New Threat to Pakistan with India,s New K4 SLBM test next month

[gambit]

If its a anti-ship missile, it really cannot miss too much, can't it. Especially its a smaller ship. Even for a anti-ship missile, so CEP do not apply to anti-ship missile.

As for missile that require GPS, its the error of GPS signal that determine the accuracy.

But we are talking about ballistic missile here. Can India achieve CEP of zero for K4?

@gambit, can you explain what he is talking about ?

Sure...

The proper definition for the circular error probable (CEP) is: A circle around a pair of 'x,y' coordinates and that the circle has a %50 probability of containing the target.

Translation:

1- The 'x,y' coordinates DOES NOT represent the target.

2- The target is supposed to be inside that circle.

3- The target can be anywhere inside that circle.

I would add that this is from the weapon's perspective. Purists would curl their toes and flinch at that but I found a long time ago that for my trainees, explaining things from a weapon's perspective tends to clear up a lot of misconceptions.

There are many reasons for the size of that circle ranging from technical to intelligence.

The technical reasons are from technology sophistication such as sensor, avionics, or propulsion that affects the missile's flight from launch and target detection at the destination.

The intelligence reasons are from knowing or not knowing the precise locations of targets. Obviously, the Soviets did not allow American agents to measure Soviet ICBM silos, so we had to resort to other means such as satellite photo recon, then we superimpose a map with boundaries upon those photos and calculate the 'x,y' coordinates of the silos.

The greater the sophistication and precision of both technology and intelligence, the smaller the circle. The imprecision of the intelligence of Soviet ICBM silos resulted in varying CEP figures and necessitate the use of nuclear warheads to increase the odds of their destruction.

This statement: '...CEP do not apply to anti-ship missile.'

Should be expressed as: 'The CEP is not ALLOWED for an anti-ship missile.'

Theoretically speaking, if the target is stationary in the air or on sea surface, a CEP figure can be calculated.

But practically speaking...The no allowance is based on the fact that the target is moving and the non-nuclear warhead that require the missile to literally impact the ship in order to remove the ship from the calculus of war. Simply put, an anti-ship cruise missile is just like an anti-ballistic warhead interceptor -- must not miss. So calculating a CEP figure is useless. It can be done, even against a moving target, just that there is no utility for it.

If we make that allowance, we must have a customer/user for that figure and that customer/user would be a nuclear warhead.

In designing a non-nuclear warhead anti-ship cruise missile, if the CEP is calculated via electronics engineering, without this section the avionics would be a little bit smaller and lighter, if the CEP is calculated via software, the codes would be a little bit less complex.

GPS navigation is not for target detection and impact when the target is mobile. It is good only to get the missile to the general area and hopefully its sensor will pick up something. If a missile have a CEP figure of 1 meter and it got deviated somewhere in its flight, that precise capability does not disappear when the missile found no target in the area because it is in the wrong location.

 

[gambit]

BS.

Anti ship missile do not target the edge of ship that if they miss the target by a meter, it will miss the ship. It will hit the ship even though they miss the target the by 10 to 20 meter as they are targeted at the middle of the ship about 1 to 2 meter of water level.

For surface to surface missile CEP do not matter much if they are equipped with Nuclear weapon. How ever DRDO is making the missile which can be targeted at a target with conventional role. So CEP matters a lot for us. We are Successful in making that.

Hold on...A ship, just like any irregularly shaped target, is quite problematic for any missile.

Assume a radar sensor for now...

That is how a radar, or even an IR sensor, sees a ship: A collection or cluster of reflecting surfaces.

So in order for your missile to home in on the center of this irregularly shaped target, the missile must have the most complete view of the target: lateral or topside. Its targeting algorithm must know where the edges/ends are and calculate the middle. That is not hard to do and all high quality missiles can do it. Remember, radar and electricity move at the speed of light.

The problem for your argument is that your missile do not know how a ship (or many ships) will be arrayed by the time the missile reached the general area. The missile could be looking at the ship's smallest profiles: fore or aft view. If the ship is arrayed at an angle to the missile's sensor view, that view will not be as complete as the full lateral view and would present the missile with less quantity of reflecting surfaces to calculate. Now take in countermeasures which for radar would be chaff which could blanket the missile's entire radar view.

So yes, even when presented with a full lateral view, there could be circumstances where the missile could miss by just one meter and that would constitute a fail.

 

[janon]

Hold on...A ship, just like any irregularly shaped target, is quite problematic for any missile.

Assume a radar sensor for now...

That is how a radar, or even an IR sensor, sees a ship: A collection or cluster of reflecting surfaces.

So in order for your missile to home in on the center of this irregularly shaped target, the missile must have the most complete view of the target: lateral or topside. Its targeting algorithm must know where the edges/ends are and calculate the middle. That is not hard to do and all high quality missiles can do it. Remember, radar and electricity move at the speed of light.

The problem for your argument is that your missile do not know how a ship (or many ships) will be arrayed by the time the missile reached the general area. The missile could be looking at the ship's smallest profiles: fore or aft view. If the ship is arrayed at an angle to the missile's sensor view, that view will not be as complete as the full lateral view and would present the missile with less quantity of reflecting surfaces to calculate. Now take in countermeasures which for radar would be chaff which could blanket the missile's entire radar view.

So yes, even when presented with a full lateral view, there could be circumstances where the missile could miss by just one meter and that would constitute a fail.

Wouldn't the missile be guided by the launch platform's sensors as well, in addition to its own? Can't an aircraft's radar accurately target the middle of a ship and relay the coordinates to the missile?

 

[gambit]

Wouldn't the missile be guided by the launch platform's sensors as well, in addition to its own?

Not if the launch platform and general target area are over-the-horizon (OTH) to each other.

Can't an aircraft's radar accurately target the middle of a ship and relay the coordinates to the missile?

This would be either data or radar guidance. Or both if you have the money. Radar guidance is when the missile uses the target reflections created by your radar. Data guidance is when you tell the missile the spatial/geo coordinates of the target, aka 'data linking'.

 

[Armstrong]

Not if the launch platform and general target area are over-the-horizon (OTH) to each other.


This would be either data or radar guidance. Or both if you have the money. Radar guidance is when the missile uses the target reflections created by your radar. Data guidance is when you tell the missile the spatial/geo coordinates of the target, aka 'data linking'.

Can't one attach a camera on the missiles head that transmits signals back to the firing platform & lets the user guide it to a target till an adequate distance after which the reaction time of the receipt couldn't possibly be adequate enough to react appropriately anyhow for a projectile traveling at that speed & altitude !

 

[HariPrasad]

Hold on...A ship, just like any irregularly shaped target, is quite problematic for any missile.

Assume a radar sensor for now...

That is how a radar, or even an IR sensor, sees a ship: A collection or cluster of reflecting surfaces.

So in order for your missile to home in on the center of this irregularly shaped target, the missile must have the most complete view of the target: lateral or topside. Its targeting algorithm must know where the edges/ends are and calculate the middle. That is not hard to do and all high quality missiles can do it. Remember, radar and electricity move at the speed of light.

The problem for your argument is that your missile do not know how a ship (or many ships) will be arrayed by the time the missile reached the general area. The missile could be looking at the ship's smallest profiles: fore or aft view. If the ship is arrayed at an angle to the missile's sensor view, that view will not be as complete as the full lateral view and would present the missile with less quantity of reflecting surfaces to calculate. Now take in countermeasures which for radar would be chaff which could blanket the missile's entire radar view.

So yes, even when presented with a full lateral view, there could be circumstances where the missile could miss by just one meter and that would constitute a fail.

From Whatever angle the missile approaches the ship and which ever part of ship is visible to Missile, Missile tries to home on the middle of whatever is visible to Missile and not on the edge of the ship. you would accept that more than one meter (As argued by Faithful) and In fact lot more than one meter of the part is visible to missile. So if missile misses by few meter (Single digit), It may not hit the area it intended but certainly hit the ship and not miss it.

 

[帅的一匹]

Time for PA induct HQ9 ABM.

 

[gslv mk3]

@wanglaokan

Pakistani members here claim that ABM systems are useless against their BMs ( which doesnt even,have MIRVs/MIRVs)

And you are proposing your ABM to counter a Shape Trajectory system like K 4 ???

 

[HariPrasad]

Time for PA induct HQ9 ABM.

HQ9 can not intercept K4.

 

[帅的一匹]

HQ9 can not intercept K4.

who tell you? it can and always can. China will also sell HQ26 anti-satellite to Pakistan in the future.

All India so-called advantage could be countered thourgh weapon purchase from China.

CHina will help Pakistan getting over any type of threat from its neignbour.

@wanglaokan

Pakistani members here claim that ABM systems are useless against their BMs ( which doesnt even,have MIRVs/MIRVs)

And you are proposing your ABM to counter a Shape Trajectory system like K 4 ???

It depends who produce it. I believe China sure can, So Pakistan also can.

 

[Echo_419]

who tell you? it can and always can. China will also sell HQ26 anti-satellite to Pakistan in the future.

All India so-called advantage could be countered thourgh weapon purchase from China.

Do you work in the Politburo or The Chinese Ministry of Defense
Fact is that with a 3,500 Km SLBM we will end the possibility of a Nuclear war in South Asia
Our Land based ICBMS are more than a match for them when a SLBM enters the game
Our victory is ensured

 

[HariPrasad]

who tell you? it can and always can. China will also sell HQ26 anti-satellite to Pakistan in the future.
All India so-called advantage could be countered thourgh weapon purchase from China.
CHina will help Pakistan getting over any type of threat from its neignbour.

Russia told that TOPOL M Can not be intercepted by best in the world ABM (Even THAAD). How can K4 be intercepted by Junk HQ 9 type of system. Sell Pakistan whatever you want. We are least concern of Chinese weapon sale to Pakistan. We shall think when America or France sell something to Pakistan. In fact we would like Pakistan to spend its money on Junk Chinese Weapon.

 

[bloo]

who tell you? it can and always can. China will also sell HQ26 anti-satellite to Pakistan in the future.

All India so-called advantage could be countered thourgh weapon purchase from China.

CHina will help Pakistan getting over any type of threat from its neignbour.


It depends who produce it. I believe China sure can, So Pakistan also can.

 

[gslv mk3]

@wanglaokan

So chinese & Pakistani designed ABMs would shoot down an STM??

And about ASAT sales...

 

[帅的一匹]

Why you guys feel so funny? K4 is unstoppable or you just hype from the beginning?

Do you work in the Politburo or The Chinese Ministry of Defense
Fact is that with a 3,500 Km SLBM we will end the possibility of a Nuclear war in South Asia
Our Land based ICBMS are more than a match for them when a SLBM enters the game
Our victory is ensured

With China watch Pakistan's back, your dirty plot won't be achieved.