu). It is a "man-made" or more correctly a "byproduct" acquired from spent nuclear fuel that is essentially Uranium (U). This means that to acquire 'Pu' you must have 'U' fuel cycle in place, including the sifting "through tons of natural ore."

With regards to escaping radioactive particles, which cause the decay of plutonium, reflective materials like Beryllium, Vanadium, Aluminium, and a few other metal types are placed in the plutonium pit. However, there is no efficient way around the bubbles filled with helium in the pit. This should cause degradation in the weapons' performance but depending on the quality of the pit it may require these bubbles from several decades to a century before it is taken apart and re-prepared.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Safriz

SABRE said:


> "Artificial" is not the correct term for Plutonium (Pu). It is a "man-made" or more correctly a "byproduct" acquired from spent nuclear fuel that is essentially Uranium (U). This means that to acquire 'Pu' you must have 'U' fuel cycle in place, including the sifting "through tons of natural ore."
> 
> With regards to escaping radioactive particles, which cause the decay of plutonium, reflective materials like Beryllium, Vanadium, Aluminium, and a few other metal types are placed in the plutonium pit. However, there is no efficient way around the bubbles filled with helium in the pit. This should cause degradation in the weapons' performance but depending on the quality of the pit it may require these bubbles from several decades to a century before it is taken apart and re-prepared.


Yes...
Since plutonium is a relatively new material unlike uranium and also not available to everyone unlike uranium, there haven't been much study of the material to understand certain long term characteristics such as helium bubbling.
There haven't been 100 years for any of the Plutonium based nuclear weapon anywhere in the world as the first one was made in 1945 and all in the storage today we're we'e in the 69s and later.
Understanding of those characteristics are based on simulations run on supercomputers and a country like Pakistan doesn't have that luxury.


----------



## Pax Ottomana

Hey guys, is plutonium an absolute requirement for thermonuclear (hydrogen bomb) weapons? Or can they be manufactured with U235 alone? Thanks.


----------



## Safriz

Vord said:


> Hey guys, is plutonium an absolute requirement for thermonuclear (hydrogen bomb) weapons? Or can they be manufactured with U235 alone? Thanks.


Can be , but those H-bombs will be the size of a house

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fawadqasim1

Safriz said:


> Can be , but those H-bombs will be the size of a house





Vord said:


> Hey guys, is plutonium an absolute requirement for thermonuclear (hydrogen bomb) weapons? Or can they be manufactured with U235 alone? Thanks.


Chinese initial tn weapons were u235 based

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ghazi52

*Pakistan completes preparations for Missile Test*

13 April 1999

ISLAMABAD: As all preparations to test-fire the indigenously-built missiles with superior technology to give a matching response to India have been completed, the final decision will be taken in the Defence Committee of the Cabinet (DCC) to be held later this week.

"The DCC will meet towards the end this week, as Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif would return to the capital either on Wednesday evening or Thursday," Foreign Minister Sartaj Aziz said on Monday.

Aziz said the DCC meeting would be convened soon to finalise Pakistan's response to India in the context of its test-firing of Agni-II. "We are preparing agenda of the meeting, as this meeting will not only weigh all the available options, but will also consider all aspects before test-firing one or two missiles - Shaheen or Ghauri," said a senior official.

Though different government agencies and departments are rapidly doing their work, teams of Pakistani scientists have been despatched to different locations to do the spade work if the government decides to test-fire either the Shaheen-I, Shaheen-II or Ghauri-II.

There are two schools of thought: First, to test-fire Shaheen or Ghauri as a tit-for-tat response and there should be no delay; and two, Pakistan should not show any haste in giving matching response as test-firing by Agni-II can be responded at any appropriate time, if not at present.

"Pakistan will take the final decision after considering all the aspects, though India's test-firing of Agni-II is not only ill-timed but it is a setback to peace efforts in South Asia," said Foreign Minister Aziz.

Some sources say that the Americans have asked Pakistan not to respond to India in the same fashion, though Pakistan has not given any response to this "silent diplomacy" by the Americans. "We will take an independent decision, taking into consideration our security concerns," said a senior official.

However, several Pakistani officials believe that the United States has not reacted sharply to India's Agni-II test-fire, though New Delhi has shown teeth to the Americans by firing a missile with a range of 2,000 km plus.

Presently, Pakistani leadership, defence managers, and the scientist community have evolved consensus to evaluate the situation, though Pakistan is left with no other option but to give a matching response to India.

Some experts say that Agni-II firing by India was more than a "failure" as India had not issued any technical details, flight of the missile, its target and where it actually landed. "These details are vital in test-firing, and since India has concealed this information even after 36 hours of the test-firing of Agni-II, we believe that it was a failed test."

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Amavous

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1370783344879824897







__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1370786640117915649

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Mohamed Bin Tughlaq

Safriz said:


> Can be , but those H-bombs will be the size of a house



No man. It doesn't have to be the size of a house if you can purify it at higher levels


----------



## Ali_Baba

Amavous said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1370783344879824897
> 
> View attachment 724300
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1370786640117915649



Good to see some many variants of CMs in PAF service when you consider how India is struggling in this space.

Keep it up!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abid123

Pakistan should create a ballistic missile similiar to the Russian Iskander.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Why no missile test for past so many months ?


----------



## Aesterix

Zarvan said:


> Why no missile test for past so many months ?


Imran khan happened.


----------



## Genghis khan1

India is building secret base in Mauritius. Time for 7000 km range ICBM.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sine Nomine

FAmbMkBhadarkumar said:


> Not sure chinese will share ICBM tech with Pakistan or even let North Korea do that same.
> Chinese interests ends with providing or facilitating Pakistan with MRBM tech.


And Why we would need that from PRC or NK?
Almost three decades ago Pakistan purchased M-11 and Nodong-1 with complete tooling,since than Pakistan has been working itself and has produced scores of new Arsenal for dealing enemies,if needed Pakistan would make an ICBM.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

FAmbMkBhadarkumar said:


> Not sure chinese will share ICBM tech with Pakistan or even let North Korea do that same.
> Chinese interests ends with providing or facilitating Pakistan with MRBM tech.


Please keep that repetitive condescending Indian C—apa of thinking Pakistanis aren’t capable to yourself.

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Sine Nomine

SQ8 said:


> Please keep that repetitive condescending Indian C—apa of thinking Pakistanis aren’t capable to yourself.


I hope and pray that this arrogance and delusion of grandeur fully seeps into, not only heart and minds of enemy populace but also into those sitting in south block.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Genghis khan1

As far as technical knowledge for rocket propulsion Space program (or ICBM) is concerned, I know for a fact young SPD engineers were in China on 2 to 3 years detachment during mussraff time. Getting Hand on experience with powerful rocket engines.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Battlion25

The Accountant said:


> What about plotonium based warheads ? How much cost and time they need? And how much do we have plotnium based facilities



Could be an option but little bit expensive but none the less a realistic option


----------



## Abid123

Pakistan needs to develop a missile similiar to Russia's Iskander.


----------



## Riz

No new missile since decade , did we enrolled mijjiles projects ?? Seriously


----------



## farooqbhai007

Riz said:


> No new missile since decade , did we enrolled mijjiles projects ?? Seriously


Yes that part is rather interesting , no new projects revealed yet the infrastructure size and locations of NDC have increased quite significantly ,

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Super Falcon

Pakistan is already in process to develop hypersonic missile based on DF 17


----------



## Abid123

Super Falcon said:


> Pakistan is already in process to develop hypersonic missile based on DF 17


What is your source?


----------



## emotionless_teenage

Abid123 said:


> What is your source?


It's just him throwing rumors around so people would watch his low effort YouTube channel instead of getting a real job


----------



## Desert Mouse

Colleague, of course I agree with you, but let's not judge others, let the guy have fun and wind up views, let's be smarter than him ....


----------

