How can Pakistan Navy defend itself from Brahmos cruse missile ?

[fitpOsitive]

In my opinion PN should simply Increase its numbers of submarines.
Anti-Missile tech is being readily advanced and some Chinese solutions are already present So no big deal.

Rather increasing ships and anti-submarine capability will be more substantial. Long-range-Naval-aerial capability must also be addressed on urgent basis.

 

[Sine Nomine]

Brahmos would most likely be employed by Su for land attack on pakistani establishment from sea. The surface targets would be a waste of the Brahmos CM.

That's same I was thinking,they are likely to target depots,command nodes,power infrastructure,government manufacturing facilities,bridges,rail roads,air bases,sea port and ship yard,now sir what measures we can take to foil there bid.

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

I am looking forward for your lines on target acquisition and engaging them in ocean,kindly tag me.


But sir saturation doctrine is shooting on own foot in an open ocean,what if tarrget survives,saturation fire is best suited for land warfare using it in air and sea is suicidal.

Saturation ensures that target doesnt survive, the whole soviet doctrine and their allied forces count on that.

 

[Alphacharlie]

AESA or PESA, they would be useless at this speed, for search radar the terminal speed is too fast track radar cannot track at this speed with the exception of a few Russian CW systems.

Remember that these systems were designed specifically to defeat western radar terminal defense and CLOS SHORAD.

Radar will not track it at terminal speed, you need infra red search and track as it crosses the LoS horizon, and engage with supersonic kinetic darts solution, CLOS preferred. The only thing that matches is StarStreak, and LMM on headon eng.



At this speed its a straight bee line system, very easy to track and predict, and one touch would defilgrate the system, and it can be safely interdicted at 8-10 km. It is a conventional system.

What a Crap !! wasted my 30 seconds

 

[dani958]

buy barak 8

 

[hell9214]

[QOTE="dani958, post: 8539139, member: 177838"]buy barak 8[/QUOTE]

Bt will going to sell that to Pakistan coz both brahmos nd Barak r of India..lol..

 

[dani958]

ofcaurse not

 

[amardeep mishra]

AESA or PESA, they would be useless at this speed, for search radar the terminal speed is too fast track radar cannot track at this speed with the exception of a few Russian CW systems.

Remember that these systems were designed specifically to defeat western radar terminal defense and CLOS SHORAD.

Radar will not track it at terminal speed, you need infra red search and track as it crosses the LoS horizon, and engage with supersonic kinetic darts solution, CLOS preferred. The only thing that matches is StarStreak, and LMM on headon eng.

@Bilal Khan 777
Hi dear Bilal,Well actually thats not entirely correct,a radar with sufficiently high PRF(pulse repetition frequency) can track a fast moving target.And by fast moving I am refering to extremely fast missiles and even RVs. The track beam should have as less wavelength as possible for best possible resolution cell- resolution cell is basically the distance between two objects that a radar needs to effectively distinguish them. If two objects are flying in the same cell,then it'll take them as one object. There is a limitation to how high a frequency you can employ in your search and track radar- a higher frequency suffers from much higher attenuation vis-a-vis longer waves. Normally search radars employ L-band or even larger waves like UHV and even VHF etc. However tracking radars now a days use X-band like US sea based x-band radar that is world's largest x-band radar.Now the reason why it has an awesome range of 2500miles inspite of the fact that it works on x-band is because of itz ridiculously large aperature and power- these two factors are coupled together in something known as PAP(power aperture product).
Here is a link,kindly go through it.It serves as mid-course guidance to american BMDS.

https://www.mda.mil/global/documents/pdf/sbx_booklet.pdf

 

[CHI RULES]

The Brahmos range is so far less than 300km and at best shall be up to 300KM in near future, PN should acquire long range ASHMs to counter IN ships at 400KM. Further PN should at least for time being equip it's sole OHP with LRSAM and F22Ps with Medium range SAMS.

 

[hell9214]

The Brahmos range is so far less than 300km and at best shall be up to 300KM in near future, PN should acquire long range ASHMs to counter IN ships at 400KM. Further PN should at least for time being equip it's sole OHP with LRSAM and F22Ps with Medium range SAMS.

Nd how cn Pakistan acquire 400 km missiles without being in MTCR ....

Nd how cn Pakistan acquire 400 km missiles without being in MTCR ....[/QUOTE

Nd India have barak missiles to counter Pakistani missiles...

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

@Bilal Khan 777
Hi dear Bilal,Well actually thats not entirely correct,a radar with sufficiently high PRF(pulse repetition frequency) can track a fast moving target.And by fast moving I am refering to extremely fast missiles and even RVs. The track beam should have as less wavelength as possible for best possible resolution cell- resolution cell is basically the distance between two objects that a radar needs to effectively distinguish them. If two objects are flying in the same cell,then it'll take them as one object. There is a limitation to how high a frequency you can employ in your search and track radar- a higher frequency suffers from much higher attenuation vis-a-vis longer waves. Normally search radars employ L-band or even larger waves like UHV and even VHF etc. However tracking radars now a days use X-band like US sea based x-band radar that is world's largest x-band radar.Now the reason why it has an awesome range of 2500miles inspite of the fact that it works on x-band is because of itz ridiculously large aperature and power- these two factors are coupled together in something known as PAP(power aperture product).
Here is a link,kindly go through it.It serves as mid-course guidance to american BMDS.

https://www.mda.mil/global/documents/pdf/sbx_booklet.pdf

Thanks for the argument. Is there one on the market? is it available to Pakistan? I don't bring up situations that are not practical.

 

[amardeep mishra]

Thanks for the argument. Is there one on the market? is it available to Pakistan? I don't bring up situations that are not practical.

@Bilal Khan 777
Fair enough,i was merely pointing out that tracking of a high velocity missile or an RV and guidance of interceptor is accomplished using a radar these days. Although most of the exo-atmospheric interceptors have either an IIR seeker or dual seekers. The reason why IIR seekers are prefered over lets say an active radar seeker is because an active radar seeker wont be able to distinguish between an actual RV and dummy if the "beta-coefficient" or ballistic coefficient of both RV and dummy is same.Thats not the case with an IIR.
As for pakistan though,I am not sure what kind of tracking radar they have.If i am not mistaken(kindly correct me if I am wrong!),the most advanced ground based surveillance radar in pakistani inventory is american TPS-77 that based on the arrangement of antennae clearly indicates that it can only electronically steer the beam in elevation and not in azimuth. Besides the number of antennae(active transmitting modules which are 34 in number) also put restriction on the number of independent beams it can furnish for various tasks. And although it can search vast volumes using it L-band beam,it cant effectively track a fast moving RV or lets say a 3-mach supersonic missile.

http://www.lockheedmartin.co.in/con...-based-air-surveillance/TPS-77_SPEC_sheet.pdf

 

[Pakistan First]

It's really amusing to see Indian kids and mall ninjas coming here and posting about stuff that they know f*** about.

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

@Bilal Khan 777
Fair enough,i was merely pointing out that tracking of a high velocity missile or an RV and guidance of interceptor is accomplished using a radar these days. Although most of the exo-atmospheric interceptors have either an IIR seeker or dual seekers. The reason why IIR seekers are prefered over lets say an active radar seeker is because an active radar seeker wont be able to distinguish between an actual RV and dummy if the "beta-coefficient" or ballistic coefficient of both RV and dummy is same.Thats not the case with an IIR.
As for pakistan though,I am not sure what kind of tracking radar they have.If i am not mistaken(kindly correct me if I am wrong!),the most advanced ground based surveillance radar in pakistani inventory is american TPS-77 that based on the arrangement of antennae clearly indicates that it can only electronically steer the beam in elevation and not in azimuth. Besides the number of antennae(active transmitting modules which are 34 in number) also put restriction on the number of independent beams it can furnish for various tasks. And although it can search vast volumes using it L-band beam,it cant effectively track a fast moving RV or lets say a 3-mach supersonic missile.

http://www.lockheedmartin.co.in/con...-based-air-surveillance/TPS-77_SPEC_sheet.pdf

You ask a question, and then answer it yourself proving my point.

 

[fatman17]

Land based CWIS systems