Babur's New Prospectus ?

[nightcrawler]

@ Mark Sien

http://www.defence.pk/forums/1206733-post70.html

You end it boy; you end it!!

 

[Arsalan]

there are plenty of proffs available confirming the Raadis not the air launched Babur.
navy and air force are working on there versions of Babur missile. the air force variants may now have been put on hold after Raad success but this do not makes Raad an air launched Babus missilem by anymeans...

BABUR Missile
The Babur’s twin-spool RD95-300 turbofan, derived from the 36MT engine developed by Russia’s NPO Saturn, is embedded in the tail and uses a ventral air inlet duct (which pops out after missile launch) and tailcone exhaust. The missile’s rear section also mounts a four-surface tail control assembly with anhedral on the stabilators. The 700lb thrust engine with a thrust-to-weight ratio of 4.8:1 comprises a single-stage centrifugal compressor, two-stage fan with a two-stage low-pressure booster, a reverse-flow annular combustor with rotary injection, a turbine section with one high-pressure and two low-pressure stages.

It uses a special high-density blended aviation turbine fuel that has more energy for a given volume than standard fuels, and can endure harsh weather conditions and long storage periods.

The Babur has a length of 7.2 metres, diameter of 0.52 metres, wingspan of 2.67 metres, and a 450kg HE blast/FAE warhead. After its launch by a solid-fuel booster, the cruise turbofan cuts in, giving the Babur a cruising height of 1km (that drops to 200 metres in the terminal phase), speed of 880kph and a range of 600km.

it have IIR terminal seeker—offering a CEP of 10 metres

for Ra'ad,

Raad ALCM:
As part of its efforts to bolster its offensive firepower the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) has begun inducting into service the Hatf-8 (also known as ‘Raad’ or ‘thunder’ in Arabic) air-launched cruise missile (ALCM). Described as having a range of 350km (220 miles) and equipped with an imaging infra-red (IIR) seeker with digital scene-matching capability, the conventionally armed ALCM has been under development since 2003 and will be capable of being launched by the PAF’s fleet of F-16, upgraded Mirage IIIEA and JF-17 ‘Thunder’ combat aircraft. Military-industrial entities responsible for developing the ‘Raad’ are Pakistan’s Wah Cantonment-based Advanced Engineering Research Organisation, or AERO (previously known as the Air Weapons Complex) and the Kentron subsidiary of South Africa’s Denel Aerospace Group.

Typically, two ALCMs will be carried by the combat aircraft’s two inboard underwing pylons, each of which is rated at 2,041kg for manoeuvring flights at up to 5.5 g. Targets to be engaged by the ‘Raad’ include static targets like hardened aircraft shelters, bunkers and command-and-control centres, bridges, airspace surveillance radar stations, as well as strategic industrial infrastructure such as telecommunications nodes, ports and petrochemicals refineries.

The missile weighs 1,200kg, has a 450kg (9,92lb) high-explosive fragmentation warhead, has a length of 5.1 metres, diameter of 0.17 metres and a wingspan of 3 metres (with its twin horizontal fins deployed), is powered by a turbojet (a reverse-engineered Microturbo TRI 60-30 turbojet producing 5.4kN thrust), cruises at a speed of Mach 0.8, and is a fire-and-forget missile optimised for pre-planned attacks.

 

[Quwa]

Sniper

I never I said I was an authoritative source, and for everyone's convenience I gave an example of an authoritative source (Janes). Now I don't know who the hell you think you are, but I exposed you on a few fronts:

1. You've been changing your argument back and forth.

2. A source like Janes agreed with very first opinion of Ra'ad and Babur not being variants of one another. That said, regarding the Kh-55's wiki-page...I did check out the Janes links posted below...care to tell me which one of the links actually work right now???

3. And you're just arguing for the sake of it...I proved my point on the issue, so all I ask you is to suck it up and move on with what little respect you have here.

 

[SnIPeR Xr]

Example of DECISIVE EVIDENCE - i.e. Jane's Air Launched Weapons]

It is not.I am going to show you.

Ra'ad (Hatf-8) (Pakistan), Air-to-surface missiles - Stand-off and cruise

Type

Land-attack cruise missile.

Development

Pakistan has developed an indigenous air-launched cruise missile known as Ra'ad (Hatf 8). It is part of Pakistan's wide-reaching strategic missile development programme that includes short-, medium- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles and ground-launched cruise missiles. Each of these weapons has a numerical designation under the Hatf programme, and often an individual system name. The Ra'ad (meaning Thunder) was preceded by the Hatf-7 (Babur) ground launched cruise missile, first tested in 2005. The Ra'ad (Hatf-8) is not an air-launched derivative of the Babur. Instead, it is a new design, specially developed for the air-launched role and with several cues to foreign technology input. All of Pakistan's strategic missiles have benefited from external design assistance to one degree or another. The Babur/Hatf-7 is being developed in close co-operation with China. The Ra'ad (Hatf-8) represents another strand in Pakistan's cruise missile capabilities, but one that may have benefited from South African engineering know-how. Pakistan and South Africa have previously forged links in advanced weapons development and the Ra'ad bears a resemblance to several proposed South African stand-off weapon projects such as MUPSOW and Torgos. South Africa's Kentron (now Denel) has already supplied its Raptor powered glide bomb to the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and the extension of that relationship to include more advanced weapons would seem to be a logical step. Another pointer to possible South African involvement in the Ra'ad programme is the fact that its first announced test launch, in 2007, was undertaken by a PAF Dassault Mirage IIIEA (upgraded ROSE-1 aircraft).

Ra'ad (Hatf-8) (Pakistan) - Jane's Air-Launched Weapons

So what.Tommorow if we will show the pictures of a missile similar to ICBM.& after some time we announce that we have test fired an ICBM.

What proof does Janes have that the described missile is ICBM or not?

Janes is not god of Information.

Even WIKI has leaved a roam for deciding the Raa'ds variancy with babur:
----------------------------------------------
After a successful test-launch in 2005 of the Babur (also known as Hatf VII), Pakistan's first cruise missile, it was stated by officials that the Babur would be modified to be launched from airborne platforms. But the Ra'ad ALCM, developed by Pakistan's Air Weapons Complex and NESCOM,[3] appears to be an entirely new missile, as is evident by the new name and a new official designation of Hatf VIII.

----------------------------------------------

Not a confirmed statement but a statement with doubt that Ra'ad APPEARS TO BE a different missile.

The confirmed statement is not added because it is not confirmed that whether Ra'ad is variant of Babur or not.

A roam for change is in the statement so that in future if any credible news from reliable source,comes about the variancy of Ra'ad,so then they will edit the statement.

If they include a clear statement about RA"ADS VARIANCY & if in future that statement is proved wrong then the Justifications of Wiki will not help to lower the reliability damage.


Why there is not a confirmed statement about ra'ads variancy in Wiki Article??

It is not because WIKI do not give information based on only one source.

There are also other reliable sources,and wiki writes comprehensive articles based on that Information,Research Facts and figures given by those sources.

As I said earlier references of the sources used while writing articles are given at the end of each article.

--------------------------------------

References
1.^ a b c Ra'ad Test Launch-Aljazeerza
2.^ Babur Cruise Missile Test Launch
3.^ Pakistan Pushes To Improve Missile Strike Capability - Defense News
4.^ http://www.sipri.org/research/armaments/nbc/nuclear/pakistan
5.^ MissileThreat :: Hatf 7
6.^ Ra'ad Missile
7.^ Ra'ad Test Launch-Pakistan times
8.^ Pakistan Missile Test
9.^ Geo Ra'ad Launch
10.^ Ra'ad test - The News

-------------------------------------------

Surely the weight of all the given sources compelled wiki to not give a decisive statement in Ra'ads variancy.

Now

You said that wiki is an encyclopedia and you believe in decisive sources.

Ok alright.

No doubt Janes are a big name in Aerospace information field but there is also another very Reliable and credible source in this field and that is Missile threat .com

& According to them:

---------------------------------------
Pakistan Test Fires Hatf-8 Cruise Missile
August 25, 2007 :: News


Pakistan today successfully test fired a new Air-Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM) termed the Hatf-8 (Ra'ad). The indigenously developed Ra'ad ("Thunder" in Arabic), is said to have a range of 350 kilometers, though there is speculation that this range might be extended. The missile is said to have a stealth design, to be as accurate as the Babur cruise missile, and have the capability to carry various types of warheads. The missile has been reportedly designed exclusively for launch from a variety of Pakistan's air platforms, providing these with a strategic stand off capability on land and at sea.

The Hatf-8 is a designation which has apparently not been previously used by Pakistan, and it seems uncertain if this is a genuinely new missile or a variation of the Hatf-7.

-------------------------------------

Now this not wiki but a reliable source MISSILE THREAT.COM


And according to them it is not clear that whether Ra'ad is variant of Babur or not.

And also in wiki article about Ra'ad:

------------------------------------
External links
Jane's Air-Launched Weapons article - Ra'ad (Hatf-8) (Pakistan)

MissileThreat.com article - Hatf 7 and Hatf 8

------------------------------------

Janes and Missile threat.com both are included in external links section from which the information about Ra'ad is collected from THESE TWO SOURCES.

If Janes(Your source) is decisive then MISSILE THREAT.com(My source) is also decisive.

Bcoz both are preferred by Wiki to write the article about Ra'ad.And Information given by both is included in the Article.



Both are saying different things and thats why Wiki have to wait for a reliable Information about Ra'ads variancy.

And that is the reason why there is a roam for change in wiki's statement.


Like I said earlier Wiki can be believed in cases related to aeronautics because wiki gives information given by all the selected reliable sources.And the conclusion of the wiki articles is based on the conclusion drawn from all the sources after analysis of their Information.
Now there is also anothr thing in Ra'ads Article in Wiki:

-----------------------------------------

After a successful test-launch in 2005 of the Babur (also known as Hatf VII), Pakistan's first cruise missile, it was stated by officials that the Babur would be modified to be launched from airborne platforms

----------------------------------------

Babur would be modified !!!
MODIFIED !!!

What does that mean???

I think it means that Modification in Babur will be made in Areas such as Design,Engine and Maybe in guidence system.

After Launch of Babur in 2005 we saw the Launch of a Cruise missile named Ra'ad in 2007 by Pakistan.

If we look at the above mentioned areas of modification we see that Apart from design,Every thing in Ra'ad is similar to Babur.

And looking at the statement of the officials given in 2005 we can pretty much assume that Babur have been modified only in design area & except design every thing in Ra'ad is same of Babur.

Its guidence system is same.
Its propulsion system is same.
Both can Terrain hug in Terminal stages.
Both are low altitude missiles in Initial stages.

So whats the point of calling both not a variant of each other?

Just two points design and designation.

About design when the officials said in 2005 that modification will be made in babur then why you are not accepting that it is posible that modification in design would have been made in Babur for its Air launched version?

About New Name, when the design is changed then I think it is good that they have given it a new Name.
(Please note that designation is not the point here because designation is like a serial number of a amount of number of missiles.In militry terms the designation is a name used to call missiles in a war or emerjency scenario.
AGM-129 has different designation from gryphon.
Airlauched Klub and GL Klub have different designations.
All the different missiles in every military of the world have different designations.)

It looks more Fancier to call the slightly modified AL variant of Babur 'Ra'ad'.

If we look at the European family of ALCM's e.g Storm Shadow and Taurus Kepd.This class dont have any GL variants & Because of this people call them a very different class of missiles which are not variants of any GLCM and any other CM.So in order to make any ALCM(Based on GLCM) at par with these missile I think its good to give that missile a new name so that when people will compare them they should not Bring the GL version in discussion.And when that class of missiles is discussed That ALCM should be Included in that Class of ALCMs as part of it.



It is a big Misconception that Ra'ad is not an AL version of babur.

And this Misconception occurs due to two points:
Design and Name.

And why they were changed is discussed above.

Apart from that There is no other point & it is not right to believe in this childish concept.

Many sources spread this misconception because of the secretive nature of Pakistan's missile development programs.



And now the FLAW in Janes Article:

In the End they Gave a so called fact in support of there argument that Ra'ad is derived from South african Stand OFF programs.

------------------------------------------

Another pointer to possible South African involvement in the Ra'ad programme is the fact that its first announced test launch, in 2007, was undertaken by a PAF Dassault Mirage IIIEA (upgraded ROSE-1 aircraft).

-----------------------------------------

Their pointer is saying that because Ra'ad is fired from Mirage III thats why it indicates the south african involvement.

Now how can a French made Aircraft equipped with Italian Radars points it.

I know that PAF widely use Helmet mounted systems of Denel but those are minor technological inputs.
No big technological inputs are being used in any PAF's aircraft from south africa.

It would be better if janes will elaborate that How a French made Airborne Platform Equipped with Italian Radars indicate south African involvement???

AND AGAIN, Janes affirming that the RK-55 and KH-55 are from the same family (i.e. variants of one another):

You seriously need to consult a dictionary.The word FAMILY doesnt mean that they are variants of each other.Writing it yourself then putting i.e Variants of each other will not make them Variants of each other.

Now take a example of a real human family.

"If two twin brothers are present in one family.And a person says that "They and their Parents are a Family".Then how does this sentence indicates or give any clue to the listner that there are two twin brothers present in this family."

RK-55 (SSC-X-4 'Slingshot' and 3K10 Granat) (Russian Federation)

Type

Intermediate-range, road mobile, turbofan-powered, single warhead cruise missile.

Development

The RK-55 Granat (3K10) was one of a family of three cruise missiles developed in the 1970s and early 1980s; the air-launched Kh-55 (AS-15 'Kent'), the submarine-launched RK-55 (SS-N-21 'Sampson') and the ground-launched RK-55. The ground-launched version had the NATO designator SSC-X-4 'Slingshot'. It is believed that the ground- and submarine-launched versions were similar, but the air-launched Kh-55 was different in appearance. The RK-55 ground-launched missiles were designed for carriage on an eight-wheeled Transporter-Erector-Launcher (TEL) vehicle, with six missiles, carried in launch canisters, per vehicle. The TEL were based upon the R-17 (SS-1 'Scud B') MAZ 543 TEL design.

RK-55 (SSC-X-4 'Slingshot' and 3K10 Granat) (Russian Federation) - Jane's Strategic Weapon Systems

The article is saying that RK-55 sub & GL version and Kh-55 are part of a family.That family is for LONG RANGE GROUND ATTACK STRATEGIC PURPOSE.

AND

Their DNA is same
In this case the DNA is that special request that was sent by the russian armed forces to the defense Industry of russia asking for a development of A FAMILY OF LONG RANGE CRUISE MISSILES.

AND TWO MISSILES WERE BEING MADE.

THE GL VERSION WAS FURTHER EXPANDED TO THE SUB LAUNCHED VERSION
MEANS AN INDEPENDENT DEVELOPMENT WAS MADE IN THE GL VERSION.

THE GL VERSION IS NOT IN SERVICE BUT THE SUBL VERSION IS IN THE SERVICE.

It's just the case that only two missiles are present in that family.


Janes is not saying that both are variants of each other.

Except your own written sentence "i.e Variants of each other" no where in the Article,any thing is present which is sufficient to call them variants.

I gave you a source saying that both are not variants of each,with the reason also given in the statement

&

When you didnt found any source in the Internet to prove me wrong,
You picked the Janes article,edited it with your own view and now you are forcing me to believe in your own edited article of janes.

You are firing the gun by putting it on Janes shoulder


Give me a decisive link saying that both are not variants of each other.

Like I gave you the link saying it in clear statement with reasons.

 

[SnIPeR Xr]

@SniperXr

Better you re-read my post before negating the characteristics of turbojet/turbofan...
They are true; you simply have negated them & said the same things in a different manner.

@Turbofans


This is same what I have said

Where did I said you were wrong regarding Turbo Fans charecteristics??
I was writing them for my own comprehension with little addition in your given charecteristics.

@Turbojets


Points i had given; not a single of them go against what you have pasted from WIKI...Re-read my post

You said that Turbo jets are cheap thats why they are used.

Is cheapness the only reason for using turbojet in 99.9 % Anti ship missiles??

If except cheapness Turbo jets have no other advantage over Turbofans then why those nations too are using turbo fans who believe in QUALITY NOT QUANTITY?


Read my post again.I said that Turbo jets have high speed exhaust thats why they are used in Anti ship missiles.
It is written in Wikis reason.

You think you are more reliable than wiki????

Hehe..
Maneuvering a greater speed object is easy or a lower one?? Better you get urself acquainted with the phenomenon of inertia

Wrong.

High speed exhaust does not only accelerate the missile but along with speed it also brings stability in the missile & saves it from continously varying speed.

The phenomenon of Inertia comes before the striking of missile.
But HSE saves the misssile from it because the speed of exhaust in whole flight makes missile stable even during maneouvering.

Kh-35 (AS-20 "Kayak") Anti-Ship Cruise Missile

OK.

You really am getting scared of me
Greater be the Mach number (supersonic regime) more work has to be done to step down the incoming air speed to sonic levels for appropriate combustion in turbofan engine.... I never said turbofan never can be used in these regimes. I only pointed out relative performance of different engines in various speed regimes

The topic being discussed here is Long range Land attack cruise missiles and All of them are Subsonic

So there is no reason for bringing word SUPER SONIC in the discussion.
But I know that its Brahmos,which always remains in your mind.
So far I have not seen any of your post which does not include Brahmos,Things Related to its specifications.
Even when the topic is not related to it still you bring brahmos.
In JF-17's anti ship thread you did the same .The thread got derailed and now the thread is close.The threads topic was not related to it.Bcoz AL brahmos is not out yet.

Ramjet engine,Supersonic,Sea skimming of Super sonic missiles(Fiction in case of Ramjet equipped missiles) All of these things are included in your every post.
So it is logical for every person reading your posts closely to assume that you are very Fond of brahmos.

Please do something to cure this love of brahmos.

 

[SnIPeR Xr]

arsalanaslam

The articles you have posted about Babur & Ra'ad contains very big mistakes.
Although you have not posted the link but I am pretty sure that it is from a Blogspot.If it is not then please post the link.

IIR terminal seeker—offering a CEP of 10 metres

Both Babur and Ra'ad dont have IIR terminal seeker.
Both uses TERCOM guidence for Terrain hugging.

And this is proved through many reliable sources:

Ra'ad ALCM - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://www.janes.com/extracts/extract/jsws/jswsa305.html

Babur (cruise missile) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

digital scene-matching capability

How? when both dont have any IIR seeker.
Niether the pics of both missiles show the presence of IIR seeker in airframes of both.

Raad ALCM
been under development since 2003

Tom ahawks crash landed in 1998.

There is also another report which says that Pakistan starts working on cruise missiles since 1995.

Raad
manoeuvring flights at up to 5.5 g

I am getting curious.Please post the link.

How this source even knows the G limits of Ra'ad.
It is not designed for maneouvering at such greater limits.
For a design like Ra'ad it seems impossible to have such a big G limit.

Ra'ad
turbojet (a reverse-engineered Microturbo TRI 60-30 turbojet producing 5.4kN thrust),

Ra'ad is equipped with turbo Fan.
Such a big blunder this source is.
Ra'ad ALCM - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think the wiki link is sufficient but still i would like to give a proof

Storm shadow is equiped with turbo jet and it is Larger than Ra'ad at lenght of 5.1 m.

Ra'ad 's lenght is shorter than storm shadow:4.85 m

Ra'ad has greater range than storm shadow 350 km.
Storm shadow's range is 250.

If Ra'ad is equiped with turbo jet than how can the turbojet engine of smaller missile can give it greater range than larger missile equiped with turbo jet??.

Small difference in range is understandable but Ra'ad has Damn 100 km range advantage over SS even when it is smaller than shadow.

As discussed the Fuel inefficency of Turbo jets in this thread and the information is also present in Internet.
It is well known fact that turbo jets cant give greater ranges to missiles especially for Land attack cruise missiles.

Only turbofan powered Ra'ad can achieve range of 350 km.


There are many indian blogspots who spread such type of lies that Ra'ad is equiped with turbo jet.Its Engine belongs to xyz countries.

And IIR seeker part is also a propaganda.
I saw on an indian blog that the author of the blog was sying that Babur is an advancement over chinese C602.Its design is similar to it.

But in reality Baburs design is similar only with tomahawk.

According to that indian the IIR seeker of c803 and Babur is same and Pakistan have imported it from china.
Thats why those indians who try to malign pakistan's missile developments try their best to prove that Babur uses IIR seeker for CEP of 10 m.

They just cant digest the reality that Pakistan has made a missile having more advanced TERCOM guidence.

The sad part is that many Pakistanis also help those indians by spreading these lies as a Reliable & confirmed Information.

 

[SnIPeR Xr]

@ Mark Sien

http://www.defence.pk/forums/1206733-post70.html

You end it boy; you end it!!

Foolish and nonsense beliefs dont have any ends.

Only the reality with proofs and Facts & figures have a decisive and conclusive End.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/1218694-post79.html

 

[SnIPeR Xr]

Sniper

I never I said I was an authoritative source, and for everyone's convenience I gave an example of an authoritative source (Janes)..

You denied wiki. ok.
You gave the source of janes.
Full of Pakistan Bashing and Pakistan acquired this & that from here & there.I found this reliable Information.
I have posted the flaw in the janes article.Review that if you can understand what I am saying.

After all janes are not god of information.
Still ok.Janes are credible ones

But I also gave you the example of authoritative source(Missile threat.com)

Now I don't know who the hell you think you are, but I exposed you on a few fronts:

1. You've been changing your argument back and forth.

The reality is that i put forward multiple points in favour of my argument.

Repeating this sentence continously,that i changed my arguments is not going to change the reality that i put forward multiple points in favour of my argument.

Every one can see my posts from the start and all i have discusssed is the continuation of those points which i described in my 2nd post in this thread.


You said that i changed my argument to manufacturer point and then i told you that it was my first ever point.

After that you haven't pointed out any change of argument in my posts.
Please point them out then say any thing about it otherwise i would be compelled to call you a liar.

2. A source like Janes agreed with very first opinion of Ra'ad and Babur not being variants of one another. That said, regarding the Kh-55's wiki-page...I did check out the Janes links posted below...care to tell me which one of the links actually work right now???

A source like MIssile threat.com agreed with opinion that it is uncertain whether both are variants of each other or not.

Regarding KH-55's page with due respect sir RUDE wikipedia has not changed his opinion After the god of Information Mark sien pointed out its mistake and you urged your desire that wiki should change his view so that you can turn me down
.It is still sticked on it.

Please sir I beg you to forgive stubborn wikians.

I thought only wikipedia can be edited by anyone but hats of to you sir you are genius.

You even edited the Janes article in favour of your view by adding your statement.

You just changed the word Family with Variants. and the whole article becomes in favour of you.

B/w those I think you have not read the PDF files of russian sources.So far none of the source says that mentioned soviet missiles are variants of each other.

3. And you're just arguing for the sake of it...

For the sake of what??? please say it openly what you want to say.

I proved my point on the issue

Oh sorry sir I thought the discussion is still on.Please forgive me if I dont agree with your thoughts.

, so all I ask you is to suck it up

Better to behave.

and move on with what little respect you have here.

Who are you to say any thing about my respect.
I am not here to earn a respect certificate.





I know you are a respectable member and military expert.
But no one is complete in this world.
Sorry if I caused any damage to your image on PDF and inside yourself.

 

[SnIPeR Xr]

there are plenty of proffs available confirming the Raadis not the air launched Babur.

There are many who believe in this misconception but the one you have posted appears to be a Blogspot.

navy and air force are working on there versions of Babur missile

.

Yes man you are right.Currently our Airforce is seriously lacking the stand off capability.We dont have any tactical ALCM.
And it is misconception that Ra'ad is an ALCM.
Actually Ra'ad is a space launched cruise missile.It is designed to be launched from space.
Apart from Mirage III it can also be launched from space shuttles.

the air force variants may now have been put on hold after Raad success

And again you are right.Pakistan's cruise missile program basically revolves around three missiles GLCM Babur,Space launched Ra'ad and an AL babur.
Currently Ra'ad is of no use to us but in future maybe in 2040-50 the Ra'ad will help us to increase our space defence.It will give suparco the nice Stand off capability against the stationary targets on moon and mars.
As currently star wars are not happening so we should concentrate on Air launched cruise missiles because we dont have them.

but this do not makes Raad an air launched Babus missilem by anymeans...

We test fired an ALCM.apart from design it is same in everything with GLCM babur.
But this doesnot make Raad an AL version of Babur because we are those kids who like to have two TOFFIES with same colour & same taste BUT WRAPPED IN TWO DIFFERENT WRAPPERS.

 

[Quwa]

It is not.I am going to show you.




So what.Tommorow if we will show the pictures of a missile similar to ICBM.& after some time we announce that we have test fired an ICBM.

What proof does Janes have that the described missile is ICBM or not?

Janes is not god of Information.

Even WIKI has leaved a roam for deciding the Raa'ds variancy with babur:
----------------------------------------------
After a successful test-launch in 2005 of the Babur (also known as Hatf VII), Pakistan's first cruise missile, it was stated by officials that the Babur would be modified to be launched from airborne platforms. But the Ra'ad ALCM, developed by Pakistan's Air Weapons Complex and NESCOM,[3] appears to be an entirely new missile, as is evident by the new name and a new official designation of Hatf VIII.

----------------------------------------------

Not a confirmed statement but a statement with doubt that Ra'ad APPEARS TO BE a different missile.

The confirmed statement is not added because it is not confirmed that whether Ra'ad is variant of Babur or not.

A roam for change is in the statement so that in future if any credible news from reliable source,comes about the variancy of Ra'ad,so then they will edit the statement.

If they include a clear statement about RA"ADS VARIANCY & if in future that statement is proved wrong then the Justifications of Wiki will not help to lower the reliability damage.


Why there is not a confirmed statement about ra'ads variancy in Wiki Article??

The Janes article is already decisive in saying that Ra'ad is NOT a variant of Babur, everything else you have posted is saying it is uncertain or possible - but not firm. I have no idea which hole you're getting your claims about Babur and Ra'ad being variants from, because all you have (as shown) is showing uncertainty - while mine (Janes) is claiming that they're not variants in a decisive manner.

It is not because WIKI do not give information based on only one source.

There are also other reliable sources,and wiki writes comprehensive articles based on that Information,Research Facts and figures given by those sources.

As I said earlier references of the sources used while writing articles are given at the end of each article.

OK...give me the source where you found out or believe Ra'ad and Babur are variants of one another.

After a successful test-launch in 2005 of the Babur (also known as Hatf VII), Pakistan's first cruise missile, it was stated by officials that the Babur would be modified to be launched from airborne platforms

----------------------------------------
Babur would be modified !!!
MODIFIED !!!

What does that mean???

I think it means that Modification in Babur will be made in Areas such as Design,Engine and Maybe in guidence system.

That is your deduction that Babur may be a variant of Ra'ad, but that is not authoritative proof on the matter - just a guess. Tell me where you got the information about Ra'ad being a variant of Babur in plain, no deductions or your guesses...

And now the FLAW in Janes Article:

In the End they Gave a so called fact in support of there argument that Ra'ad is derived from South african Stand OFF programs.

------------------------------------------

Another pointer to possible South African involvement in the Ra'ad programme is the fact that its first announced test launch, in 2007, was undertaken by a PAF Dassault Mirage IIIEA (upgraded ROSE-1 aircraft).

-----------------------------------------

Their pointer is saying that because Ra'ad is fired from Mirage III thats why it indicates the south african involvement.

Now how can a French made Aircraft equipped with Italian Radars points it.

I know that PAF widely use Helmet mounted systems of Denel but those are minor technological inputs.
No big technological inputs are being used in any PAF's aircraft from south africa.

Janes has good reason to believe that Pakistan benefited from South African technology for Ra'ad, why not? At the end of the day, Ra'ad is a stand-off weapon that there has bound to been some indirect or direct support in certain areas. In any case, this is besides the point, you claimed Ra'ad and Babur are variants of one another...Janes denied it explicitly...and all you have to show for it is an informal deduction. Please give me a source that states both are variants of one another...

You seriously need to consult a dictionary.The word FAMILY doesnt mean that they are variants of each other.Writing it yourself then putting i.e Variants of each other will not make them Variants of each other.

Now take a example of a real human family.

"If two twin brothers are present in one family.And a person says that "They and their Parents are a Family".Then how does this sentence indicates or give any clue to the listner that there are two twin brothers present in this family."

Because the speaker stated that "they" (i.e. twin brothers) + "their parents" = "a family"... I don't get how anyone would think otherwise.

When you didnt found any source in the Internet to prove me wrong,
You picked the Janes article,edited it with your own view and now you are forcing me to believe in your own edited article of janes.

You are firing the gun by putting it on Janes shoulder


Give me a decisive link saying that both are not variants of each other.

Like I gave you the link saying it in clear statement with reasons.

Your own deductive reasoning backfired on you when you claimed KH-55 and RK-55 are not variants, even though they share the exact same engine (which according to your LAST theory made Ra'ad and Babur variants of one another)...and then you switched to saying that Kh-55 and Rk-55 are different because they're from different manufacturings DESPITE the fact they shared the exact same engine and according to you a similar design. And now you've return to relying on deductive reasoning to support your arguments INSTEAD of a decisive or authoriative source explicitly stating that Ra'ad and Babur are variants of one another.

And now you're baselessly accusing me of EDITING an article I just copy & pasted WITH a link. Tell me, WHERE did I edit the Janes articles...what did I omit or add to the work?

 

[redgriffin]

DF bro, remember 'one cannot argue with stupid''. Let him be. We can argue all we want but it will be useless. Some people are not willing to concede when they are wrong. Best to ignore such rants.

 

[ARSENAL6]

But isnt the Ra'ad similar to Babur

 

[nightcrawler]

Mark Sien let the readers decide who wins & not the Sniper; now end this

 

[TaimiKhan]

But isnt the Ra'ad similar to Babur

No, they aren't. Ra'ad is more like the below missiles:

AGM-158 JASSM - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Storm Shadow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Taurus KEPD 350 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

While Babur is a land launched cruise missile more like the Tomahawk CM.

Range of the missiles are different, size also, plus the guidance mode may also differ.

Ra'ad and Babur are Cruise Missile, but are different from each other nor are variants of each other.

 

[MJaa]

there are plenty of proffs available confirming the Raadis not the air launched Babur.
navy and air force are working on there versions of Babur missile. the air force variants may now have been put on hold after Raad success but this do not makes Raad an air launched Babus missilem by anymeans...



for Ra'ad,

TRISHUL: Babur LACM & Ra’ad ALCM Detailed

BABUR Missile dont use twin-spool RD95-300 turbofan

This is a myth created and spread by Prasun K Sengupta

Original news never mentioned the name of Pakistan about this Ukraine smuggling of Kh-55SM/Korshun by Iran and china but then Pakistan tests the Babur cruise missile few years after the news and Indians were surprised and then comes this Prasun K Sengupta with wildest of claims and start including Pakistan without any kind of proof. He gives the details of everything like he was there supervising the operations but won’t have anything to say once you ask him for proof.

Dr A Q Khan was running the KRL not the NESCOM where Babur cruise missiles are designed and build so his complete theory of Wal-Mart goes to ground as only thing in this article that can be called a Wal-Mart is he i.e. Wal-Mart of baseless news. Even when Dr A Q Khan was running the KRL, he had furious rivalry with NESCOM


Earlier the Indians defense anaylsts claimed that Pakistani Babur was copy of "Chinese Red arrow"HN-series of cruise missiles, when people pointed out the differences between Red Arrow & Babur , now this .Babur is based on one of the most successful & utilized cruise missile system i.e; Tomohawk and whose range could one day enhanced up to 1,500kms !

Here is detail of export of Kh-55SM (AS-15B) nuclear-capable air-launched cruise missiles (ALCMs) from Ukraine to Iran and China but no name of Pakistan

Ukraine's Illicit Weapons Sales to Iran and China

On February 2, 2005, Hryhoriy Omelchenko, Deputy Chair of the Ukrainian parliament’s Committee on the Fight against Organized Crime and Corruption, made public information about ongoing investigations into the alleged illegal export of 12 Kh-55 (NATO designation AS-15A) and Kh-55SM (AS-15B) nuclear-capable air-launched cruise missiles (ALCMs) from Ukraine to Iran and China. [1]The transfer of the missiles was in violation of Kiev’s START I Treaty obligations. Under the treaty, to which Ukraine became a party by signing the Lisbon Protocol in 1992, Ukraine committed to dismantling or returning to Russia the Tu-160 and Tu-95MS bombers and accompanying Kh-55 ALCMs that remained in the country after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. [2] However, according to Omelchenko, the Progress trading firm (a subsidiary of the state arms trader Ukrspetseksport) illegally transferred missiles to China in April 2000 and to Iran in May 2001. In addition, Progress supplied Iran with an associated ground targeting system, referred to as the KNO-120. [1]Omelchenko’s letter began with a request to arrest Valeriy Shmarov, head of Ukraine’s arms export company Ukrspetseksport. According to the letter, a criminal case regarding the missile sale was opened in February 2004. Director of the air cargo company UkrAviaZakaz and former Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) staffer V.V. Yevdokymov, along with three Russian citizens (Oleg G. Orlov, Ye. V. Shilenko, and G.K. Shkinov) stand accused of collaborating with S.M. Samoylenko, then director of Progress, in the missile sale. [1] Orlov, a Russian arms trader accused by the U.N. Security Council in 2001 of selling illegal weapons to Angola, and Shilenko approached Ukrspetseksport in early 2000 regarding the sale. [1,3] The Russians had fictitious documents from the Russian Ministry of De fense and the state-owned Rosvooruzheniye arms trading company, as well as end-user certificates to support their request to purchase 20 Kh-55 missiles. These false documents were evidently accepted by Ukraine’s State Export Control Service, which allowed the sale to move forward. Yevdokymov arranged for the missiles to be transported by air from Ukraine to China in April 2000. [1] He provided customs with documents indicating that the flight was departing for an airport in Russia, but instead the six missiles were flown to China. [4] Former Ukrspetseksport head V.I. Malyev reportedly knew that the paperwork was fictitious and that the missiles were headed for China. Progress was paid US$600,000; the payment was made by two firms based in Cyprus via the U.S. firm Technocality Inc. through the Central European International Bank in Budapest. [1] Six missiles destined for Iran similarly were sold for US$600,000, and related ground targeting equipment for an additional US$200,000, also paid through Technocality Inc. This time, a fictitious contract between a Cypriot firm and Iranian firm for the provision of equipment to oil refineries was used as a cover for the money transfer. Further, the Iranian deal included servicing of the missiles; Ukrainian specialists visited Iran for this purpose several times in 2001-2003.In October 2004, the SBU opened a criminal case regarding the embezzlement of more than US$13 million by Ukrspetseksport staff, including Director Shmarov, through these and other illegal weapons sales. Omelchenko related that it was only in the fall of 2003, when SBU head Leonid Derkach was replaced by Ihor Smeshko, that the SBU began to investigate illegal exports, including the Kh-55 sales as well as other illegal arms sales to Sierre Leone and Eritrea. [1] The Kh-55 missile, also known in the West as a “Kent” missile, is a strategic ALCM (a missile with a range exceeding 600 km) under START I rules. The Kh-55SM is a long-range variant of the missile, with a maximum range of 3,000 km. The Kh-55 and Kh-55SM are designed to carry a 200-kt nuclear warhead; the conventional variant of the Kh -55 was never adopted into service; the conventional variant of the Kh-55SM missile is the Kh -555. [5] Several Kh-55—as well as short-range Kh-22—missiles remained in Ukraine after Russia purchased most heavy bombers and related weapons from Ukraine after the breakup of the Soviet Union. It is likely that the missiles were purchased for parts and possibly also reverse engineering of the Kh-55’s highly efficient turbofan engine, the R95-300. Kh-55s were designed only for nuclear warheads and only for heavy bombers (Tu-95MS and Tu-160). Iran or China would have to modify their Kh-55s to make them capable of being launched from underneath the wing of an aircraft. Although such a conversion is conceivable, given the small number of missiles, it hardly seems worth the effort.

Sources:
&#8220;Deputatskiy zapit&#8221; [Deputy&#8217;s Request], Sobor website, February 2, 2005, <http://www.sobor.org.ua/vr/dep020205_2.htm>.
&#8220;Protocol to the Treaty Between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Arms,&#8221; in NIS Nuclear and Missile Database, Nuclear Threat Initiative website, <http://www.nti.org/db/nisprofs/fulltext/treaties/start1/s1lis.htm>.
Pavel Felgenhauer, &#8220;Great Weapons for Rogues,&#8221; Moscow Times, February 15, 2005, <http://www.themoscowtimes.com>.
&#8220;Utechka informatsii iz Apellyatsionnogo suda Kieva: rakety iz Ukrainy okazalis v Kitaye i Irane!&#8221; (Leaked information from Kiev&#8217;s Appellate Court: Missiles from Ukraine turn out to be in China and Iran!), Obozrevatel (Kiev),February 3, 2005, in Integrum Techno, <http://www.integrum.com>.
&#8220;Russian Heavy-Bomber Delivered Missiles,&#8221; NIS Nuclear and Missile Database, Nuclear Threat Initiative website, <http://www.nti.org/db/nisprofs/russia/weapons/bombers/bombers.htm>.

He says that just change the shape of MUPSOW and air intake and controls and stretch the airframe and you will have Raad ALCM . if you apply same logic on almost any ALCM missile of world it can be called Raad ALCM.

Lastly Raad ALCM was launched from the Mirage because it was only aircraft beside F-16s capable of doing that and as Pakistan needed permission from USA to Integrate the Raad ALCM with F-16 and Raad ALCM is nuclear capable it is hard to imagine that USA would have been kind enough to allow PAF to Mount a nuclear delivery system with the F-16s.