What's new

Pakistan's Future ICBM 'Taimur'

sir
this is all just nationalist dream, you need to understand that fear of weapon is more important and fearful than weapon itself. and to make a ICBM is no joke you need very high technology ( i don't doubt that Pakistan can make it ... since their experience with missile technology). but you need to do test and answer where this funding go to people of you nation etc. and there are many more factor such as technology share , and making a statement about power of your country. so in my opinion Pakistan don't have a ICBM for now .
but i am sure they are developing some , and we the world will know when they will have it.

Its the Fear of the weapon which is preventing another war between Pakistan and India, Isn't it ?

As you said we don't have it right now, you are right but no one knows about the future. India knows very well that we are full of Surprises remember India thought we were bluffing on Nukes but we came up with a Bang on 28th of may 1998 and again when we tested Babur cruise missile, India was stunned.

We are moving forward and we will continue to do so.
 
Pakistan Pushes To Improve Missile Strike Capability

By Usman Ansari
Published: 17 November 2008
Print Print | Print Email

ISLAMABAD - Pakistan is continuing efforts to increase the range, accuracy and lethality of its ballistic missiles while gradually switching from liquid- to solid-fueled propellants.

According to P.I. Cheema, head of the Islamabad Policy Research Institute think tank, who last year co-edited "Ballistic Missiles and South Asian Security," these efforts are sparked by the Indian threat.

"The driving force behind the program is basically India," he said. "Basically, throughout the Indo-Pak standoff, Pakistan has always been striving for parity or a qualitative edge, given the disparity we have in terms of numbers. Continuous improvisation is required to ensure the system works and remains valid, so you have to continuously update your systems."

A ballistic missile arsenal is necessary to maintain a national deterrent. The close geographical proximity of India and Pakistan would also make surprise attacks with conventionally armed missiles highly effective.

It is widely believed Pakistan obtained at least some missile-related know-how from abroad to initiate its efforts. The solid-fueled Chinese M-11 and liquid-fueled North Korean No Dong, plus associated technologies, are widely regarded to have formed the building blocks of the Pakistan program.

This has resulted in the Ghauri and Shaheen series of medium- to intermediate-range ballistic missiles. The established development/deployment pattern has seen the simpler liquid-fueled Ghauri series initially fielded, followed by the more advanced, solid-fueled Shaheen.

Liquid-fueled missiles require a longer logistics train (due to having to separately transport the fuel) and take hours to fuel, but they have performed a vital stopgap function. In this way, the 1,500-kilometer range Ghauri-I formed a stopgap until supplemented by the 750-kilometer range Shaheen-I, and then replaced by the 2,300 kilometer Ghauri-II.

With the deployment of the 2,500-kilometer Shaheen-II, development has shifted to the proposed 3,500- to 4,000-kilometer range Ghauri-III, which will be eventually replaced by the envisioned 4,000- to 4,500-kilometer Shaheen-III.

Strike at a Safe Distance

Pakistan needs such ranges so it can strike any targets within arch-rival India at a safe enough distance from the Indo-Pak border.

These increases in range have been achieved by using more efficient fuel or rocket motors, reducing the weight of the payload and simply incorporating additional stages. More ambitious advances involve the quest to increase accuracy by moving away from inertial navigation guidance systems to ones like GPS, and possibly developing multiple warhead technology.

According to defense analyst Usman Shabbir, the main force behind advances in the missile program is the National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM) defense conglomerate and its subsidiary, the National Defence Complex (NDC).

"NESCOM has been quietly and steadily refining its missile designs with special emphasis on more precision and greater range and warhead capacity," he said. "Work on MIRV [multiple independently targeted re-entry vehicle] warheads is ongoing and might be fielded in the near future on the Shaheen-II ballistic missile system.

"NESCOM is also working on new guided missile projects and in some cases helping other Pakistani research facilities with theirs. One such example was the recently tested air-launched cruise missile RAAD, developed by AWC [Air Weapons Complex] in collaboration with NESCOM," Shabbir said.

Pakistan has also developed a range of solid-fueled battlefield and short-range ballistic missiles to target high-value targets such as airfields, headquarters, troop concentrations, and ammunition and supply depots. The 290-kilometer-range Ghaznavi closely resembles the Chinese M-11 (of which Pakistan is said to have received a number in the early 1990s), and there is a possibility it is a variant of the same missile.

The 180-kilometer-range Abdali, however, is a development of Pakistan's initial indigenous efforts to develop a missile capability, the Hatf-1/1A, dating from the 1980s. These missiles can be armed with a range of conventional or nonconventional warheads.

Though the liquid-fueled missiles will eventually be retired, they may yet form the basis of a satellite-launch capability. They are ideal for such purposes because of the comparatively higher thrust they deliver.

However, Arshad Siraj, the secretary of Pakistan's national space agency, the Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission, said, "At this point in time, there is no such program, though it of course would be in the long-term planning of any space agency to have this capability. Perhaps this will happen, but definitely not within the next 10 years."

This is within the timeframe of retiring the Ghauri system and developing it to launch satellites. ■

Pakistan Pushes To Improve Missile Strike Capability - Defense News

:cheers:

This comes from a VERY credible author.
 
From what we can establish, Tipu Sultan is a different missile, it isn't derived from the shaheen and ghauri series. If Ghauri III has a stated range of 3500-4000 km, and Shaheen III has a range of 4000-4500 km, we are probably looking at a 5000+km range for Tipu Sultan giving us an ICBM.
 
hehe long live North Korea....we might already have the missiles blueprints:)
 
Prevention is better than cure & I feel that ICBM wth integrated MIRV will certainly make our enemies think 100 times before even planning to attack us. Regarding our future threats yes they don't just lie in our neighbours rather they lie far West!! I believe that certainly missile like Bulava or Topol will give us strategic & psychological benefits over our enemies
 
getting an ICBM would go against pakistan.We have the capabiltiy of producing an ICBM on short-notice because of our space program...but havnt because having an ICBM proves to be too much of a liability...if we are to get an ICBM..the MRCA contract and the nuclear deal and similar deals would be hard to come by.pakistan which already is struggling to find strategic partners..will be further pushed to a corner.dont you know that for a nuclear capable country armed with an ICBM...the european countries would refuse to trade all together!
 
ICBM is must for Pakistan and we have to make sure it carries the range about 6000KM to reach US and it cities because everyday our citizens are killed and no possible action we have the worst President @ the worst Time Kayani Marshall law now ! and we should stop killing our brothers in NWFP and get Kashmire from India 50years people are dying everyday it makes me sick how much Muslims die everday.
 
getting an ICBM would go against pakistan.We have the capabiltiy of producing an ICBM on short-notice because of our space program...but havnt because having an ICBM proves to be too much of a liability...if we are to get an ICBM..the MRCA contract and the nuclear deal and similar deals would be hard to come by.pakistan which already is struggling to find strategic partners..will be further pushed to a corner.dont you know that for a nuclear capable country armed with an ICBM...the european countries would refuse to trade all together!

Thats what I am talking about buddy the point here is that Equal division of powers in most circumstances prevent any disastrous war & believe me that Pakistan already is making enough defence contracts with Sweden Germany France & notable China that Quest for strategic partners has already taken shape & the ball is in now our court
 
implications of an icbm for pakistan

ICBM=MILITARY MIGHT
ICBM=ECONOMIC DESTRUCTION.

pakistan needs to decide.
thnx

I don't see the latter occurring unless we get someone like Ahmedinejad in power.

Sanctions were place on Pakistan because of US law and Pakistan's nuclear program.

AFAIK, there is no law in the West that imposes sanctions fro developing an ICBM. The current economic aid is in the context of making the region stable, and if Pakistan has ICBM's, that makes the need for ensuring Pakistan remains stable even more important, since the West would definitely not want a nuclear armed nation with ICBM's to fall apart, and allow those things to get in the hands of extremists.

So contrary to what you said, it will not have an economic impact.
 
I don't see the latter occurring unless we get someone like Ahmedinejad in power.

Sanctions were place on Pakistan because of US law and Pakistan's nuclear program.

AFAIK, there is no law in the West that imposes sanctions fro developing an ICBM. The current economic aid is in the context of making the region stable, and if Pakistan has ICBM's, that makes the need for ensuring Pakistan remains stable even more important, since the West would definitely not want a nuclear armed nation with ICBM's to fall apart, and allow those things to get in the hands of extremists.

So contrary to what you said, it will not have an economic impact.

Flawed analysis. This is exactly diplomacy with a gun to own head.
A nuclear armed nation like Pakistan with ICBM's would create even more of a ruckus and almost every nation barring China would be loathe to give Pakistan offensive technology(which INCLUDES AEW&C's as well as Subs).

Do you realise one thing, this time, the decision to sell U-214's to Pakistan was challenged and there was a debate in Germany. Earlier, there was never such a thing, the govt of the day decided whether to sell or not, this time, it has evoked a parliamentary response. Now whether the deal passed through or not is not the question, the question and point is why did such a hearing take place in the first place.

Same thing in the US, there are senators questioning selling of any military equipment to Pakistan, EDA or not. There would be even greater pressure on western nations to be hard on Pakistan, if it starts having the capability to target them. This does play a huge role. A declared Muslim nation, with nukes and ICBM's that is unstable and has cyclical bankruptcy issues.

ICBM's would change a lot of things IMO.
 
Flawed analysis. This is exactly diplomacy with a gun to own head.
A nuclear armed nation like Pakistan with ICBM's would create even more of a ruckus and almost every nation barring China would be loathe to give Pakistan offensive technology(which INCLUDES AEW&C's as well as Subs).

Diplomacy with a gun to her head? I am not making any arguments that this is how Pakistan should conduct diplomacy - I am merely pointing out that Moscow's analysis of 'economic sanctions' is incorrect.

Do you realise one thing, this time, the decision to sell U-214's to Pakistan was challenged and there was a debate in Germany. Earlier, there was never such a thing, the govt of the day decided whether to sell or not, this time, it has evoked a parliamentary response. Now whether the deal passed through or not is not the question, the question and point is why did such a hearing take place in the first place.
What was the last big ticket item Germany sold us and when? And is getting parliamentary approval not a constitutional requirement in Germany?

Same thing in the US, there are senators questioning selling of any military equipment to Pakistan, EDA or not. There would be even greater pressure on western nations to be hard on Pakistan, if it starts having the capability to target them. This does play a huge role. A declared Muslim nation, with nukes and ICBM's that is unstable and has cyclical bankruptcy issues.

ICBM's would change a lot of things IMO.
I consider the US attitude to be an 'improvement' since the last time we bought something from them they sanctioned us and kept our money and equipment. So I do not see the attitudes in the US as anythign different from the past, and in fact slightly positive.

Of course a lot of that is tied to the WoT, and will continue so long as the WoT continues - but that is also why Pakistan is moving away from the US in terms of reliance on her equipment.

Attitudes in the West will eventually be shaped by Pakistan's progress towards democracy and fight against AQ and terrorism.
 
Flawed analysis. This is exactly diplomacy with a gun to own head.
A nuclear armed nation like Pakistan with ICBM's would create even more of a ruckus and almost every nation barring China would be loathe to give Pakistan offensive technology(which INCLUDES AEW&C's as well as Subs).

Do you realise one thing, this time, the decision to sell U-214's to Pakistan was challenged and there was a debate in Germany. Earlier, there was never such a thing, the govt of the day decided whether to sell or not, this time, it has evoked a parliamentary response. Now whether the deal passed through or not is not the question, the question and point is why did such a hearing take place in the first place.

Same thing in the US, there are senators questioning selling of any military equipment to Pakistan, EDA or not. There would be even greater pressure on western nations to be hard on Pakistan, if it starts having the capability to target them. This does play a huge role. A declared Muslim nation, with nukes and ICBM's that is unstable and has cyclical bankruptcy issues.

ICBM's would change a lot of things IMO.
on the contrary, your analysis is flawed. true, an ICBM would cause a lot of tension, considering Pakistan is a muslim country. However, an ICBM would be a "game-changer", you would see less "do more" pressure on Pakistan. The US may actually get something done in afghanistan for change.

the decision to sell arms to Pakistan is always challenged, it's the same thing with almost every other country. The german govt. passed the deal with a large majority. It's interesting to see indians continuing to bring this up, when they forget that their pressure tactics had no effect on germany. The bottome line is, the germans are trying to enter Pakistan's defense industry. the U-214 is not the only thing they are offering. TKMS has also offered their MEKO frigates to Pakistan, with considerable technology transfer and production in Pakistan's shipyards.

as for the US, that's not a good argument. Lobbies always challenge arms sales to Pakistan, nuclear weapons or not. What matters is whether the arms deal goes through, which usually does. again, the bottom line is, we are getting F-16's for free on EDA, and india is not.
 
IMO ICBM is a must thing for Pakistan. There are no permanent enemies and no permanent friends, however to attain an ICBM, we need to strengthen our economy first so that no latter economic threat can lead us to withdraw from our project. Moreover i am also of an opinion that as long as this government is in place, we will not see anything even closely related to an ICBM, reason we all know very well. Plus it would be better if instead of making an ICBM, we increase the range of our cruise missiles and bring it in the same league as TomaHawk and enable its use on our subs, perhaps a nuclear sub on lease from China can give us the capability to hit anywhere in the world if God for bid the time comes down to that.
 
Back
Top Bottom