Recent Interview with Pakistani Nuclear scientist Dr.Samar Mubarakmand

[Mrc]

Terminal guidance comes into play during the Terminal phase of the flight.

Modern American ABM systems have the capability to intercept a Ballistic Missile during both Midcourse and Terminal phases of its flight and are also equipped with Terminal guidance system. The interceptor missiles do not just depend upon their onboard guidance systems to hone-in towards the target, they take cues from the entire surveillance setup (ranging from radar systems on the ground to satellites in space) to track the movement of the target in real-time.

So even if a Ballistic Missile is changing its direction mid-flight, it cannot escape or evade a modern interceptor unless it is relatively faster.

Change of course / trajectory is only relevant in terminal phase for evading terminal course intercept only... mid course intercept is a different scenario and that too has been problematic.. currently americans are unable to distinguish between rv and and an air filled balloon of same shape released with rv, as both travel through space at same speed.....

The modified PDV is an EXO-ATMOSPHERIC interceptor that can reach an altitude of 150kms- or at least thats what the DRDO research papers claim.It has already been tested upto an altitude of 120kms!

@amardeep mishra what would be the speed of shaheen rv at 150 + km altitude? Can you intercept that speed??

 

[Zahoor Raja-Jani]

Terminal guidance comes into play during the Terminal phase of the flight to guide the warhead towards its destination with good accuracy.

Modern American ABM systems have the capability to intercept a Ballistic Missile during both Midcourse and Terminal phases of its flight and are equipped with Terminal guidance systems of their own. Moreover, the interceptor missiles do not just depend upon their on-board guidance systems to hone-in towards the target, they take cues from the entire surveillance setup (ranging from radar systems on the ground to satellites in space) to track the movement of the target in real-time.

So even if a Ballistic Missile is changing its direction mid-flight, it cannot escape or evade a modern interceptor unless it is relatively faster.

In the end, it comes down to what kind of foe we are dealing with. India doesn't have the capability to intercept Shaheen series ballistic missiles at the moment but US is a much more capable foe.

What about MaRV do we have or tested this tech.

 

[باپ]

Abdali did have movable wings but we're ditched in later version.

 

[amardeep mishra]

what would be the speed of shaheen rv at 150 + km altitude? Can you intercept that speed??

Hi dear @Mrc
If you use lambert's principle ,a shaheen class IRBM would have velocity anywhere between 8-12M. We dont have an interceptor that can intercept anything above 150kms.Even interception at 150kms hasnt been validated yet.As for interception is concerned ,what a lot of folks have missed at the moment is tracking of a very fast moving target(in the vicinity or exceeding 10M). One would require radars with ridiculously high PRF to even detect it and pulse jittering to reduce ambiguity.Another point i would like to highlight is that at altitudes above 70kms,external control surfaces loose their relevance,hence jet vanes and flex nozzles are used.
Now,it would have been extremely difficult to intercept the RV if it were maneuvering but since RV of shaheen doesnt maneuvre (i believe in tests!),task of interception becomes relatively straight forward- it is indeed difficult but not impossible.
Secondly modified PDV uses an IIR as against RF seeker and it is not that easy to fool the seeker as the ballistic coefficient beta of RV and dummy are different and hence to a RF seeker,RV and dummy will yield different frequency shifts.In order to really spoof the RF seeker,the dummy shall have not only exact same shape but also same ballistic coefficient!

 

[LeGenD]

What about MaRV do we have or tested this tech.

No confirmed test so far.

Change of course / trajectory is only relevant in terminal phase for evading terminal course intercept only... mid course intercept is a different scenario and that too has been problematic.. currently americans are unable to distinguish between rv and and an air filled balloon of same shape released with rv, as both travel through space at same speed.....

Agreed that intercepting a ballistic missile during Midcourse and Terminal phases are entirely different set of challenges. But Americans are developing and fielding a multi-layered ABM platform that is versatile enough to defeat multiple threats in real-time scenario through data-sharing and multiple guidance techniques. The key to successful intercept not just lay in the onboard guidance system of the interceptor but the capability of the interceptor to digest information from the entire surveillance setup at its disposal to ensure successful tracking of a target in real-time throughout the course of its flight and American surveillance setup is most comprehensive and capable in the world so far. You can learn some stuff from here (http://www.mda.mil/system/system.html) and here (http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/THAAD.html).

Here is the holistic intercept record of modern American ABM systems: http://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/missile-defense-systems/u-s-missile-defense-intercept-test-record/

Don't let the statistics fool you. As of lately, most of the intercepts have been successful.

Regarding distinguishing between an RV and a decoy:

ENDO-ATMOSPHERIC INTERCEPT. Technically, intercept within the atmosphere is easier for the defense because the ICBM warheads are highly visible to radar and to optical sensors, because of the very hot "wake" produced by the Mach-23 RV as it enters the atmosphere. Balloons and light chaff(9) are no longer effective against sensors, because they will be retarded or destroyed on reentry. Within the atmosphere it is more difficult to make survivable and effective decoys that match the deceleration of the RV containing a nuclear warhead. And the interceptor can undertake much more aggressive maneuvers by aerodynamic force than it could conveniently with rocket propulsion in space.

Source: http://fas.org/rlg/garwin-aps.htm

 

[Mrc]

Now,it would have been extremely difficult to intercept the RV if it were maneuvering but since RV of shaheen doesnt maneuvre (i believe in tests!),task of interception becomes relatively straight forward- it is indeed difficult but not impossible.

All shaheen rv's manuver.. to what degree is unknown

 

[amardeep mishra]

In the end, it comes down to what kind of foe we are dealing with. India doesn't have the capability to intercept Shaheen series ballistic missiles at the moment but US is a much more capable foe.

@LeGenD
Well at present india might not have demonstrated the capability to intercept shaheen class of missile.But Newly modified PDV can in theory intercept shaheen. A real validation would come when PDV/ADV combo is put to test against a agni-2 missile mimicing shaheen-2/3.
Notwithstanding these developments,DRDO is actively working on next set of interceptors that will take the role of PDV and ADV.And that is phase-2.

All shaheen rv's manuver.. to what degree is unknown

@Mrc
Well my dear friend,We must all believe in demonstrated capabilities.As of yet,pakistan hasnt demonstrated a MaRV. For starters my friend,what kind of experience do you have in aerospace?
To be very honest,when i compare the speeches of ISRO chairman with Mr Mubarakmand,i find the latter to be not only vague but also lacking in depth knowledge of Missile guidance and Control.I have seen a lot of his interviews and found out that he's intellectually dis-honest as he not only propagates false information but also talks in a very vague language!Now it is debatable if he does it on purpose or if he's really intellectually dis-honest!. However in india,ISRO chairman in his speeches or interviews is very precise

 

[Mrc]

Maneuverability in shaheen series is not stated by dr mand only...actually this is first time he saying it....
It has been an open secret for a while ....wiki page and its references predate above interview by several years

http://www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.47/pub_detail.asp

Link is from 2004

 

[باپ]

Um no, it doesn't effectively exists. The Mk-11C reentry vehicle aboard Minuteman-III incorporated a change from the standard titanium nose cone to reduce RCS, however I don't know what they exactly did. In the face of modern radar and IR technology, RCS reduction of normal RVs is not feasible. Any applied RAM would burn up on re-entry, and there is no way to hide the heat plume of a re-entry vehicle. The seekers of today's interceptors can easily lock on it, the interception itself is another matter.

No, Shaheen-IA doesn't have a stealthy RV, that was just fanboy journalism.

Those winglets are fixed and are rather for RV stability. SRBMs have lower re-entry speeds so the winglets don't burn up, and can be used for stabilization, rather than spinning the RV itself. However, making them movable and using them for evasive maneuvers is another matter, and probably would do more harm than good.

However it may be noted that ABM has to have 3D accuracy and has to predict target position in X,Y and Z axis. Even if evasive maneuver by RV cannot be in X,Y axis due to limitations of stress and later need of course corrections, the RV can still change speed frequently in Z axis. For example a stop start small thruster at the back of the RV which randomly fires only exerting force in the direction in which RV is already traveling. Thus unpredictably changing RV position.
This arrangement will still throw ABM off course as it won't find the RV in previously calculated place.

 

[karakoram]

....... ?

 

[The Deterrent]

Only reason why iranians did it and we did not uptill now would be that there was no need for us to do this while iranians had reasons....

Otherwise i dont see a huge technological gap here that similar things xannot be adopted (if not already) by pakistan

I agree, they needed a system to take on the Arrow BMD of Israel. Yes, there is no huge technology gap to acquire that capability, however, its effectiveness is questionable regarding accuracy.

To kill a nuclear rv u need a direct hit....
The radar need to track it accurately to get an interceptor close enough ...radar cannot track IR signature... u may know its there but u wont be able to hit it unless u can see it on radar....

Also chaff dispensers will work brillianltly against terminal intercept...from what i read....

Not really, a proximity explosion can be enough to destabilize the RV, which can do a lot of damage. I'm not sure about what type of radar's are used, but some interceptor seekers are IR-based. The point is, the general conical shape of the RV has too much RCS.

Hi dear @The Deterrent
I am afraid you're mistaken here,all indian strategic missiles-particularly the AGNI have complete RV made up of heat resistant carbon fibres and not just the the tip.That is the trend everywhere,isnt it?

I don't think so. Only the tip takes most of the heat of blazing thousands of degrees, so its made from 3D carbon-carbon. The rest of the cone is metallic from what I know.

However it may be noted that ABM has to have 3D accuracy and has to predict target position in X,Y and Z axis. Even if evasive maneuver by RV cannot be in X,Y axis due to limitations of stress and later need of course corrections, the RV can still change speed frequently in Z axis. For example a stop start small thruster at the back of the RV which randomly fires only exerting force in the direction in which RV is already traveling. Thus unpredictably changing RV position.
This arrangement will still throw ABM off course as it won't find the RV in previously calculated place.

This is indeed an interesting idea, @amardeep mishra what do you think? Is the RV aligned EXACTLY with its trajectory during reentry? If it is, I suppose slight variations in speed in the direction of trajectory/point of impact can cause problems for proximity-detonation based interceptors.

 

[MilSpec]

Maneuverability in shaheen series is not stated by dr mand only...actually this is first time he saying it....
It has been an open secret for a while ....wiki page and its references predate above interview by several years

http://www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.47/pub_detail.asp

Link is from 2004

interesting read.

 

[amardeep mishra]

I agree, they needed a system to take on the Arrow BMD of Israel. Yes, there is no huge technology gap to acquire that capability, however, its effectiveness is questionable regarding accuracy.


Not really, a proximity explosion can be enough to destabilize the RV, which can do a lot of damage. I'm not sure about what type of radar's are used, but some interceptor seekers are IR-based. The point is, the general conical shape of the RV has too much RCS.

I don't think so. Only the tip takes most of the heat of blazing thousands of degrees, so its made from 3D carbon-carbon. The rest of the cone is metallic from what I know.


This is indeed an interesting idea, @amardeep mishra what do you think? Is the RV aligned EXACTLY with its trajectory during reentry? If it is, I suppose slight variations in speed in the direction of trajectory/point of impact can cause problems for proximity-detonation based interceptors.

Hi dear @The Deterrent
I repeat again,entire RV is covered with heat resistant composites.
Secondly a "bang-bang" type optimal controller,wherein the control input can take only extreme values- either 0 or 1(on-off) is usually not used in the atmospheric leg of the final journey. You see,in very simple language RV must be stabilized in flight during the final leg of the journey- this stabilization can be either by externally mounted fins or spin stabilized.
As you have correctly pointed out that RV is spun rapidly just before re-entry to provide the stabilizing effect. The free-fall leg of the journey through atmosphere is pre-planned by the designers and hence it follows a pre-determined trajectory.Now lets suppose suddenly we wish to have some control over the trajectory,in theory we can manipulate the motion in the longitudinal plane,but any error in the flight path will see the RV missing itz target by atleast couple of 100 meters if not more!It is very very difficult to control a missile flying at close to 8-12M especially in the atmosphere. And we are not even talking about the limitations of a "bang-bang" controller!

 

[Mrc]

effectiveness is questionable regarding accuracy.

Not really, a proximity explosion can be enough to destabilize the RV, which can do a lot of damage. I

Emaad is more accurate than any other iranian missile

Proximity explosion is enough for non nuclear pay load... it wont disable the nuke... which will still fall on to the ground and explode...may b not on intended target but on same city is going to be enough....
Thats why US has abandoned proximity explosion fot THAAD and patriot pac 3 systems....hit to kill os way to go

 

[v9s]

To be very honest,when i compare the speeches of ISRO chairman with Mr Mubarakmand,i find the latter to be not only vague but also lacking in depth knowledge of Missile guidance and Control.I have seen a lot of his interviews and found out that he's intellectually dis-honest as he not only propagates false information but also talks in a very vague language!Now it is debatable if he does it on purpose or if he's really intellectually dis-honest!. However in india,ISRO chairman in his speeches or interviews is very precise

You do not understand why he's being vague because, though you might be academically bright, you're a socially inept retard.

You are comparing the head of an organization that is in the public's eye, carries out very public launches and is primarily civilian, with a scientist who has worked for one of the most shadowy organizations and on Pakistan's most strategic weapons.