What's new

Pakistani Missiles vs Indian Missiles

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have seen outlandish claims here.

However, the point is have you seen such level of insider knowledge being spilled out by people can only mean two things, none of which is good.

I cannot believe such easy access to sensitive information being permitted in open domain.

I still haven't seen any information on this forum which can be even a slight bit sensitive....People who are privy to any sensitive information are extremely careful to say anything even to their spouses, forget internet forums.
 
.
I still haven't seen any information on this forum which can be even a slight bit sensitive....People who are privy to any sensitive information are extremely careful to say anything even to their spouses, forget internet forums.

I know, most tall claims here have proven to be lies.
 
.
This is usually verified. Moreover, leave that distinction to us. Sandy is an excellent example of how we select people so you are insulting him as well. Suggest you stick to the topic and refute posts.


Now, the argument was on the lineage of Indian missiles vs Pakistanis Missiles.
Lets put it this way, the Ghauri series is clearly the Nodong; first painted and fired as it is off ships coming in from North Korea and later improved with home made guidance systems along with smaller engine improvements.

The Shaheen series is modified form of existing blueprints and apart from aerodynamics has less in Common with other missiles than thought. Essentially the whole lineup is a mix of existing designs heavily modified for requirements or local derivations of that basic design. It is hard to deny that the Babur looks a lot like the Tomahawk but whats inside it has little to do with the BGM-109.

The first Indian missiles by contrast were attempts to emulate Russian designs.. the Prithvi does look like a basic rocket design but at the end limited by the origins of its engine which are reportedly based on the Sa-2.
The Agni-I it might be argued as a copy of a Russian or Israeli missile but that it just conjecture, one could say that the Brahmos is Russian but then it is based on the P-800 Oniks so it does have a lot of Russian input.

Essentially the reason behind this is that India's closest partner in Russia was also the most monitored by the MCTR protocols and hence could only provide technology components and not missiles lest it be accused of violating these restrictions. Otherwise all Indian missiles would be simple Russian ones since any country would find it a lot easier to invest 100 and get 4 excellent missile systems rather than spend 1000 and get 5 untried prototypes. Further corroboration of the desperation facing Indian scientists during the 90's can be taken from accounts of Pakistani and Indian "delegations" meeting in the same drawing rooms of "fixers" that provide "consultancy" and "procurement" services in the black market in places like Dubai.

Which is why till recently India was behind in Deployed Missile tech as compared to Pakistan. However, as I have posted here a while back the reason is for the different approaches taken in missile development by the two parties due to the different environment available to them. One had access to entire missile systems if they wished(which were sophisticated in propulsion but not in guidance), while the other had access to various technologies but was dogged both by bureaucratic tape and R&D failures.

Compare the two philosophies to baking cake. One decides to learn how to make cake with eggs, and flour and so on. In that process, they get it right 2 times and ten times wrong. The other uses a cake mix and only changes the flavour it puts in and icing.
The first one does not have such easy access to cake mix but better ingredients.. the latter has ok cake mix but better access to the rest. So for the initial while, the second one will make better tasting cake while the first one learns how to make the batter in the first place. It is also cheaper to get readymade cake mix than doing it from scratch.

At some point, one has become the master of cake mixes and has even learnt how to do basic batter. While the other has eventually mastered the entire batter process. Essentially , both can make good cake. But the cake mix guy has to look for cake mixes he can adapt since his batter skills arent all that good. The cake batter guy however, is no longer dependant on anyone to improve his batter and even with help does 50% of the task himself. So while in the past the cake mix guy would easily edge ahead by improvise and adapt cake mixes.. he is limited by them. The cake batter guy will have his road open to make any sort of cake he wants.. since he at least has better idea of the batter.

Bad example, but I cant find my earlier detailed post on the subject so this will have to do.

Very well summed up...

Members on the forum grossly underestimate the capability of the opposite sides. Both sides have done extensive amount of reverse engineering, and it is absolutely true that both sides often miscalculate their projects, which is a part of every development cycles.

Rocket technology is not as complex as touted by most of the world, as long as you have technology to build airframe, propellent and test them, guidance and communication systems do not take decades to develop especially when the working concept is not space age and computing is dirt cheap... Most of the defence tech is getting simplified day by day, when your common cell phone has more computing strength than the computers that launched the Appolo 11...

the difficult technologies which actually bring huge breakthroughs go completely unnoticed, - Metallurgical development, Data acquisition and monitoring systems, Epoxy development, these are technologies that make the difference between a technology manufacturing country and a consumer country, not an extended fuselage to carry more fuel.... People will be surprised to know the key technologies that the french russians US etc withhold fromthier customers would sound extremely trivial...

In my humble opinion i do not think Iskander has anything to do with shaurya as @Dazzler claimed. As far as pakistani missiles are concerned, i highly doubt if the NoKo missiles are even still in commision, pakistan has better resources to develop better missiles than NoKo's chinese counterfeit missiles...

I know, most tall claims here have proven to be lies.

Can you point me to a few, I know for sure I didn't make any....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: HRK
.
Can you point me to a few, I know for sure I didn't make any....

I wasn't talking about you, haven't followed your posts too much.

The usual suspects- Nuclear Submarine, JF17 Block 2 capabiliities, Pakistani ICBM.

Aren't you the motorcycle guy? What did you buy in the end?
 
.
the difficult technologies which actually bring huge breakthroughs go completely unnoticed, - Metallurgical development, Data acquisition and monitoring systems, Epoxy development, these are technologies that make the difference between a technology manufacturing country and a consumer country, not an extended fuselage to carry more fuel.... People will be surprised to know the key technologies that the french russians US etc withhold from thier customers would sound extremely trivial...

In my humble opinion i do not think Iskander has anything to do with shaurya as @Dazzler claimed. As far as pakistani missiles are concerned, i highly doubt if the NoKo missiles are even still in commision, pakistan has better resources to develop better missiles than NoKo's chinese counterfeit missiles...
.

The thing that people forget is that the big three suppliers.. Namely , the US , Russia and France arent the only ones with missile technology and programs. Apart from China, countries like Israel, Argentina, South Africa all have/had missile programs. Moreover, before the breakup of the Union there were a lot of missile experts in former soviet states along with other warsaw pact allies. After the cold war, weapons were not the only thing for sale from these nations in the black market(as humorously portrayed in the move Lord of war); Blueprints, information and technology experts all went on "sale" in the arms Bazaar. Cities like Dubai, Hong Kong and Bangkok were regular meeting points for people looking to buy and sell such services. And it is during those 90's that embargoed countries like India and Pakistan desperately scrounged around these markets for such services to assist in such programs. Sometimes bidding for the same person or service. Does it make their programs any less indigenous? After all, it was a search for knowledge and that is what the sought. People from South Africa came to Pakistan and other East European states, experts in missile guidance/ seekers/ ELINT and SIGINT.. and similar people went to India. These people shared their information with the country's leading engineers and assisted in early programs. Early programs that taught them how to talk the talk and walk the walk.

The difference was that Pakistan had the advantage that its ally could essetially ship entire missle components to it through the KKH without raising bells in the MTCR.. the same cannot be said of India. However, these early Pakistani missiles were still ages behind in guidance and control which is where the external "consultants" came in.
For India, I assume many of its "consultants" were Russian. But because it could not import certain items without raising too many bells; and that it relied a bit too much on Russians and French early on for components. It lagged behind in areas such as propulsion and guidance as these had to be then done in house from scratch. In my opinion, if this hypothesis is correct, this approach is bearing its fruits now as it has a greater understanding of its components(in both success and failure) vis-a-vis Pakistan which still looks to focus more on an approach of Reverse-engineer->Improved Frankenstien process.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
BTW any one tell me what is the use of a cap in a missile just like Shourya has?
 
.
. . .
BTW any one tell me what is the use of a cap in a missile just like Shourya has?

Shaurya/K-15 use pressurized gas ejection mechanism for launch through the canister/SLBM tube. Since the nose is conical (unlike that of Trident for example, which is round), it is necessary to place a "cap" to provide a cork-like effect to stop the gases from releasing during ejection. Thats the most probable reason I guess.
 
.
I wasn't talking about you, haven't followed your posts too much.

The usual suspects- Nuclear Submarine, JF17 Block 2 capabiliities, Pakistani ICBM.

Aren't you the motorcycle guy? What did you buy in the end?

A person should do little research before opening mouth and showing how much ignorant he is. Nuclear submarine is official. Last year, It was officially stated that Nuclear submarine development plan is put in motion and 5 year development time frame was given.

JF-17 Block 2 capabilities were put on hold due to financial constraints PAF faced/facing

Pakistani ICBM is in developmental stage that would be Shaheen 3.
 
. .
The thing that people forget is that the big three suppliers.. Namely , the US , Russia and France arent the only ones with missile technology and programs. Apart from China, countries like Israel, Argentina, South Africa all have/had missile programs.


IIRC, an interesting news item appeared in south african local news papers in 2005/2006, an engineer working on guided missile projects in Denel Dynamics were jailed due to his illegal collaboration with Pakistan. The investigations revealed The unnamed engineer received 6.5 million dollar for his services.

In 2000, South African engineer allegedly sold weapons secrets to Pakistan,
helping overcome restrictions on arms sales imposed since the 1999 coup by General Pervez
Musharraf. An air weapons specialist was tried on 21 counts that ranged from fraud to theft to
contraventions of several laws, including the Armscor Act and the Copyright Act
 
  • Like
Reactions: HRK
.
A person should do little research before opening mouth and showing how much ignorant he is. Nuclear submarine is official. Last year, It was officially stated that Nuclear submarine development plan is put in motion and 5 year development time frame was given.

JF-17 Block 2 capabilities were put on hold due to financial constraints PAF faced/facing

Pakistani ICBM is in developmental stage that would be Shaheen 3.
^^
I'm afraid Shaheen-3 will not have the characteristics of an ICBM.

Seems like you need to follow your own advice . :lol:
 
. .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom