• Monday, June 1, 2020

The curious case of Nasr's terminal guidance

Discussion in 'Pakistan Strategic Forces' started by CriticalThought, Feb 2, 2019.

  1. HRK

    HRK PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    10,915
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Ratings:
    +81 / 26,071 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    dear I understand the scenario and the purpose of Nasr missile and I am not questing these .... the question which is disturbing me is not related to the role of Nasr or its conceptual use but it is exclusively related to NASR as a system demonstrating certain flight characteristic and capabilities in which something is missing (or not known publicly) which is reducing the range.

    As it is known that Nasr does not follow pure ballistic trajectory it is somewhat quasi ballistic missile, some of the 400mm artillery rockets which follow pure ballistic trajectories are having range in 250+ Km while Indian Pharar missile with almost the same dimensions as Nasr have 150+ KM range, so something is different in NASR and I want to understand that difference.

    Either
    - Its warhead weight
    - Or early flight manoeuvres to mask the position of launch battery and related C&C systems

    (NOTE: these are just my guess I may be totally wrong)
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  2. CriticalThought

    CriticalThought SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    6,085
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2016
    Ratings:
    +20 / 5,908 / -6
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Australia
    There is also the burn rate to consider - the rate at which it burns fuel. Higher rate means higher acceleration.
     
  3. HRK

    HRK PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    10,915
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Ratings:
    +81 / 26,071 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    IF we assume difference in burn rate than it mean deficiencies either in fuel or with rocket motor of NASR which I think should be at least at par if not better with other 400 mm rockets systems rather inefficient than those
     
  4. CriticalThought

    CriticalThought SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    6,085
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2016
    Ratings:
    +20 / 5,908 / -6
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Australia
    An increased burn rate to gain higher acceleration is an advantage not a deficiency.
     
  5. HRK

    HRK PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    10,915
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Ratings:
    +81 / 26,071 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    I know what I was saying that IF the difference of Nasr range as compare to other 400 mm systems is because of burn rate than it mean Nasr have less efficient fule and rocket motor as compare to other systems.
     
  6. CriticalThought

    CriticalThought SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    6,085
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2016
    Ratings:
    +20 / 5,908 / -6
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Australia
    Assuming they achieve the same acceleration as Nasr.
     
  7. Safriz

    Safriz ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    20,373
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Ratings:
    +6 / 9,760 / -7
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Burn rate has significantly improved from earlier versions
    The missile does not carry as much fuel as other 400mm rockets.
    It is evident from the picture I posted
    The fuel compartment only goes to less than half of missile length

    images (3).jpeg
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  8. HRK

    HRK PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    10,915
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Ratings:
    +81 / 26,071 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    acceleration would be a dependent variable depending on the total mass of the system and force applied, if we think on these line than Nasr is heavier either
    - because of heavy payload, assuming mass of fuel, subsystems and body of nasr equivalent to any other 400 mm system
    - Or its payload is in range of 200-250kg same as other 400 mm systems but Nasr is heavy due additional subsystems or heavy body frame
     
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2019
  9. CriticalThought

    CriticalThought SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    6,085
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2016
    Ratings:
    +20 / 5,908 / -6
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Australia
    If ratio of fuel to total weight is constant between Nasr and other systems, and Nasr achieves same or better acceleration, then we can reliably say there are no inefficiencies with burn rate.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  10. HRK

    HRK PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    10,915
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Ratings:
    +81 / 26,071 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    which leave us only with the possibility that Nasr is heavier than other systems
     
  11. CriticalThought

    CriticalThought SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    6,085
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2016
    Ratings:
    +20 / 5,908 / -6
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Australia
    I wonder what those extra components could be.
     
  12. Safriz

    Safriz ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    20,373
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Ratings:
    +6 / 9,760 / -7
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    A nuclear weapon is always heavier than conventional
    Specially the type nasr is using, matt need additional subsystems

    The Americans had W66 warhead which was intended for similar purposes To produce large x-ray and neutron burst
    The W66 was 18 inches in maximal diameter and 35 inches long, with a weight of approximately 150 pounds.
    That's 45 cm dia and about 70 kilos
    But to reach such refined designs the Americans carried out 1000 nuclear test explosions. Pakistani design cannot be that refined and has to be larger. I am assuming it's longer and heavier . Spread out longitudinal instead of circumference
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  13. HRK

    HRK PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    10,915
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Ratings:
    +81 / 26,071 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Abdali missile was able to carry 500 Kg nuclear warhead (that was publicly known least heavy nuclear warhead before Nasr) upto 180 Km with different dimensions (0.5 m diameter and 9+ m height)

    If we assume after the progression of so many years in Nuclear technology Pakistan succeed to develop sub kilo-newton warhead in 200-250 kg range than it should not reduce the range of Nasr, but if its heavier than this range then the question arise how much heavier the warhead is .... ?? is it in range of 250-300 kg or above ....?? which is impacting the range of Nasr as much as 1/3 of the range of other 400 mm systems

    @The Deterrent ..... Missile wali Sarkar kuch kashf ..... kuch kiramaat ....
    logical assessment....
     
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2019
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  14. maxpayne

    maxpayne FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,204
    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2011
    Ratings:
    +3 / 762 / -2
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    China
    Ring Laser Gyros..
     
  15. Fawad alam

    Fawad alam FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    625
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2014
    Ratings:
    +1 / 905 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    If Nasr is highly maneuverable and accurate at high speed than why not convert him as SAM?