Pakistan Navy tests Harbah Cruise Missile

[Safriz]

I still think it's the short version Babur 3 derivative with 450 km range, but let's wait for official statement by ISPR.

 

[X.I.X]

ALLAH O AKBAR. THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST MISSILE TESTED BY PAK NAVY. THE PARAMETERS FALLS BEYOND 96.7% WITH +-5 meters strike capability.

 

[Army research]

ALLAH O AKBAR. THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST MISSILE TESTED BY PAK NAVY. THE PARAMETERS FALLS BEYOND 96.7% WITH +-5 meters strike capability.

Please stop using capitals and what is the source for those figures

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

ALLAH O AKBAR. THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST MISSILE TESTED BY PAK NAVY. THE PARAMETERS FALLS BEYOND 96.7% WITH +-5 meters strike capability.

I love the exaggerated conjectured numbers. Horse manure. What is this data? Where is the reference? Where is the comparison? Where is the data of firing 200 rounds?

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Looked like it hit the target 100% dead center .. it was a success

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

Looked like it hit the target 100% dead center .. it was a success

ever heard what a one hit wonder is?

 

[GriffinsRule]

Hitting a static target with no ECM, no active counter-measures like flares, smoke or even maneuvering, etc could be done with a missile from the 1960s too.
Without knowing the test parameters or any details of the system, we can call the test a success, but there is almost no information available to come to any real conclusions aside from that PN is testing a new missile.
Hope is more tests are followed and the system is validated and put into operational use.

 

[Safriz]

Hitting a static target with no ECM, no active counter-measures like flares, smoke or even maneuvering, etc could be done with a missile from the 1960s too.
Without knowing the test parameters or any details of the system, we can call the test a success, but there is almost no information available to come to any real conclusions aside from that PN is testing a new missile.
Hope is more tests are followed and the system is validated and put into operational use.

You are funny.
Nowhere in the world an anti ship missile is tested with CIWS on target.
You ask Pakistan to do something not even USA and Russia do.

 

[GriffinsRule]

You are funny.
Nowhere in the world an anti ship missile is tested with CIWS on target.
You ask Pakistan to do something not even USA and Russia do.

No of course not, and no one is asking for a CIWS to be destroyed for a test. The point I was trying to make was in response to the claim of "THE PARAMETERS FALLS BEYOND 96.7% WITH +-5 meters strike capability"

No one knows anything about the performance of this missile (real world capabilities) or much less the test parameters, such as range tested, mid-course guidance, maybe attempts at electronic jamming, etc.

 

[Safriz]

No of course not, and no one is asking for a CIWS to be destroyed for a test. The point I was trying to make was in response to the claim of "THE PARAMETERS FALLS BEYOND 96.7% WITH +-5 meters strike capability"

No one knows anything about the performance of this missile (real world capabilities) or much less the test parameters, such as range tested, mid-course guidance, maybe attempts at electronic jamming, etc.

That's how missiles are tested anywhere in the world and as long as it hits a static target with a big radar reflector on, the test is called a resounding success.
Dodging CIWS is a capability which cannot be tested but can be incorporated in missile software by giving it capability of wiggling just before hitting target or rising and then plunging in target. But even that is no guarantee of missile survival.
That's why more than one missiles are fired on defended targets.

 

[MastanKhan]

ever heard what a one hit wonder is?

Hi,

Could you kindly expand on that!

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

Hi,

Could you kindly expand on that!

One test of anything is not 97 precent, or 99 percent. Tests are done in dozens, in hundreds to get data. I get really angry when i see first of type or the first publicly released of a type declared "100% accurate.

No of course not, and no one is asking for a CIWS to be destroyed for a test. The point I was trying to make was in response to the claim of "THE PARAMETERS FALLS BEYOND 96.7% WITH +-5 meters strike capability"

No one knows anything about the performance of this missile (real world capabilities) or much less the test parameters, such as range tested, mid-course guidance, maybe attempts at electronic jamming, etc.

i agree.

That's how missiles are tested anywhere in the world and as long as it hits a static target with a big radar reflector on, the test is called a resounding success.
Dodging CIWS is a capability which cannot be tested but can be incorporated in missile software by giving it capability of wiggling just before hitting target or rising and then plunging in target. But even that is no guarantee of missile survival.
That's why more than one missiles are fired on defended targets.

No, this is not how missiles are tested in the world, or in Pakistan. This is how missile test limited data is released for public consumption like yours.

You are funny.
Nowhere in the world an anti ship missile is tested with CIWS on target.
You ask Pakistan to do something not even USA and Russia do.

He maybe funny, but you seem just naive.

 

[Safriz]

One test of anything is not 97 precent, or 99 percent. Tests are done in dozens, in hundreds to get data. I get really angry when i see first of type or the first publicly released of a type declared "100% accurate.


i agree.



No, this is not how missiles are tested in the world, or in Pakistan. This is how missile test limited data is released for public consumption like yours.



He maybe funny, but you seem just naive.

Ok big boy.
Instead of throwing insults left right and centre, come up with something useful. So how else missiles are tested when not for public consumption. Let's hear it from you

 

[Safriz]

Is this true???

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1424232531022260

 

[The Deterrent]

Is this true???

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1424232531022260