Pakistan's Own BVRAAM under Project Azm.

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Just useless love of weapons, which have enslved the Citizen of Nation
into Loving an entity which has no interest in welfare of people

Weapon this , Weapon that ...

Mean while Kashmir mere 20-35 km away can't be liberated for 75 years but boogie man exists

So keep buying weapons , and give us the 45% budget share

 

[JamD]

Some thoughts on the Faaz-2 picture:

1. The most obvious thing that I notice is the ratio of the length to the diameter. This is called the fineness ratio. For Faaz-2 this is roughly 10 - that is the length is 10 times the diameter. For comparison the AIM-120 has a fineness ratio of roughly 20. There's two explanations for this:
a. Optimistic explanation: This is a motor with a long burn time, while sacrificing drag, which would suggest a high-altitude, long-range shot type mission.
b. Realistic explanation: This is a limitation of the motor technology, which requires this chonky design and drag has to be sacrificed.
I say this is realistic because given the choice, you almost always reduce drag rather than increasing burn time if that's the tradeoff. The reason is that the missile spends a lot of time coasting too, so you want to minimize drag as much as possible.

2. The fins are massive. The main fins are fixed, and its tail controlled. This missile looks closer to the AIM-7 Sparrow, which is an old missile. Another missile that has large fore fins is the HARM, which has large fins due to its mostly near-ground missions where lift is more important. These large fins point to deficiencies in control system and actuator technology. The price that you pay is again drag.

3. This picture is some sort of engineering view with parts missing. This is most evident in the tail section where the placeholder actuators for the fins are visible. This can also be seen in the seeker area, front of the warhead. This does not look like any kind of seeker to me, just a bunch of placeholder blocks. This placeholder stuff could be secrecy, or point to the possibly unfinished (very early) stage of the design. Why show a cutway, only to have placeholder things for secrecy? You could just cover it up and show the outer mold line.


Not a comment on the picture, but the dual-mode seeker claim seems far fetched to me. This is a difficult difficult technology and I don't expect us to master it out of nowhere. And I don't think any country sells these things to us.

EDIT: The fin actuator assembly similar to the one that is visible at the tail:

 

[Imran Khan]

Just useless love of weapons, which have enslved the Citizen of Nation
into Loving an entity which has no interest in welfare of people

Weapon this , Weapon that ...

Mean while Kashmir mere 20-35 km away can't be liberated for 75 years but boogie man exists

So keep buying weapons , and give us the 45% budget share

if nation have such love with scientists engineers philosophers physicist professors economists today paksitan was 1 million times strong powerful and rich country . this stupid love of weapons and uniformed gang have dragged paksitan into hell today paksitan is world's fail state with 0 economy and 0 powers .

 

[Dalit]

Project azm has not materialised. An off the shelf fighter will be acquired along side missiles.

Some thoughts on the Faaz-2 picture:
View attachment 931927
1. The most obvious thing that I notice is the ratio of the length to the diameter. This is called the fineness ratio. For Faaz-2 this is roughly 10 - that is the length is 10 times the diameter. For comparison the AIM-120 has a fineness ratio of roughly 20. There's two explanations for this:
a. Optimistic explanation: This is a motor with a long burn time, while sacrificing drag, which would suggest a high-altitude, long-range shot type mission.
b. Realistic explanation: This is a limitation of the motor technology, which requires this chonky design and drag has to be sacrificed.
I say this is realistic because given the choice, you almost always reduce drag rather than increasing burn time if that's the tradeoff. The reason is that the missile spends a lot of time coasting too, so you want to minimize drag as much as possible.

2. The fins are massive. The main fins are fixed, and its tail controlled. This missile looks closer to the AIM-7 Sparrow, which is an old missile. Another missile that has large fore fins is the HARM, which has large fins due to its mostly near-ground missions where lift is more important. These large fins point to deficiencies in control system and actuator technology. The price that you pay is again drag.

3. This picture is some sort of engineering view with parts missing. This is most evident in the tail section where the placeholder actuators for the fins are visible. This can also be seen in the seeker area, front of the warhead. This does not look like any kind of seeker to me, just a bunch of placeholder blocks. This placeholder stuff could be secrecy, or point to the possibly unfinished (very early) stage of the design. Why show a cutway, only to have placeholder things for secrecy? You could just cover it up and show the outer mold line.


Not a comment on the picture, but the dual-mode seeker claim seems far fetched to me. This is a difficult difficult technology and I don't expect us to master it out of nowhere. And I don't think any country sells these things to us.

EDIT: The fin actuator assembly similar to the one that is visible at the tail:

All wishful thinking.

 

[salarsikander]

How many Pakistanis(especially women and children) will it kill in dropped in the subrubs of Shiekhupura?

Not exactly but it will surely kill quite Fugly Indian Hindus thats for sure

 

[sparten]

This isn't under project Azm. It's an SPD org product (obviously), that has been in development hell for many years. Honestly, I have no idea if this is just a CAD model or an actual product.

To be fair so was the Shaheen system, for many years.

Some thoughts on the Faaz-2 picture:
View attachment 931927
1. The most obvious thing that I notice is the ratio of the length to the diameter. This is called the fineness ratio. For Faaz-2 this is roughly 10 - that is the length is 10 times the diameter. For comparison the AIM-120 has a fineness ratio of roughly 20. There's two explanations for this:
a. Optimistic explanation: This is a motor with a long burn time, while sacrificing drag, which would suggest a high-altitude, long-range shot type mission.
b. Realistic explanation: This is a limitation of the motor technology, which requires this chonky design and drag has to be sacrificed.
I say this is realistic because given the choice, you almost always reduce drag rather than increasing burn time if that's the tradeoff. The reason is that the missile spends a lot of time coasting too, so you want to minimize drag as much as possible.

2. The fins are massive. The main fins are fixed, and its tail controlled. This missile looks closer to the AIM-7 Sparrow, which is an old missile. Another missile that has large fore fins is the HARM, which has large fins due to its mostly near-ground missions where lift is more important. These large fins point to deficiencies in control system and actuator technology. The price that you pay is again drag.

3. This picture is some sort of engineering view with parts missing. This is most evident in the tail section where the placeholder actuators for the fins are visible. This can also be seen in the seeker area, front of the warhead. This does not look like any kind of seeker to me, just a bunch of placeholder blocks. This placeholder stuff could be secrecy, or point to the possibly unfinished (very early) stage of the design. Why show a cutway, only to have placeholder things for secrecy? You could just cover it up and show the outer mold line.


Not a comment on the picture, but the dual-mode seeker claim seems far fetched to me. This is a difficult difficult technology and I don't expect us to master it out of nowhere. And I don't think any country sells these things to us.

EDIT: The fin actuator assembly similar to the one that is visible at the tail:

Frankly, its a waste of time to acertain anything from released artists renditions, Those are always going to be meaningless. The artist is told "make a scary *** looking missile" and s/he does.

 

[HAIDER]

if nation have such love with scientists engineers philosophers physicist professors economists today paksitan was 1 million times strong powerful and rich country . this stupid love of weapons and uniformed gang have dragged paksitan into hell today paksitan is world's fail state with 0 economy and 0 powers .

An old saying among Pentagon boys...Pak fight others war to finance there defence needs. We produce best minds but they lost ... as I said many times before, hundreds of people resign from Pak defence institutions and working in Western companies and on top post. Because they all having one word, when someone ask them question " merit" . No merit in Pakistan...

 

[JamD]

To be fair so was the Shaheen system, for many years.

Fair enough.

Frankly, its a waste of time to acertain anything from released artists renditions, Those are always going to be meaningless. The artist is told "make a scary *** looking missile" and s/he does.

Well that's all we have. We don't have access to the design data so this picture is all we have to go on. If the assumption is that we view view everything as "scary looking whatever rendition" then we have nothing to go on and nothing to discuss.


IF that is the missile, what I've said is what is true in my opinion. We can have a discussion on that, unless you can bring forth actual design data.

 

[sparten]

Fair enough.


Well that's all we have. We don't have access to the design data so this picture is all we have to go on. If the assumption is that we view view everything as "scary looking whatever rendition" then we have nothing to go on and nothing to discuss.


IF that is the missile, what I've said is what is true in my opinion. We can have a discussion on that, unless you can bring forth actual design data.

I had a whole big post written out, but I deleted it. Because as I said, the drawing on its own doesn’t really tell one much.

For what little it’s worth, I agree with your views as stated up thread. One caveat, having a longer burn time is beneficial for long range shot, since there is more energy retained at the end. The problem that the Phoneix and the longer range versions of the AMRAAM, and AA-13 had/have is that at long range the missile will have so little energy left that a fighter with the manoeuring ability of a pheasant will dodge them. Longer burn time gains more energy than is lost by increased drag, and that is something that can be alleviated in other ways as well, for instance by a deployable aerospike.

 

[FuturePAF]

Some thoughts on the Faaz-2 picture:
View attachment 931927
1. The most obvious thing that I notice is the ratio of the length to the diameter. This is called the fineness ratio. For Faaz-2 this is roughly 10 - that is the length is 10 times the diameter. For comparison the AIM-120 has a fineness ratio of roughly 20. There's two explanations for this:
a. Optimistic explanation: This is a motor with a long burn time, while sacrificing drag, which would suggest a high-altitude, long-range shot type mission.
b. Realistic explanation: This is a limitation of the motor technology, which requires this chonky design and drag has to be sacrificed.
I say this is realistic because given the choice, you almost always reduce drag rather than increasing burn time if that's the tradeoff. The reason is that the missile spends a lot of time coasting too, so you want to minimize drag as much as possible.

2. The fins are massive. The main fins are fixed, and its tail controlled. This missile looks closer to the AIM-7 Sparrow, which is an old missile. Another missile that has large fore fins is the HARM, which has large fins due to its mostly near-ground missions where lift is more important. These large fins point to deficiencies in control system and actuator technology. The price that you pay is again drag.

3. This picture is some sort of engineering view with parts missing. This is most evident in the tail section where the placeholder actuators for the fins are visible. This can also be seen in the seeker area, front of the warhead. This does not look like any kind of seeker to me, just a bunch of placeholder blocks. This placeholder stuff could be secrecy, or point to the possibly unfinished (very early) stage of the design. Why show a cutway, only to have placeholder things for secrecy? You could just cover it up and show the outer mold line.


Not a comment on the picture, but the dual-mode seeker claim seems far fetched to me. This is a difficult difficult technology and I don't expect us to master it out of nowhere. And I don't think any country sells these things to us.

EDIT: The fin actuator assembly similar to the one that is visible at the tail:

I hope they add an IR seeker to this RF BVR missile. A missile with an IR and RF seeker could be used to overcome the EW and IR suppression defenses of the frontline IAF platforms sooner(increasing the no escape zone) than is currently possible.

Regaining an effective first shoot first kill capability in the face of Meteor Armed Rafales.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1341113412386959360

https://twitter.com/x/status/1618518040764887042

P.S. The USN fielded such a missile which I think the PAF should study; the RIM-66K aka SM-2MR BLOCK IIIB

Obscure 23-Year Old Navy SAM Was So Ahead Of Its Time That It's Still In High Demand Today

The SM-2 Block IIIB's dual-mode guidance system is still unique among the missiles the Navy's fleet uses to defend against aerial threats.

www.thedrive.com

 

[jamal18]

if nation have such love with scientists engineers philosophers physicist professors economists today paksitan was 1 million times strong powerful and rich country . this stupid love of weapons and uniformed gang have dragged paksitan into hell today paksitan is world's fail state with 0 economy and 0 powers .

Yes,at present the greatest army in the world can't move its tanks because they have no diesel!