MODP Year Book 2017-18

[war&peace]

How would a CM like SOM design will work with Supersonic ? Will there be any limitation related to it designs ?

It is subsonic design.

 

[YeBeWarned]

It is subsonic design.

can post some Supersonic missile design ..

 

[JamD]

It's likely a supersonic-cruising design; either an original project (like Harba, Babur-3, etc) or a turnkey off-the-shelf buy of a Chinese AShM like HD-1A or CM-302. @JamD

Unfortunately, as I have said on other threads, being away from Pakistan for so long means I don't know much detail about these things anymore. I faintly recall something about an indigenous project on this so this might be that. Hard to recall.

@JamD didn't you say there was work on new air-breathing designs? Anyways, I hope there's scope in this supersonic AShM for airborne (via JF-17) deployment too.

As far as I could tell, that work was very early stages and certainly not ready for a missile last year. EDIT: This was particularly work on an air-augmented rocket like on the Meteor.

This book also talks about ATAK so I am not sure how seriously to take it.

 

[Bossman]

Yep we're talking about a ramjet (at least) air breathing engine, a very different beast I imagine (with its own issues re: flight control, fuel efficiency, etc). The first variant will probably be too heavy for the JF-17, basically tied to our surface warships and land launchers first. But if we're taking Project Azm seriously, then lessons on lightweight aero structures/composites, flight control systems, etc, should start making its way to cruise missile development.

As it stands, we'll be a step behind the Indians. They already have Brahmos, but will move onto the Brahmos NG (which their Tejas is supposed to be able to carry). It'll surprising if we can start out with something as light as the Brahmos NG on the first iteration. But doable if we prioritize it and secure the expertise (via South Africa, Ukraine, China, etc).

There is nothing which suggest it’s an anti ship or surface to surface missile.

 

[khanasifm]

Ylc-18a is new news

https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-PLA-IADS-Radars.html#mozTocId486275

CETC YLC-18 High Mobility Medium Range Low Altitude 3D Radar



This is a two-vehicle convoy, high mobility, medium-range, low-altitude 3D radar announced by CETC in June 2007 at Singapore.

The reported system features are excellent low-altitude performance with high measurement accuracy, strong ECCM capability.

Specifications:
Operating frequency: EF-band
Coverage: (Pd = 80%, RCS = 2m2)
Range: ≥ 250km
Height: ≥ 12,000m
Elevation: 0º ~ 35º
Azimuth: 0º ~ 360º

Its detection range suggest instantaneous PRF of 600pps thus operational PRF of approx 400 is suspected.

Measurement accuracy: (rms)
Azimuth: ≤ 0.3º
Range: ≤ 100m
Height: ≤ 600m (within 200km)
Assembly/disassembly: 20mins/4 persons
MTBCF: ≥ 1,000 hrs
MTTR: ≤ 30 mins

In view of its 3D capability and potential to control aircraft and surface-to-air weapons, its likely frequency cover is shown, which is within the ITU regulated bands.

 

[khanasifm]

http://modp.gov.pk/frmDetails.aspx

 

[khanasifm]

REK for bomb 1 million dollars each , seems too high must be typo???

 

[JamD]

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) I don't think anyone has noticed this yet but there are two distinct range extension kits.

The first called REK here as shown as a purchase (for a large sum that is probably a typo as @khanasifm pointed out). The second is called IREK. I am assuming this is short for indigenous or improved REK.

I was talking to an AWC engineer about REK and on something I said, they said "oh you must be talking about the Chinese REK. There are two." I think we've bought a large number of LS-6 kits and a local design has been developed in parallel. What if the cost listed is not a typo and that's what the Chinese are selling them for. That would certainly be a motivation to develop the kit in-house.

EDIT: Evidence for why there are two distinct REK:

EDIT: The I is for ingenious for sure. Confirmed it.

 

[Thorough Pro]

Not off the shelf, this was a brand new built from scratch very long range supersonic anti ship missile tested in December 2017. This is 100% Pakistani missile and very lethal. This is all I can share.

It's likely a supersonic-cruising design; either an original project (like Harba, Babur-3, etc) or a turnkey off-the-shelf buy of a Chinese AShM like HD-1A or CM-302. @JamD

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Unfortunately, as I have said on other threads, being away from Pakistan for so long means I don't know much detail about these things anymore. I faintly recall something about an indigenous project on this so this might be that. Hard to recall.


As far as I could tell, that work was very early stages and certainly not ready for a missile last year. EDIT: This was particularly work on an air-augmented rocket like on the Meteor.

This book also talks about ATAK so I am not sure how seriously to take it.

It's all from 2017-2018, so everything on it is a year behind where we are today. That said, TAI told me flatly that the target delivery date for the T129s to the PAA was 2021. So, there's time, otherwise it'll have to spillover to TAI's ITAR-free platform or an alternative from China.

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) I don't think anyone has noticed this yet but there are two distinct range extension kits.

The first called REK here as shown as a purchase (for a large sum that is probably a typo as @khanasifm pointed out). The second is called IREK. I am assuming this is short for indigenous or improved REK.

I was talking to an AWC engineer about REK and on something I said, they said "oh you must be talking about the Chinese REK. There are two." I think we've bought a large number of LS-6 kits and a local design has been developed in parallel. What if the cost listed is not a typo and that's what the Chinese are selling them for. That would certainly be a motivation to develop the kit in-house.

EDIT: Evidence for why there are two distinct REK:
View attachment 578945

EDIT: The I is for ingenious for sure. Confirmed it.

The REK looks like the Chinese FT-6, not LS-6. So, if what we've been seeing thus far has been the FT-6, then we haven't seen what IREK looks like. I wonder what it could be: ToT FT-6 or LS-6? Or an original project?

 

[Areesh]

@Bilal Khan (Quwa)

What about this kornet atgm mentioned in the document? When did we buy this? I never heard anything about it

 

[JamD]

The REK looks like the Chinese FT-6, not LS-6. So, if what we've been seeing thus far has been the FT-6, then we haven't seen what IREK looks like. I wonder what it could be: ToT FT-6 or LS-6? Or an original project?

Yes possibly the FT-6. LS-6 was just the one I recalled immediately.

I think it's an original project judging from what I've gathered from the engineers' comments.

EDIT: The recent censored test and the censoring on the news report on airforce day program might be the IREK. Not sure.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

@Bilal Khan (Quwa)

What about this kornet atgm mentioned in the document? When did we buy this? I never heard anything about it

It must be related to the Pak-Russian defence deal reports from 2017/2018.

Yes possibly the FT-6. LS-6 was just the one I recalled immediately.

I think it's an original project judging from what I've gathered from the engineers' comments.

EDIT: The recent censored test and the censoring on the news report on airforce day program might be the IREK. Not sure.

This appears to be the case. But it seems they're keeping the IREK close to the chest.

 

[Areesh]

It must be related to the Pak-Russian defence deal reports from 2017/2018.

This came out of nowhere. Anyways a good addition in our arsenal

 

[Fawadqasim1]

Very interesting and reassuring but those kornet e missiles are very costly aren't they.