Pakistan cruise missiles pose key challenge to India

[Dillinger]

@Hyperion More dick measuring going on?

Children, cruise missiles shall always remain a threat. Putting it succinctly and without much technical jargon- the land attack CMs are terrain following (there is a difference between terrain following and cruising below radar horizon- so before someone knocks their head over it- learn it) articles (which is the primary reason that most of them are subsonic)- the only effective way to provide defense against them is to have a coordinated tracking system comprised of AEW&C platforms and aerostat mounted radars- part of the reason why the IAF IACCCS has a very large aerostat sensor component- oh and real time high data load data sharing ability. Even then complete protection and coverage over a large landmass is not possible.
IF anyone wants more details then please deposit the required fee in our (me and Hype's) accounts and we shall be happy to pilferage our store of amateur information and put forth a cogent reply along with liberal borrowing from online sources and senior members.

 

[Secur]

Ok sir, i agree to be called as a ignorant fool if it pleases u. Doesn't changes the truth, no matter how much u try to twist my words by talking about v2. i wasn't talking about copying. i was talking about performance. but anyways, this discussion is over from my side.

Sorry , what discussion ?

Next time , try not to claim things which you do not understand hence cant explain and since you cant explain , cant prove . Simple stuff , really .

nd trust me that will be better than any Tmhawk rip-off

Any proof ?

IF anyone wants more details then please deposit the required fee in our (me and Hype's) accounts and we shall be happy to pilferage our store of amateur information and put forth a cogent reply along with liberal borrowing from online sources and senior members.

The question is ' Why so serious ? ' ?

 

[Hyperion]

Tujhay kiya hua? Itnee khafgee kion?

Challenge accepted, we will make subsonic 1000 Km range cruise Missile. nd trust me that will be better than any Tmhawk rip-off...


Now close the thread..

Need a list of ripoffs?

 

[Bratva]

A missile flying at tree top height, Even americans can't bring it down with their sophisticated sensors and indians here pissing about their Super duper DODO sensors

 

[Shadow_Hunter]

A missile flying at tree top height, Even americans can't bring it down with their sophisticated sensors and indians here pissing about their Super duper DODO sensors

did u test babur against americans as well? i see. You generally tend to be very objective about pakistani weapons, what happened?

 

[Bratva]

did u test babur against americans as well? i see. You generally tend to be very objective about pakistani weapons, what happened?

I can't tolerate shyte shoveling by indians. What babur does is it minimizes time of detection despite passing through dense sensor environment, it will be detected 100-150 KM before hitting the target. Either if you got all bases covered with CIWS. It's 90-95 percent chance Babur will hit it's target with accuracy

But the Genius Indians usually dreams of bringing down every CM and BM of Pakistan

dont compare urself with americans.. we all know the chinese ancestry of your cheap weapons.. it may fall down in your backward.. probability of that is way too high.

Ah,,, In soviet india, the percentage of population who has "bhoosa" in their brains are high! We talking about CM and here the indian cheapster.

 

[Shadow_Hunter]

I can't tolerate shyte shoveling by indians. What babur does is it minimizes time of detection despite passing through dense sensor environment, it will be detected 100-150 KM before hitting the target. Either if you got all bases covered with CIWS. It's 90-95 percent chance Babur will hit it's target with accuracy

But the Genius Indians usually dreams of bringing down every CM and BM of Pakistan

There is something known as QR-SAm as well. but anyways, the questions i asked from u in my post were rhetoric in nature, as u can easily judge.

 

[Bratva]

There is something known as QR-SAm as well. but anyways, the questions i asked from u in my post were rhetoric in nature, as u can easily judge.

Well can't blame you, In soviet india, every missile can be brought down by indians either in internet forum or in their fantasis

 

[Shadow_Hunter]

Well can't blame you, In soviet india, every missile can be brought down by indians either in internet forum or in their fantasis

not only in india, but in every country of the world, who is so heavily investing in QR sams. it wasn't me who claimed that americans can't bring down babur, and u blame indians to live in fantasies.

 

[IND151]

1. An Airplane also does not have a fixed trajectory and is much more maneuverable than a crusie 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.

2. Stealth cruise missiles does not exist and even their existence would not have changed dynamics in favor of cruise missiles.Stealth is a useful concept in case on Aircrafts because by the time a Radar detects a Stealth Aircraft, that radar would be dead.( Are you aware of the fact that every stealth aircraft could be detected by radar but at shorter range than conventional aircraft). A cruise missile does not have ability to fight back Radar, hence stealth in case of cruise missiles would not be a gamechanger.

3. Could be detected by look down shoot down radars, both AWACS and Aerostat even when in ground hugging mode. Another point is that a Cruise missile is not capable of ground hugging mode throughout the flight.

4. Ballistic missile are difficult to be shot down because interceptors have both speed and altitude limits. Also detecting a Ballistic warhead is difficult.

5. A cruise missile could be shot down by any Air defense system capable of shooting down Aircrafts. A SAM or AtoA missile is perfectly capable of shooting down a cruise missile. It could even by shot down by Air defense guns probably with less effort than that required for an Airplane since a cruise missile could not react to efforts of interception.

There are some sources which supports this claim, but concerned missiles are subsonic

 

[Bratva]

not only in india, but in every country of the world, who is so heavily investing in QR sams. it wasn't me who claimed that americans can't bring down babur, and u blame indians to live in fantasies.

So Did americans successfully brought down CM in their recent tests?

 

[Shadow_Hunter]

So Did americans successfully brought down CM in their recent tests?

we actually don't know that. The advancements in the patriot system are done to accommodate cruise missiles as well. Infact a missile to target cruise missile was developed in patriot 2 itself. obviously they did not develop the missile without doing tests.

 

[Dillinger]

@Oscar sir, since this is a thread on CMs, I had a question. I had written a post on the flight paths utilized by various missiles- anyway so I was contrasting the advantages of a sea skimming profile (hi-lo-lo) against a simple hi-hi-hi path with context to radar horizon and the radar clutter zone ergo the oft stated point that a sea skimming ASCM for example might end up only being detected 40-30Kms out by its intended target. But then I started to wonder, since even the CM's which follow a hi-lo-lo path still have to execute a climb before they descend into their "cruise" shouldn't a sufficiently powerful radar with the adequate range still detect its launch- not track it or provide a vector for interceptors but just detect the launch since for a certain period of time the CM is indeed flying at a relatively high altitude? Also since ASCMs which are sea skimming still need to pop up to get a lock on its target right, so does it execute such a maneuver once its already within the detection range of a radar anyway where cruising at 5 (I believe the altitude varies between 5-50 meters in order to follow a sea skimming profile) meters above the surface becomes immaterial or does it employ such a pop up maneuver before? Apologies for wording the question rather poorly.

 

[SQ8]

@<u><a href="http://www.defence.pk/forums/member.php?u=14956" target="_blank">Oscar</a></u> sir, since this is a thread on CMs, I had a question. I had written a post on the flight paths utilized by various missiles- anyway so I was contrasting the advantages of a sea skimming profile (hi-lo-lo) against a simple hi-hi-hi path with context to radar horizon and the radar clutter zone ergo the oft stated point that a sea skimming ASCM for example might end up only being detected 40-30Kms out by its intended target. But then I started to wonder, since even the CM's which follow a hi-lo-lo path still have to execute a climb before they descend into their "cruise" shouldn't a sufficiently powerful radar with the adequate range still detect its launch- not track it or provide a vector for interceptors but just detect the launch since for a certain period of time the CM is indeed flying at a relatively high altitude? Also since ASCMs which are sea skimming still need to pop up to get a lock on its target right, so does it execute such a maneuver once its already within the detection range of a radar anyway where cruising at 5 (I believe the altitude varies between 5-50 meters in order to follow a sea skimming profile) meters above the surface becomes immaterial or does it employ such a pop up maneuver before? Apologies for wording the question rather poorly.

That all depends on the launch mode. A ground launched CM might go straight into its lo-lo-lo profile.

Will a well placed radar pick something like this up? Not a ground based radar as long as the launch platform is well behind the horizon. However, with a Aerostat these launches should be detectable but may be mistaken for false contacts unless one is specifically looking for these. Clearly the profile Babur is flying is anything from terrain hugging or otherwise but then many of these test are declared operational test which are essentially development tests.

As for the pop-up maneuver.. that does not last more than a few seconds and is needed only to verify the position of the target. it does give the missile away but then it also dissapears as quickly. So the Ship may be alerted and may start taking evasive actions.. it may still not be able to lock on or shoot down such a weapon.

 

[Dillinger]

That all depends on the launch mode. A ground launched CM might go straight into its lo-lo-lo profile.

Will a well placed radar pick something like this up? Not a ground based radar as long as the launch platform is well behind the horizon. However, with a Aerostat these launches should be detectable but may be mistaken for false contacts unless one is specifically looking for these. Clearly the profile Babur is flying is anything from terrain hugging or otherwise but then many of these test are declared operational test which are essentially development tests.

As for the pop-up maneuver.. that does not last more than a few seconds and is needed only to verify the position of the target. it does give the missile away but then it also dissapears as quickly. So the Ship may be alerted and may start taking evasive actions.. it may still not be able to lock on or shoot down such a weapon.

The aerostat bit has been very clear to us for a while- the sheer no. of aerostat mounted radars we are busy setting up and low-level detection gap filler radars (meant to be deployed very close to the borders in order to provide some depth in terms of detecting an inbound headed for targets deeper in) is a testament to that. Babur is terrain following last I checked, no?

Specifically though- for example the MF-STAR radar on our to be launched DDGM is quoted to have a detection range in excess of 300Km for high altitude objects, now the range of our ASCM (BrahMos) is 280Km and it does indeed make a climb first before settling into the sea skimming cruise- so when it makes that climb its within the detection range of the MF-STAR, will the said sensor at least detect the launch in this case?