• Monday, December 9, 2019

Pak tests Babar cruise missile

Discussion in 'Pakistan Strategic Forces' started by Zeeshan S., Mar 21, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Comanche

    Comanche FULL MEMBER

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    57
    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    but what if china and pakistn both launch missiles on india and take out all its reactors and nuclear labs and then let all the indans barbecue under hydrogen bombs of china and nuclear bombs or pakistan without letting them the chance to retaliate and blow up indians nuclear subs they mihgt get from russia .
     
  2. Bull

    Bull ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    6,850
    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2006
    Ratings:
    +0 / 274 / -0
    Why wud u do that????
     
  3. A.Rahman

    A.Rahman ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    4,724
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Ratings:
    +0 / 465 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Canada
    maybe president had a bad dream and he cant find this teddy?:crazy2:
     
  4. Bull

    Bull ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    6,850
    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2006
    Ratings:
    +0 / 274 / -0
    :embarassed:
     
  5. Neo

    Neo RETIRED

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,929 / -0
    Firing cruise missile Babar

    A COLUMN BY MAJ. GEN. (RETD) JAMSHED AYAZ KHAN

    Pakistan carried out its second Test Firing of its Cruise Missile on 21 March 2006 amidst celebrations. The people do keep on asking about this missile, the reason why it was fired and why is it so important for Pakistan.

    Missiles are very different from guns and rockets as Missiles are properly guided to the target through very technical guidance system, while guns and rockets are free flight and once they are fired there is no way to correct their movement during flight. It all depends upon the initial data that you have fed into the gun or rocket. That is why their accuracy is not pinpoint and they are called Area Weapons. Pakistan and India have been developing their missiles under a systematic programme and therefore there has been test fire regularly. Pakistan has been experimenting with Ballistic Missiles of different ranges and has been quite successful in these tests.

    The various Ballistic Missiles that Pakistan has developed and test fired can be equipped with normal conventional war-heads or nuclear war-heads and ranges they achieve depend on the thrust that is given to them at the time of firing.
    It is certainly a matter of pride that Pakistan has been able to develop its own missile system and is quite advance in this field among the region and in the developing world. But these Ballistic Missiles can be located by the "enemy" and if the "enemy" can locate a missile in time and the "enemy" has the capability, he can destroy it in the air through the use of Anti Ballistic Missiles before they land at the designated target and destroy it.

    Pakistan's defence experts and scientific community have now come up with an answer to this, by developing a Cruise Missile called Babar. This type of missile is what one would call Intelligent missile. It clings to the ground to avoid detection by the enemy's radars and satellites. Obviously when the "enemy" is unable to detect these missiles, it can not take any counter measures against them.

    Cruise Missile Babar was tested at the range of 500 kilometers and proved its accuracy as a point target through the use of its sophisticated guidance system wherein that data of the target was fed into the guidance system of the missile and through out its flights, command signals were sent to the missile continuously to keep it on track and guide it to the designated target. Lately, India has been toying with the idea of acquiring the anti ballistic missiles system from the United States to counter the Ballistic Missile capabilities of its "enemies". This " Anti Ballistic Missile System" is also called Ballistic Missile Shield which is a misnomer as this is not a shield but a system where on coming missiles are identified, tracked and destroyed by the anti ballistic missile weapon system which includes detection and tracking of the incoming missile before its ultimate destruction. This system has not proved to be that effective and does not have hundred percent reliability. It cannot destroy all incoming missile fired by the "enemy". Fifty to seventy percent hit probability is taken as satisfactory, this means out of hundred missiles fired, then up to seventy would be destroyed but thirty would still be able to penetrate through. In order to defend each vulnerable area (VA) like, Delhi, Bombay and Chennai etc India would have to deploy many batteries to defend these VAs against Ballistic Missiles, yet some of the Ballistic Missiles will be able to get through.

    Pakistan's development of Cruise Missile system is a real feather in the cap of Pakistani scientists and defence experts and Anti Ballistic Missile System (ballistic missile system) that Indians are trying to acquire from United States would become redundant as they would not be able to detect the Cruise Missiles through the use of their radar and satellite system. The world at large and Indians in particular were not expecting Pakistan to develop this sophisticated missile and that is why during the Indo-Pak talks on giving prior information about testing of missiles India did not include the Cruise Missile, even though India has developed Cruise Missile called "Ramos" with the help of Russians. This shows India did not expect Pakistan to develop Cruise Missile. In the next round of talks, India will possibly ask for the inclusion of cruise missiles in this agreement.

    The cruise missile "Babar" fired by Pakistan on 21 March 2006 is the army and air force version. If a seaborne cruise missile system is developed, it will have far reaching effects on Pakistan's minimum credible defence deterrence capabilities. If mounted on the "state of art" submarines that Pakistan possess, then these submarines could be hidden anywhere around India and no Indian city would remain safe.

    It would be certainly appropriate to appreciate the efforts of scientific community (old and new) and defence establishment who have made the Pakistani nation proud. Hats off to all who played a role in this project. Special mention must be made of the authorities in National Command Authority (NCA) and Strategic Planning Division (SDP) for motivating various scientific organisations in such a way that they now complement each other rather than being jealous of each other's achievements.
     
  6. Munir

    Munir PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Messages:
    2,756
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Ratings:
    +11 / 2,604 / -1
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Germany
    The article pretty much sums up the facts. It was a suprise that Pakistan developed it (Indian answer that it is a copy ot given... Fact is that it is being build developed in Pakistan and since when do Indian whine about how we got it if we have to look at their paintjobs that are not accepted by there own forces). It will mean that Indian have to recalculate and accept the fact that reaction will be there and from all sides and elements. It will be hard to counter even with most modern equipment a impossible job.

    Let us face the facts:

    El Khaled... Accepted internal and probably export
    El Talla... Accepted and exported to Irac
    K8... Accepted and exported to numerous airforces
    Mushaq... Accepted and exported to numerous airforces
    Fc1... Runnign pretty good and will be a export hit
    Babur... Shaked the arena

    We know Indians...

    Arjun failed even basic tests...
    Druv is not even internal success... Not even exported with Israeli help... Those given to Nepal failed.
    Brahmos... took decades and its is still Yakhunt with Russian assistance... High speed is nice but it will never be good enough to be accurate
    LCA... Never ending story... Never starting reality... It is antique at the moment

    Sofar the Indians puffed and blowed the whole world but the failed to be a superpower. Even with imported weapons.
     
  7. sword9

    sword9 PROFESSIONAL

    Messages:
    586
    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2006
    Ratings:
    +0 / 22 / -0
    By all means...
    A chinese copy of the T-90II/MBT-2000 - not home made.
    http://www.sinodefence.com/army/tank/type90.asp
    A slightly up-armoured M-113 APC. Suits the US fine to buy affordable non-offensive for the Iraqis. BTW APCs are phased out in most mechanised armies for that matter, ICVs are the in thing. Indian makes licenced copies of the BMP ICV series.
    K-8 is 25% PAC stake rest 75% is Chinese. It came rather late since the pAF was using Mig-15s as trainers for quite some time. FYI the IAF has its own home made HJT-16 Kiran MkI an intermediate jet trainer way back in 1964. The HJT-16/HJT-32 Kiran Mk IIs are slated to be replaced by the HJT-36 AJT and the Hawk AJT is being used as an an interim measure.
    Nothing exceptional, we too had our HJT-2 way back in 1951. Oh BTW read below about what your military has to say about the Mushak.
    http://www.pakdef.info/pakmilitary/army/armyaviation/oldaviator5.html
    How does the JF-17 run without an engine?
    Grant you that.
    We don't accept substandard stuff the two major problems with the Arjun were the power source and fire control. We do not accept anything less than 90% hit one the move most nations accept 70%.

    The Vijayant (Vickers) had far more problems than the Arjun and it served well through 1971 till date.
    Now, that is denying the devil his due. The Dhruv has proved itself, so you can keep flapping.
    Another case of being stingy where credit is due. So typically jingoistic.
    What about the JF-17? we both started at the same time i.e 1985...we are in the same boat.
    We are way ahead of most nations, wheather you like it or not. But since you are so stingy with granting credit where its due, it does not matter what you think.
     
  8. Munir

    Munir PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Messages:
    2,756
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Ratings:
    +11 / 2,604 / -1
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Germany
    In reality everything is based on something. Whether stolen or bought. I agree that chinese input without Ukrain engine and weapons it would be not possible. But atleast they put things together. The tank is perfect for the environment. It has very decent price-quality ratio. And maybe something totallyt new fior Indian products... It is actually ordered. Maybe export. And it has Pakistani BMS. I haven't seen super duper Indian versions. Except the terrible paintjobs and totally unrealistic approach of bigger and heavier while the bridges are not suited at all.

    It is atleast exported. And used by Pakistani forces. So it is cheap and well suited. About Indian product... Do you actually export those? If they were that good then Irac would have those. Lets keep the conclusion simple. Like Kalashnikov there are Indian variants but the buyers don't like the Indian products. Whether it is Druv or Insas. Whether it is LCA or Arjun. At the same time there are export orders. I agree the reality is that it is not 100% pakistani invention but who cares.

    Those old trainers were still there to consume the hours while money was earned by selling K8 to other countries. About old planes. Like IAF uses mig21 in this century as their main fighter... Who cares about trainers that PAF still uses? Mig15 are cheap and easy to maintain. Just like the T37 had their upgrade. Why throwing away? FYI the Kiran is a crappy plane. You did see the cockpit? About AJT. I touched one. I saw the cockpit. I talked to engineers and pilots... I saw display. It is nice trainer but not comparable with a Hawk. Why else would India order so many Hawks? And the Hawk is outdated at the moment. Look at L15 or T50. AJT is now developed and already antique.

    My military? Puke. Mushaq is a basic trainer and not JF17 or J10. I don;t see Indians building same category. Do know how often it is exported. If it is that bad then why?

    As good as LCA without Kaveri? Atleast both China and Pak are not shouting over the hills that they will produce high tech engine...

    Actually the Indians started testing after Musharraf said that Arjun would not do well... And if your standards are high then why are you producing pathetic products that are developed over decades and still not accepted. Maybe changing standards of management?


    The Vijayant (Vickers) had far more problems than the Arjun and it served well through 1971 till date.

    Sure. Compare with worser.. I rather look at the best.

    Now, that is denying the devil his due. The Dhruv has proved itself, so you can keep flapping.


    It proved to be a hit. zero real export. 100% Eurocopter or other foreign parts. And it was never grounded... Do I have to say that I actually sat in one druv?

    Another case of being stingy where credit is due. So typically jingoistic.

    Whatever

    What about the JF-17? we both started at the same time i.e 1985...we are in the same boat.

    And what about latest variant. Let us compare costs and end product. Who wins two hands down?

    We are way ahead of most nations, wheather you like it or not. But since you are so stingy with granting credit where its due, it does not matter what you think.

    We? I like it? I just say that your words are so loud but tghe results are so low... Keep importing weapons.
    Nothing exceptional, we too had our HJT-2 way back in 1951. Oh BTW read below about what your military has to say about the Mushak.
    http://www.pakdef.info/pakmilitary/army/armyaviation/oldaviator5.html

    How does the JF-17 run without an engine?

    As good as LCA without Kaveri? Atleast both China and Pak are not shouting over the hills that they will produce high tech engine...

    Grant you that.

    We don't accept substandard stuff the two major problems with the Arjun were the power source and fire control. We do not accept anything less than 90% hit one the move most nations accept 70%.

    Actually the Indians started testing after Musharraf said that Arjun would not do well... And if your standards are high tehn why are you producing pathetic products that are developed over decades and still not accepted. Maybe changing standards of management?


    The Vijayant (Vickers) had far more problems than the Arjun and it served well through 1971 till date.

    Sure. Compare with worser.. I rather look at the best.

    Now, that is denying the devil his due. The Dhruv has proved itself, so you can keep flapping.


    It proved to be a hit. zero real export. 100% Eurocopter or other foreign parts. And it was never grounded... Do I have to say that I actually sat in one druv?

    Another case of being stingy where credit is due. So typically jingoistic.

    Whatever

    What about the JF-17? we both started at the same time i.e 1985...we are in the same boat.

    And what about latest variant. Let us compare costs and end product. Who wins two hands down?

    We are way ahead of most nations, wheather you like it or not. But since you are so stingy with granting credit where its due, it does not matter what you think.

    We? I like it? I just say that your words are so loud but tghe results are so low... Keep importing weapons. India is a nice country but somehow the intrnet posters think that it is the greatest and superpower... Keep feeding the 400 million poor. You will get more praise for that.

    [/QUOTE]

    Nothing exceptional, we too had our HJT-2 way back in 1951. Oh BTW read below about what your military has to say about the Mushak.
    http://www.pakdef.info/pakmilitary/army/armyaviation/oldaviator5.html

    How does the JF-17 run without an engine?

    As good as LCA without Kaveri? Atleast both China and Pak are not shouting over the hills that they will produce high tech engine...

    Grant you that.

    We don't accept substandard stuff the two major problems with the Arjun were the power source and fire control. We do not accept anything less than 90% hit one the move most nations accept 70%.

    Actually the Indians started testing after Musharraf said that Arjun would not do well... And if your standards are high tehn why are you producing pathetic products that are developed over decades and still not accepted. Maybe changing standards of management?


    The Vijayant (Vickers) had far more problems than the Arjun and it served well through 1971 till date.

    Sure. Compare with worser.. I rather look at the best.

    Now, that is denying the devil his due. The Dhruv has proved itself, so you can keep flapping.


    It proved to be a hit. zero real export. 100% Eurocopter or other foreign parts. And it was never grounded... Do I have to say that I actually sat in one druv?

    Another case of being stingy where credit is due. So typically jingoistic.

    Whatever

    What about the JF-17? we both started at the same time i.e 1985...we are in the same boat.

    And what about latest variant. Let us compare costs and end product. Who wins two hands down?

    We are way ahead of most nations, wheather you like it or not. But since you are so stingy with granting credit where its due, it does not matter what you think.

    We? I like it? I just say that your words are so loud but tghe results are so low... Keep importing weapons.
    [/QUOTE]

    India is a nice country but somehow the intrnet posters think that it is the greatest and superpower... Keep feeding the 400 million poor. You will get more praise for that.


    Give your best. Above reaction was not even worth to react.
     
  9. Sid

    Sid SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    619
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Ratings:
    +0 / 22 / -0
    Bottom line is, Pakistan's defence industry motto is, 'why re-invent the wheel' which doesn't seem to be the case for the Indian side.

    In an ego boasting environment, the Indian mentality would make sense, but when practicality is taken in to consideration, the Pakistanis take the credit.
     
  10. sigatoka

    sigatoka SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,013
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2005
    Ratings:
    +0 / 29 / -0
    The BMP series was a great idea to move infantry at the same speed as mechanised tanks and artillery while having enough firepower to destroy oppossing armour. Unfortunately it has had a terrible record, whether with the Arab armies most notably Egypt against Israel or Iraq in the Gulf War.

    The performance has been so dissappointing that in fact it should make people question the very core of this concept. Therefore until 3rd world armies are able to demonstrate the effectiveness of ICV's, they should stick to a combination of Heavy battle tanks with APC's.
     
  11. sword9

    sword9 PROFESSIONAL

    Messages:
    586
    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2006
    Ratings:
    +0 / 22 / -0
    You sort of double posted your answers and confused the post, I hope it wasn't internet rage,...something like road rage, it is rather stressfull.

    At least you agreed that it all the porducts you mentioned are chinese copies assembled, we too do that kind of stuff but don't call them "home made". We have been making licensed copies of T-55, T-72s, BMP-1/2.

    The reason Pakistan exports these weapons systems (with the exception of the T-90II/ MBT 2000) is because they follow the PLA policy of arm sale business. I wonder how much of the arm sales profit will go to China (for the sale of the T-90II and K-8). India on the other hand does not sell weapon systems if made under TOT for coptright reasons, whatever is our own design, we sell.

    As for your criticism, they are always welcome, infact it helps to improve performance.
    Sid,
    We have no problem with TOT products. But you will agree that the "internet generals" sort of blow it out of protortion.
    Sigatoka,
    The poor usage of the weapon system by arab armies against a coalition of the first world is unfair performance, without any air cover. The changes that the ICV brings to the battle field are immence and give a commander flexibility in use of his resources.
     
  12. Neo

    Neo RETIRED

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,929 / -0
    This thread is getting better and better.
    Great debate Munir and Sword! :thumbsup:
     
  13. Munir

    Munir PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Messages:
    2,756
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Ratings:
    +11 / 2,604 / -1
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Germany
    Ok, second try.

    Both Pakistan and India are absorbing medium tech. The fact is that India is 5 times bigger. That means more cash, more brains, more market impact and more as we can see more then 5 times bigger ego.

    Like India Pakistan does buying, importing and reproducing. The difference is that Pakistan does a better job. Let us compare Mirages 5/3 in Pakistan with Mig21 Bis. Same history. While India has troubles in training pilots (wrong trainers) and more difficulty with producing spare parts or maintenance (hence the accidents) Pakistan did achieve better results with a more complex machine, the mirage 3/5. India did upgrade it. Pakistan did the same. Now the Mig is just a point defence fighter which has not much range or value in todays long range a2a combat scenario. At the same time the Mirage is still a pretty potent plane. It has achieved ROSE upgrades. It has added AIM9L, and probably BVR. Probably cause PAF never shows latest. We have never seen nukes under the belly of F16A or Fantan but we know the reality. We have never seen BVR but there is something we do not know.

    Result. Pak upgraded Mirages are better program if compared to Mig21 Bison.
     
  14. Munir

    Munir PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Messages:
    2,756
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Ratings:
    +11 / 2,604 / -1
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Germany
    Then we go to cruisemissiles. The Brahmos is 100% yakhunt but a degraded version was delivered to India to avoind legal matters. Since then it is all Russian assistance. It is nice for short reaction time anti ship but don't tell me you can fly mach 3 at 3 feet like the much disrespected Indian ok Keymag a la Harry was telling us. Speed versus agility, accuracy and range... On the other hand Pakistan evolved without major supplier. It received gifts from the USA (Tomahawk) and did all buying parts or building own parts. Hence a shock to India which not seems to look for an answer. So Indian Brahmos against Pakistani Babur...

    We can say same thing about Indian Arjun against Pakistani El Khaled. Your point about Arjun not accepted cause India raised the quality level. Well, I did not know that making less heavier tank was a raise of quality but a given standard looking at the terrain. And Pakistan did raise level of Fc1... We see how it evolved nicely. Same time we don't hear much about LCA. So Paperplane Fc1 against superduper LCA...

    I don't see India building something efficient as Anza 2. And all those nice weapons like Druv... Eurocopter written all over it. How come Indians blaim China copying Eurocopter and Dauphin while India is doing atleast the same?

    Let say it simple. All copy but it is:

    1. China
    2. Pakistan
    3. India

    But does that mean India is bad? Nopes. But not as good as its neighbours. Which not only follow its steps withing weeks (like nuclear bombs) but can do with less money and time (Babur).
     
  15. Neo

    Neo RETIRED

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,929 / -0
    Like to comment on this.
    When Kalam was asked by the BJP government how long it would take to detonate the bomb, he asked for one month.
    Pakistani reply came a week after the Indian tests, which indeed demonstrates our capability and readiness to come up with an answer and reveils a tip of our secrecy around black projects.
    There's got to be more, just wait till India tests something new...;)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.