Pakistan cruise missiles pose key challenge to India

[Cheetah786]

1. An Airplane also does not have a fixed trajectory and is much more maneuverable than a cruise missile + there is world fastest supercomputer in it in form of human brain and yet it is easier to shot down than a ballistic missile

I am no expert on missiles or jet fighters,Are you telling us jet fighters and missiles travel at the same speeds? and are the same size?

 

[bloo]

@bloo I will not ask the Nazis , the image and the character of Fuhrer It is as simple as that , neutral sources are preferred for a reason . Well , the first test flight and the subsequent ones numbering around eight of Babur were successful , that is true , now if you wonder why , you are starting to look for something not present in this business - morals . Nice philosphical lecture , but the critic has to declare the "source" of his information or provide the data , he's basing his opinion on - both are absent in this case . Why expect me to beleive it ? The whole thing has been going around in circles since you couldn't comprehend the technological correlation concept and kept mixing it with the cause of failure and argument followed another - that isn't my fault now . I have been posting in this thread for long and unfortunately I wasn't the one who started to compare a missile under development with an operational one - your countrymen and you yourself were , comparing the first flight and declaring something yet to make its first successful flight as way ahead and better than its counterpart .

Well I can say the same to you and it will be just as simple.
On the contrary, if I am wondering why and if people seem to blast me for it then I am probably touching the right nerve.
Be it 8 or dozen tests, if you are willing to say that Pakistan has had more successes than the US based on experiences in such a short time frame then yes Babur is great.
Well I don't see another journalist or anyone else refuting the claims, so why not?
Again, I do understand your "technological correlation" concept, you just don't understand where I'm proving you wrong.So do refer to last 6 lines of post #176 to see where you missed a step.
Well does it matter now, coz in the end you are comparing both the missiles.
And again plz don't misquote me I never said what Babur is capable of now, all I said was Nirbhay is doing much better than what Babur did in its first test.

 

[Secur]

And considering the 2nd test comes next month, i.e. less than a year, its still doing way better than Babur.

I believe that is your post that I quoted Re read it and see where you went wrong .

You could have said the same if I had used a source and well I haven't . Self praise , shall I call it ? . Claiming something unproven and from a biased source doesn't need refuting by anyone , no one even cares . Pakistan tested a cruise missile successfully in 2005 and that is it , provide proof that it travelled only 17 km and prove it wrong . Where does the US come in between ? Did I compare it with American missile tech ? I said to look for facts since morals are absent , the cause of the success is not from former but the latter , it has been successfully test fired eight times now , that is a fact . Doesn't matter how or why . From your first post , you have used a dubious source a blog and a website quoting the same blog to prove that a missile still under development is doing way better than a complete operational and inducted one . Anyone can claim a thousand things , therefore the burden of proof lies on the claimant , my boy , so why would anyone need to refute it ? After all , the blog doesn't provide any proof or source for this info .

The "technological correlation" you mentioned If I am not wrong was in your belief that most systems failed and not just the INS

I understood your points just fine , you kept mixing the technological correlation with cause of failure for some reason .

 

[Hulk]

@gslv mk3

Keeping the Russian Brahmos based on the Oniks sold by Indo-Russian consortium aside , what else do you have today which is operational ?

Because Raad and Babur have been tested before and are operational today . Because the cruise missile technology isn't something which is fairly easy to master . Pakistan has done it with operational systems and working towards new missiles . The 15 years claims may or may not be true but you still have around a decade to reach , where Pakistan is , in this field .

Well that is my worry too. I do not consider under development Missiles as answer. It takes time to develop things. What I am surprised is how Pakistan developed a cruise missile with lesser budget and industrial base. I am do not believe in things happening without logic, I surely believe they got help, most likely it was China working behind the scenes. However now that they have it and we do not, we are behind. I do not care much about how they got it. They have it that is what matters.

 

[bloo]

I believe that is your post that I quoted Re read it and see where you went wrong .

You could have said the same if I had used a source and well I haven't . Self praise , shall I call it ? . Claiming something unproven and from a biased source doesn't need refuting by anyone , no one even cares . Pakistan tested a cruise missile successfully in 2005 and that is it , provide proof that it travelled only 17 km and prove it wrong . Where does the US come in between ? Did I compare it with American missile tech ? I said to look for facts since morals are absent , the cause of the success is not from former but the latter , it has been successfully test fired eight times now , that is a fact . Doesn't matter how or why . From your first post , you have used a dubious source a blog and a website quoting the same blog to prove that a missile still under development is doing way better than a complete operational and inducted one . Anyone can claim a thousand things , therefore the burden of proof lies on the claimant , my boy , so why would anyone need to refute it ? After all , the blog doesn't provide any proof or source for this info .



I understood your points just fine , you kept mixing the technological correlation with cause of failure for some reason .

And where was I wrong again? If I am not mistaken Babur's 2nd test was two years after its 1st test, DRDO is doing it within a year. So yes Nirbhay is faring better than Babur was.

Yes I would have but I doubt that is necessary since we came forward with our own weaknesses, as we don't really feel an impending inferiority complex.
Or refuting seem difficult when you can't, so you question the source itself.
Sure the Babur may or may not be more capable than Nirbhay today but the 1st test was 17km long and that is reported and no "neutral" Pakistani sources has refuted it.
In the guise of no proof and no failures reported you are just deluding yourself, everyone fails but it seems Pakistan is impervious to failure, don't think that that is my premeditated thought but everything(history of cruise missiles+the 2 sources I provided against Pak's no failure record)just stinks from miles away.
No no no, we are anybodies and somebodies they are Aerospace engineers and defense correspondents their word contains some weight, so the burden of refuting lies on the refuter who are anybodies and somebodies.


Alright, since you are adamant in going round and round about a moot point, why don't you explain what you meant by,

Usually I do not argue like that , but doing only 30 percent of the intended target doesn't really look like a only-guidance problem to me for some reason .

cause this is what I was refuting all this time "technological correlation" was just a bonus.
Plz don't dodge the question again, its getting ridiculous.

 

[Secur]

@bloo What is ridiculous is you continuously running around in circles , with a dubious source claiming something unproven and beyond its capacity since it didn't have the data nor was a witness to the test nor provides a source for its own claim , no one needs to refute it since the burden of proof lies with the claimant and well the claimant here has nothing to offer for proof , just a hollow claim . Please feel free to continue . Yes we do not fail , we do not believe in morals and there are none here , ponder over it . Yea , you kept mixing the technological correlation with failure the whole time and now calling it a bonus , did you see your quoted posts ? Their words would have carried weight , if accompanied with some data and parameters and any other proof , its not there even by your revered professionals , so refute what ? A claim ? Really ? There's no burden of refuting , kid , making things up doesn't help . Never .

I meant nothing except the message to get your facts right and not twist things up by claiming a in-development missile is doing way better than an operational one . Now , do not dodge it . Yes , the source will always be questioned , dont get bothered by it now , a blog is not credible and a claim without proof needs no refuting .

 

[Secur]

@bloo Read it well .

The burden of proof is often associated with the Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit, the best translation of which seems to be: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."[1]

He who does not carry the burden of proof carries the benefit of assumption, meaning he needs no evidence to support his claim. Fulfilling the burden of proof effectively captures the benefit of assumption, passing the burden of proof off to another party.

Legal burden of proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Bratva]

@Oscar thread deserves your attention and clean up.

And where was I wrong again? If I am not mistaken Babur's 2nd test was two years after its 1st test, DRDO is doing it within a year. So yes Nirbhay is faring better than Babur was.

Yes I would have but I doubt that is necessary since we came forward with our own weaknesses, as we don't really feel an impending inferiority complex.
Or refuting seem difficult when you can't, so you question the source itself.
Sure the Babur may or may not be more capable than Nirbhay today but the 1st test was 17km long and that is reported and no "neutral" Pakistani sources has refuted it.
In the guise of no proof and no failures reported you are just deluding yourself, everyone fails but it seems Pakistan is impervious to failure, don't think that that is my premeditated thought but everything(history of cruise missiles+the 2 sources I provided against Pak's no failure record)just stinks from miles away.
No no no, we are anybodies and somebodies they are Aerospace engineers and defense correspondents their word contains some weight, so the burden of refuting lies on the refuter who are anybodies and somebodies.


Alright, since you are adamant in going round and round about a moot point, why don't you explain what you meant by,

cause this is what I was refuting all this time "technological correlation" was just a bonus.
Plz don't dodge the question again, its getting ridiculous.

Our missile technology is superior than yours because Our Cheif missile scientist Dr.Samar mubarak mand said so. So end of argument. Because India didn't refuted his claim which means India agreed with his claims. So your Nirbhay is better Babur CM argument just failed spectacularly.

 

[Hulk]

@bolo @secure I am not sure why you discussing Babur's first test in some many of your post. It does not matter to me if it failed at 17 KM or not. Bolo the reality is we are still developing vs they have developed. Going into previous failures or how it was developed who helped is good for learning history. Secure bolo has a point too, when we test something it matters a lot on number of system that workes as expected because then you know probablity of failure is lesser for next test. If most systems did worked well in Nirbhay it gives confidence for next test. This is visible if they ready to re-test in a year. Just summarizing what you guys are talking.

 

[bloo]

@bloo What is ridiculous is you continuously running around in circles , with a dubious source claiming something unproven and beyond its capacity since it didn't have the data nor was a witness to the test nor provides a source for its own claim , no one needs to refute it since the burden of proof lies with the claimant and well the claimant here has nothing to offer for proof , just a hollow claim . Please feel free to continue . Yes we do not fail , we do not believe in morals and there are none here , ponder over it . Yea , you kept mixing the technological correlation with failure the whole time and now calling it a bonus , did you see your quoted posts ? Their words would have carried weight , if accompanied with some data and parameters and any other proof , its not there even by your revered professionals , so refute what ? A claim ? Really ? There's no burden of refuting , kid , making things up doesn't help . Never .

I meant nothing except the message to get your facts right and not twist things up by claiming a in-development missile is doing way better than an operational one . Now , do not dodge it . Yes , the source will always be questioned , dont get bothered by it now , a blog is not credible and a claim without proof needs no refuting .

No what is ridiculous is you cleverly dodging my question again.
Well you don't need to answer anything about it anymore coz we both know you don't have any.

What iron clad "proof" is necessary anymore, I think it is common sense that leaders in cruise missile tech have failed so many times while apparently Pak hasn't, and 2 of my links are claiming something which irks you, and Pak brilliantly doesn't have many videos of Babur actually hitting a target.

Well there you have it, pondering is unnecessary and questioning napaak since of course you don't fail and are leaders in the area. I bet Babur runs on rhetorics and sarcasm too.

I never misunderstood your "technological correlation", if u looked above your shortsightedness then you could probably see my replies where I said that yes I agree with your, 'BrahMos ToT might have helped with Nirbhay or the Rafale thing'.
Their word carries weight simply by they being who they are and you being just an anonymous person in a forum simply furiously denying those professionals.

Nope you meant to claim a thing on your own accord even though you have no source to back it up like I do now.
And don't mention "technological correlation" "mixing up" and all that cr@p you are just dodging the question over and over again coz the last 6 lines of post #176 was my original query and you have not replied to it straightforwardly or even attempted to do so.

@bloo Read it well .

The burden of proof is often associated with the Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit, the best translation of which seems to be: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."[1]

He who does not carry the burden of proof carries the benefit of assumption, meaning he needs no evidence to support his claim. Fulfilling the burden of proof effectively captures the benefit of assumption, passing the burden of proof off to another party.

Legal burden of proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Buddy we are not playing Law & Order here, you don't need to get so serious its just a forum.
Proof no proof we'll finally agree to disagree, you'll just have sleep with 1 eye open.
Coz in the end we both know you'll sleep believing what you are so furiously defending regardless of it having a huge black spot.
Whereas, I know that 8 months ago Nirbhay did a 250 and 30 or so days from now it will probably do a 1000.

@Oscar thread deserves your attention and clean up.




Our missile technology is superior than yours because Our Cheif missile scientist Dr.Samar mubarak mand said so. So end of argument. Because India didn't refuted his claim which means India agreed with his claims. So your Nirbhay is better Babur CM argument just failed spectacularly.

Yeah sure......

Why don't we all keep trolling on specifics then, after all didn't Ahmad Mukhtar said that Pak won't last 40 or 50 days in a conventional border war today?

 

[Bratva]

@bolo @secure I am not sure why you discussing Babur's first test in some many of your post. It does not matter to me if it failed at 17 KM or not. Bolo the reality is we are still developing vs they have developed. Going into previous failures or how it was developed who helped is good for learning history. Secure bolo has a point too, when we test something it matters a lot on number of system that workes as expected because then you know probablity of failure is lesser for next test. If most systems did worked well in Nirbhay it gives confidence for next test. This is visible if they ready to re-test in a year. Just summarizing what you guys are talking.

First test was a success. Second test took 2 years because an upgraded variant came along, not the same thing tested once again. You see not he is ignorant and stupid, he refuses to read the babur database thread.

Nirbhay is being tested because they are not going to test a new thing. It will be the same systems.

No what is ridiculous is you cleverly dodging my question again.
Well you don't need to answer anything about it anymore coz we both know you don't have any.

What iron clad "proof" is necessary anymore, I think it is common sense that leaders in cruise missile tech have failed so many times while apparently Pak hasn't, and 2 of my links are claiming something which irks you, and Pak brilliantly doesn't have many videos of Babur actually hitting a target.

Well there you have it, pondering is unnecessary and questioning napaak since of course you don't fail and are leaders in the area. I bet Babur runs on rhetorics and sarcasm too.

I never misunderstood your "technological correlation", if u looked above your shortsightedness then you could probably see my replies where I said that yes I agree with your, 'BrahMos ToT might have helped with Nirbhay or the Rafale thing'.
Their word carries weight simply by they being who they are and you being just an anonymous person in a forum simply furiously denying those professionals.

Nope you meant to claim a thing on your own accord even though you have no source to back it up like I do now.
And don't mention "technological correlation" "mixing up" and all that cr@p you are just dodging the question over and over again coz the last 6 lines of post #176 was my original query and you have not replied to it straightforwardly or even attempted to do so.



Buddy we are not playing Law & Order here, you don't need to get so serious its just a forum.
Proof no proof we'll finally agree to disagree, you'll just have sleep with 1 eye open.
Coz in the end we both know you'll sleep believing what you are so furiously defending regardless of it having a huge black spot.
Whereas, I know that 8 months ago Nirbhay did a 250 and 30 or so days from now it will probably do a 1000.




Yeah sure......

Why don't we all keep trolling on specifics then, after all didn't Ahmad Mukhtar said that Pak won't last 40 or 50 days in a conventional border war today?

Your army chief calimed your army can't fight more than 10 days! Yeah,,, at least Pakistan can withstand 40-50 days

Army has ammunition only for 10 days in war situation! - News Oneindia

 

[Secur]

@indianrabbit I get your point about validation of different technologies just fine , I agree with it since the official sources say so . But this " death of logic " by preferring an unproven claim by a biased source over established fact of the first successful test flight of Babur is beyond me to be honest .

@bloo This is no law and order thing only . It applies to debate too just fine , the concept is also present for scientific and philosphical stuff in the same meaning . You continue your merry go round though , dodging the absence of any proof for the claim by your professional , doesn't irk me . Why would it since its just a hollow claim being quoted by a source ?

 

[bloo]

First test was a success. Second test took 2 years because an upgraded variant came along, not the same thing tested once again. You see not he is ignorant and stupid, he refuses to read the babur database thread.

Nirbhay is being tested because they are not going to test a new thing. It will be the same systems.




Your army chief calimed your army can't fight more than 2 days! Yeah,,, at least Pakistan can withstand 40-50 days

I do follow the Babur thread.
Nirbhay will have the same systems and the changes in the INS which caused the problems to begin with.

ENJOY....

 

[Bratva]

I do follow the Babur thread.
Nirbhay will have the same systems and the changes in the INS which caused the problems to begin with.

ENJOY....

Go on, admit you are shameless person. From 17 Km claim to Babur tested 2 years is equal to Nirbhay > Babur... While First babur tested was a 500 Km, second babur tested was a 700 Km. Both tested successfully and are operational with an CEP of 5 meter. Suck it.

Atleast we don't have faulty ammunation like your army has

 

[Secur]

@bloo You say " will have " and we can say " we have " , therein lies the difference actually .

@Aeronaut Clear it .