Anatomy of the Hatf-VIII Ra’ad Air Launched Cruise Missile

[Bratva]

When was the first time? I guess there was no pod video in Jan 2015 test?

 

[Nigel Farrage]

I thought that's an animation. isn't it?

BTW the same "Pod video" also appears in every test, I just checked 2011 test,it has the exact same "Pod video ".
2016 one is different.

 

[Bratva]

I thought that's an animation. isn't it?

low quality camera with which they shoot the video makes it look like an animation

 

[Mysticbuddy]

Likewise Russia exported Brahmos to India which is clear violation of MTCR. But.
زبردست کا ٹھینگا سر پہ.

It is not . It has been limited to 290 km. Anyways it's a member now.

 

[Quwa]

You are right. We don't need to prove anything, or rake anyone through coals. Being called traitor is always interesting. Shows you the mind of others. I guess one finds their own faults in others? There is just too many of you nice gentlemen here for me to leave the forum for anyone being a pest. These are just opinions.



Quwa, for your consumption, lets just say that the strategic chapter of JF17 is Not to be Disclosed.

With all due respect to your father for raising a fine young man, no amount of compensation can be given for service. Service is a choice, and we are proud of it. We are not offended. Over our lives and careers we have seen many naysayers. However, as I have repeated many times, what i say is my opinion, and I respect everyone else's. I can at times disagree with people's opinion based on my experience (bias you can also call it), and in that case we can only agree to disagree. However, I refuse to undertake childish arguments with anyone who just are pushing some arm chair agenda without having any knowledge of air war and our world.

Thank you for your response sir. I have no disrespect for those serve, just as I have no disrespect for the humanitarians who go into dangerous areas of the world to help their fellow human beings, or the political activists who stand up against tyranny with nothing but their words, only to get hit by aggression (with no means to materially respond).

But my conversation with you isn't about you as an individual or even the ACM as an individual, but of the PAF as an agency of the Pakistani state. It is an institution at the end of the day, and I believe that an institution must be accountable to those it serves. If it is indeed the case that civilian experts (actual ones) are being roped in to provide guidance or to keep tabs on the JF-17 or other programs, then great, I don't need to know the details. I was just worried that this was not considered or forgotten in your earlier statements.

 

[SQ8]

Finally glad that we have a thread that reflects what both admin and think tank always hoped discussions on PDF to be like. Great work @JamD @amardeep mishra

 

[ConcealCarry]

Really? so the doctrine should come from public, like the ones on this forum? Comon

The policy and the doctrine of the paf must be determined by the public and govt and not by paf.

No! common man has no right to ask an institution what they are doing, specially when the nature of their work is confidential and revolves around country's defence. These institutions have tasks given by government according to it's priorities, importance and fund availability, and that is what they do. they are responsible and accountable to their master (the government) not the public.

IF any one make a thread and ask every one what is nescom doing and its employees just getting paid for doing nothing more than 30+ thousand . and under the umberella of nescom there are four companies what they are doing we have not seen any new weapons in the past few year since 2011 just for the shaheen 3 more 50,000 employee working? is this a joke?

missiles and tanks hang pretty low and don't interfere with the flaps. 2D pics don't tell the full story

A tweet is not fact either, sorry. Fact would be a picture showing Ra'ad on the JF-17.


I have written:
"Ra’ad is so wide that it will interfere with the landing gear/ventral fin of the JF-17 and possibly any weapon system mounted on the hardpoint next to it."
View attachment 314426

Also please note, on an aircraft, structures don't have to physically touch to cause interference. Simply putting something in front of something can cause destructive flutter.

that is unprofessional and uncalled for. If you want people to respect you, you need to respect other regardless what their opinions are.

This is a public forum and it's beauty comes from different points of view, if everyone was saying the same thing, it wouldn't be interesting. A teams strength comes from difference of opinion, from conflict that leads to new thinking. Because you come from a military background, where contradicting seniors and colleagues is generally avoided as it is equated to indiscipline, you probably don't appreciate it much. But in private organizations it is encouraged and appreciated.

Why is the baby still crying?



My dear, a lot of good points are lost in acerbity, attacks and sarcasm. Sometimes we are forced to keep information from you here, and after all, most of you are civilian enthusiasts only. Regarding accountability, i now reserve my comment. If any of you can really wake up at at 4AM to reach a flight line or ready room, you can come make us accountable.

This part is so lame, so by your logic, if you hire a night guard who is supposed to perform guard duty while you sleep, just because he is awake all night he is not accountable to you for what he does at night?

. If any of you can really wake up at at 4AM to reach a flight line or ready room, you can come make us accountable.

Don't equate objective critique to negativity. If you can't comprehend what he says, then it's your fault not his.

haters gonna hate. but what i find strange is that "other" think thereaare right against someone whos actually been in the airforce. i dont like sh!t stiring but i have a weird feeling he got rejected by the airforce. i have never seen a pakistani been so negative against the airfore of his own country. sure its good to be critical but when one compares cars to planes as an arguement in a smooth tone then theres a problem. personally put him in your ignore list and move on. no need to lose your sleep over it, just ignore them and share what you want where necessary and its happy days. and if they quote you wont know they they are being ignored and you wont se their messages. end of really.

I think its straight forward 300 km limit from point of flight to point of impact.

it depends on how 290 km is defined. the rocket motor will last till 290 km and it will glide for no more than 10 km. thats why mtcr missiles will be at 290 km max


thats been delayed. visit the dassault rafale thread in the indian section. they talk a lot about specifics. im suprised you have not been there to have a little peak. its really interesting.

You tube is your friend. Find a friend to interview you and you can give your point of view. how cool is that?

Hi,

I am just asking if he was involved with any of those locations---he can say yeah or nay.

The paf does not need to come in front of the camera----it is me---who has to get in front of the camera---and that is all---I will take it from there.

nice illustrations and the point 2D pics don't tell the full story and pixel counts are pixel counts not the exact geometry.

A very good effort and I mean it. Thanks You

Can you help me out with a few calculations via your 'pixel counting' skills?

can you let me know the distance from vertical stabiliser fin to fin, also clearance of the aircraft, thanks.

Also as you look to be knowledgable about air-craft/cruise missile design, may I ask why JF-17 designer chose to place stabiliser fins so wide, logically as much as I know it is better to place them closer to centre of gravity horizontally to achieve better results. like in this image of a jet, a portion of whose fuselage design may have been an inspiration as well.

here another view of JF-17

May I suggest that if you really want to see if Raad will fit or not than try developing 3d models to scale according to your 'pixel counting' exercise and than draw whatever conclusions you want to draw.

For those who look at images of JF-17 with central drop tank and than start worrying about if it has the "clearance", a few images to enjoy and kill some free time..

First, the 'benchmark' of poor follow through resulting in 'clearance' issues.. @JamD can you please help in pixel counting how many inches high is drop tank. It could be the best proof of sheer unprofessionalism..

How much high it is? These IDF guys must be as negligent and un-professional as PAF guys @MastanKhan

and a MIRAGE TOO, and why the hell they always cant them nose down for drop tanks, poor regard to flight safety and therefore professionalism.. if off-course may have fuel left and worse vapours when landing. It after all is considered an EPITOME of clearance on PDF by some guys. Has some one tough that a longer gear may be have to do with a wing welded at bottom of fuselage. Nope that could not be true.. epitome of 'clearance'..no..NO

Looking at this vid, it looks like dimensions wise launching Ra'ad from Thunder should not be a problem.

 

[amardeep mishra]

Finally glad that we have a thread that reflects what both admin and think tank always hoped discussions on PDF to be like. Great work @JamD @amardeep mishra

@Oscar
That is correct,we must have "literature-backed" discussions based on hard scientific literature. The problem though,as i see it,a lot of folks might not be able to follow the rigorous mathematics.

 

[SQ8]

@Oscar
That is correct,we must have "literature-backed" discussions based on hard scientific literature. The problem though,as i see it,a lot of folks might not be able to follow the rigorous mathematics.

As I suggested to you a while before.
I have read and understand both
https://www.amazon.com/Mechanics-Flight-11th-R-H-Barnard/dp/1405823593
https://www.amazon.com/Flight-witho...TF8&qid=1467259009&sr=1-6&keywords=ac+kermode

And have thankfully learnt when and where to use both. Suggest you get both these, as regardless of forums; they are a joy to read.

 

[Nigel Farrage]

Sorry I misread your post and I thought you were asking about the Ra'ad. Regardless you want the most moment arm possible to get the most moment from the least amount of surface.

I must admit I don't quite know why they would put them that far apart. It is not changing the effective moment arm by much. I believe it is to make the mount higher rather than lower like the f16. There might be interfering flows from the fuselage/intake area as well. But all this is speculation.

I'll see what I can do about your image when I sign in from my computer.

EDIT:
I have scaled it so that each pixel is a cm. Have fun.
View attachment 314565

A bit off mate.
The wheel track of Thunder is 2.54 meters not 2.24 meters as per your pixels calculations. But that margin of error is expected in this type of work. Or an error margin of 12%, in your case.

 

[amardeep mishra]

As I suggested to you a while before.
I have read and understand both
https://www.amazon.com/Mechanics-Flight-11th-R-H-Barnard/dp/1405823593
https://www.amazon.com/Flight-witho...TF8&qid=1467259009&sr=1-6&keywords=ac+kermode

And have thankfully learnt when and where to use both. Suggest you get both these, as regardless of forums; they are a joy to read.

Hi dear @Oscar
I already have both the books you mentioned,but i find them lacking in rigorous mathematics vis-a-vis books like mc'ruer,nelson or even donald mc'lean etc.
Here is my collection.Kindly go through them.

FOr me,these are my favourite books on flight dynamics- in the decreasing order-
1)Mc'Ruer
2)Nelson
3)Roskam
4)brian L stevens
I mean to be brutally honest,there is no SINGLE books that explains you all the concepts with indepth insights the way you want.One would have to refer to at least 5 books to get a grip.For instance Concepts of frame transformation and development of equation of motion 12 eqn model is best explained very rigorously in Mc'ruer.However nelson is more control oriented.brian L steven basically explains Mc'ruers works in easy to understand mathematical construct-hence it is highly recommended for beginners.

However for missile guidance nothing beats
1)Missile guidance and control- george M sioris
2)Automatic control of Missiles-J blakelock

Even one of my professor has authored a very good book on flight dynamics but his approach is quite different and is more theoretical analysis based on bifurcation theory/continuation analysis

 

[Nigel Farrage]

@Oscar
That is correct,we must have "literature-backed" discussions based on hard scientific literature. The problem though,as i see it,a lot of folks might not be able to follow the rigorous mathematics.

Thats because we are not here to do a PHD or write a research thesis. Just a discussion which everyone or at least most people can understand.

 

[SQ8]

Hi dear @Oscar
I already have both the books you mentioned,but i find them lacking in rigorous mathematics vis-a-vis books like mc'ruer,nelson or even donald mc'lean etc.
Here is my collection.Kindly go through them.
View attachment 314734
View attachment 314735


FOr me,these are my favourite books on flight dynamics- in the decreasing order-
1)Mc'Ruer
2)Nelson
3)Roskam
4)brian L stevens

However for missile guidance nothing beats
1)Missile guidance and control- george M sioris
2)Automatic control of Missiles-J blakelock

Even one of my professor has authored a very good book on flight dynamics but his approach is quite different and is more theoretical analysis based on bifurcation theory/continuation analysis

Which is why I mentioned them for lacking in rigorous mathematics. They do not dwell on the Excessive theories of what is essential to understand flight, they are precise and to the point. The extended mathematics and theory is focused on those looking to develop systems.
Yet, these two were sufficient during a project for me that involved a cousin of the system under discussion. Someone else with a PhD or two along with their team did the flight dynamics, all I needed to understand was not why a fluid molecule will behave due to what equation, but what AoA of the control surface would create what movement. Suffice to say, that system performs flawlessly and has excellent performance characteristics; it will also probably not see the light of day until maybe 10 years from now when maybe some wonderful people at NDC might write a history of the place like Munir Akram did.

What you are trying to get into would make sense if you got up now and try to work on the AMCA and actually design its wing. But for someone to be able to look at a wing and understand its basic characteristics and get an estimate of how it effects the aircraft's performance; books like these would be sufficient.

P.S Although I would recommend Bernard's book as even with a little skimming over the more terse equations it has well explained theory for those looking to go beyond just understanding flight in depth.

 

[Nigel Farrage]

 

[amardeep mishra]

What you are trying to get into would make sense if you got up now and try to work on the AMCA and actually design its wing.

Hi dear @Oscar
Designing various aircraft components particularly wings,etc is the job of aerodynamicist- it is entirely different from flight dynamics. Control Engineering aspect of aircraft comes in the end when the an aerodynamicist has done his job. I am basically a control engineer,(no amount of aerospace will turn me into an aerodynamicist lol) and as a control engineer one must know the dynamics of any process(be it aircraft,nuclear reactors,nuclear submarines or your oil rig!) he/she wishes to control.

On more serious note though,ADA has already designed the wings and the basic layout of AMCA is frozen. System level design will commence soon.A lot of engineers working on AMCA are also research assistants/pursue MS/PhD at IITs.And Unlike pakistan their research is definitely published or patented!- our research is very transparent