Surface To Air Missiles | Terror in the Sky.

[Arsalan]

the air defence system, the surface to air missiles is a field which needs to be taken care of immediately.

the surface to air missile is the branch of weaponry is the one in which Pakistan lacks the most.

i want all the members, specially the seniors with knowledge of this aspect to share there views and discuss different solutions and options to tackle the situation

a similar thread had been closed previously because of the Copy Paste Trend in that thread. here i hope we can get some Fruitfull discussion and the adminstration will have no problems with it

THANKS FOR YOUR COOPERATION

 

[Arsalan]

as i mentioned above and also in some previous post on different threads, the missile air defence system of Pakistan have the least potential.

we compete in every other field of military.

our army is strong with good guns, fine artillery and excellent tanks.

the navy is improving and doing good with procurement of F22 frigates, missile boats and high tech Subs

the air-force also seems fine with Mirage ROSE, up-comming JF17z and Highly capable FC20z and the F16 both MLU and Block 52

but

in SAMZ

we dont have anything.
the anza are only low point low altitude defence equipment, they are good rather excellent against the Helis but useless against fighter aircraft.

cortals are also very old

we have been listening to SPADA and FT2000 system since 2003/2005 but still they are no where.

so what do you think where are we going with all this, what should be done and what are the possible options

 

[shehbazi2001]

as i mentioned above and also in some previous post on different threads, the missile air defence system of Pakistan have the least potential.

we compete in every other field of military.

our army is strong with good guns, fine artillery and excellent tanks.

the navy is improving and doing good with procurement of F22 frigates, missile boats and high tech Subs

the air-force also seems fine with Mirage ROSE, up-comming JF17z and Highly capable FC20z and the F16 both MLU and Block 52

but

in SAMZ

we dont have anything.
the anza are only low point low altitude defence equipment, they are good rather excellent against the Helis but useless against fighter aircraft.

cortals are also very old

we have been listening to SPADA and FT2000 system since 2003/2005 but still they are no where.

so what do you think where are we going with all this, what should be done and what are the possible options

I would always prefer and support fighter aircrafts themselves than to go for high ticket multi-million dollar SAM deals, if you have budgetary constraints.

If there is no financial crisis, we may even go for a star wars program but its not the case. A SAM unit is only defensive asset whereas a fighter jet is both offensive and defensive asset. A dual-use asset is preferable. SAMs cant be used for power projection purposes.

Till now from all wars of the modern world since WW2, ground air defences alone or with a weak air force have never stopped the aggression. Even look at Middle East wars. Israel had a strong Air Force and Arabs had an array of various SAM systems but to no avail. Egyptians had some success in 1973 war initial days with SA-6 but as Egyptian army moved out of the SAM umbrella, they had to face serious air attacks. Then see what happened to Syrian SAMs in 1982 Bekaa Valley Conflict.

The fate of Iraqi "Integrated Air Defence System" was no different. An attack on C4I shall render all integration useless. Take the case of Libya, in Operation Grand Canyon, US used air power to crush libyan air defences including long range SA-5 Gammon SAMs.

This is because the whole EW is geared towards defeating SAMs and their associated radars. Therefore a great care and planning is required before a decision is made to induct a SAM system.

While this does not mean that we dont induct SAM systems but it does imply that SAMs can't be effective on its own without a strong air force and PAF SPADA and PA RBS-23 shall be steps in right direction if they can be guided and controlled by AESA radars. If non-AESA, then they would need to work in conjunction with fighters.

First line of defence be the fighters and any intruders who escape the first line and try to approach a vital target be taken out by SAMs.

Now the MLU of F-16As, new F-16Cs, Pak-China collaboration on JF-17 and FC-20 shall require huge resouces over coming years and I dont think there would be a budgetary space for a costly SAM system.

 

[Arsalan]

very true with your statement sir but dont forget our claim that we develop military for defensive use, its not offensive force, atleast this is what we claim, and for defence of our assets i take SAM to be an essential part.

though the use and preference of aircraft is justified by the fact that fighter jet is both offensive and defensive asset, but aren't they costly rather very costly to operate.
i mean a sam battery defending a key asset like Kahota or another is quite cost friendly, it will take lots of dollars to keep an eye on it from air, the fule and the plane itself means lots of budget spending.

The SAMz are costly but are worth for there money
as an example i would like to quote the indian deal where indiahas bought six S-300 batteries for $1 billion, probably the S-300PMU-2 version, believed to consist of 48 missiles per system. now this means they can make a web at there westren border(with Pakistan) the system will not only be good for aircraft intrusions but also
form a shield against our missile attack with missile like Hataf 1 ,2, 3, 4 and the M11.rather they are basically deployed for the second purpose.

what is your say?

i mean we atleast must have something to protect our Key Installation, aircrafts are good but they are not a complete solution i guess!!

 

[Arsalan]

never heard about RBS-23 being inducted,however as you talked about being guided by AESA radar, currently it cant be, for info on this system visit:

Bamse RBS23 All-Weather Air Defence Missile - Army Technology

but let me mention it again that there is no news of it being inducted, if anyone have please share!

 

[princefaisal]

We should buy HQ-15/HQ-18 and FT-2000 missiles from China immediately after Indian purchase of S-300 missile system.

Similarly for Navy, we have to procure Aster-30 Sams with TOT.

These SAMs will provide extra punch to Indian aircrafts, UAV's and missiles and will be the last defence if our airfields were destroyed by Indian Agni & Prithvi missiles.

 

[JK!]

I have to agree that Pakistan does need a long range SAM capability and I have faith that the armed forces will make the right acquistion.

 

[nightcrawler]

I would always prefer and support fighter aircrafts themselves than to go for high ticket multi-million dollar SAM deals, if you have budgetary constraints.

I take these as very naive comments!! I do believe that Quality Comes With Price & if you have QUALITY SAM systems they are quiet capable to destroy muli-million aviation warplanes. you can't just compare poors nation defence capabilaties like you quoted the examples of Middle East countries everyone know how capable they are in the field of technical sciences. do remember that during Cold WAr to tackle the USA bombers Soviet adopted a rather economical & efiicient SAM system S-75 Dvina. Instead of adopting a more expensive & time consuming project like making Bombers they really got heads to render air vehicles unsuccessful using SAMs.
What I want to tell you that SAMs are quiet good what they are made for & their purpose is to defend & really provided that you have got urself good hand on great SAMs you can play havoc with other planes( that are more expensive than a single battery of SAM)!!

 

[TOPGUN]

I have to agree that Pakistan does need a long range SAM capability and I have faith that the armed forces will make the right acquistion.

Yes we need it ASAP!!

 

[shehbazi2001]

I take these as very naive comments!! I do believe that Quality Comes With Price & if you have QUALITY SAM systems they are quiet capable to destroy muli-million aviation warplanes. you can't just compare poors nation defence capabilaties like you quoted the examples of Middle East countries everyone know how capable they are in the field of technical sciences.

do remember that during Cold WAr to tackle the USA bombers Soviet adopted a rather economical & efiicient SAM system S-75 Dvina. Instead of adopting a more expensive & time consuming project like making Bombers they really got heads to render air vehicles unsuccessful using SAMs.

What I want to tell you that SAMs are quiet good what they are made for & their purpose is to defend & really provided that you have got urself good hand on great SAMs you can play havoc with other planes( that are more expensive than a single battery of SAM)!!

Middle Eastern countries were using Russian technology and we cant say that Russians were lagging in SAM technology. To me till now its only the Russians that have a vast experience of building and deploying SAMs.

Look at the total types of SAMs built by USA and Soviet Union. US SAMs can be counted on finger tips whereas the Soviet SAMs are in dozens and dozens.

While Soviet Union did design and deploy long-range bombers like Bear and Blackjack, their main strategic nuclear arsenal consisted of ICBMs.

 

[shehbazi2001]

very true with your statement sir but dont forget our claim that we develop military for defensive use, its not offensive force, atleast this is what we claim, and for defence of our assets i take SAM to be an essential part.

though the use and preference of aircraft is justified by the fact that fighter jet is both offensive and defensive asset, but aren't they costly rather very costly to operate.
i mean a sam battery defending a key asset like Kahota or another is quite cost friendly, it will take lots of dollars to keep an eye on it from air, the fule and the plane itself means lots of budget spending.

The SAMz are costly but are worth for there money
as an example i would like to quote the indian deal where indiahas bought six S-300 batteries for $1 billion, probably the S-300PMU-2 version, believed to consist of 48 missiles per system. now this means they can make a web at there westren border(with Pakistan) the system will not only be good for aircraft intrusions but also
form a shield against our missile attack with missile like Hataf 1 ,2, 3, 4 and the M11.rather they are basically deployed for the second purpose.

what is your say?

i mean we atleast must have something to protect our Key Installation, aircrafts are good but they are not a complete solution i guess!!

We know that HQ-2Bs were deployed over Kahota when Indian AF Mig-25R came over Islamabad in 1997 and did a sonic boom before egress. HQ-2B or SA-2 is said to be high altitude Air defence system, so what went wrong?

I believe that had PAF the BVR missiles, this Foxbat was not going back home..............

If adequate budgets have been allocated/devoted to the modernisation of air force, then the rest of the money can be used for modernizing the ground air defences.........no doubt in it...

Here I would like to revise the famous Garry Powers incident of shooting down of U-2 by SA-2. Popular side of the story is not the whole story.

The altitude at which the U-2 was flying was a secret altitude and the figures given by various sources are not the same thing.

Credit was given to SA-2 itself but what about KGB role in it?. No one officially seem to accept KGB side of the story and the infiltration of KGB in Badhaber base near Peshawar.

I cant give a solid reference but some sites do allude to this affair. Its said that a KGB agent did some tweaking with the altimeter of U-2 in Badhber base and once over USSR, the pilot Garry Powers started altitude readings from his altimeter and went on to his operational height. While he thought that he was at 68,000 feet (or his assigned height), in fact he may have been flying well below this height and thus was taken out by SA-2 shots.

 

[qsaark]

We know that HQ-2Bs were deployed over Kahota when Indian AF Mig-25R came over Islamabad in 1997 and did a sonic boom before egress. HQ-2B or SA-2 is said to be high altitude Air defence system, so what went wrong?

Nothing went wrong. MiG-25 was not fired upon in a fear that it will escalate tension.

 

[MastanKhan]

double post let it go.

 

[MastanKhan]

We know that HQ-2Bs were deployed over Kahota when Indian AF Mig-25R came over Islamabad in 1997 and did a sonic boom before egress. HQ-2B or SA-2 is said to be high altitude Air defence system, so what went wrong?

I believe that had PAF the BVR missiles, this Foxbat was not going back home..............

If adequate budgets have been allocated/devoted to the modernisation of air force, then the rest of the money can be used for modernizing the ground air defences.........no doubt in it...

Here I would like to revise the famous Garry Powers incident of shooting down of U-2 by SA-2. Popular side of the story is not the whole story.

The altitude at which the U-2 was flying was a secret altitude and the figures given by various sources are not the same thing.

Credit was given to SA-2 itself but what about KGB role in it?. No one officially seem to accept KGB side of the story and the infiltration of KGB in Badhaber base near Peshawar.

I cant give a solid reference but some sites do allude to this affair. Its said that a KGB agent did some tweaking with the altimeter of U-2 in Badhber base and once over USSR, the pilot Garry Powers started altitude readings from his altimeter and went on to his operational height. While he thought that he was at 68,000 feet (or his assigned height), in fact he may have been flying well below this height and thus was taken out by SA-2 shots. Success lies in a combined effort.

Shehbazi,


You are the second person who told me that. The first person, told me the same thing I believe in 1992 or 1993.

You know another funny thins----in the history book that I had to study in the university here in the u s stated that Gary Power flew from TURKEY. There was no mention of pakistan.

By the way wasn't it Khruschev who threatened to nuke the base where the U 2 flew from. After that threat pakistan shut down that base right away.

 

[shehbazi2001]

Mastan this story in fact originated from within PAF circles. PAF may be aware of it because one of its bases was used by U-2s.

However to get a broader view on the topic, we need to look at other incidents too like shooting down of U-2 by SA-2 over Cuba soon after Garry Power episode.

Then the third incident is the damaging of PAF RB-57F over Delhi in mid 1960s by Indian SA-2s. After this damage, these ELINT aircrafts were given back to USA, because I think they were on lease.

So Garry Power incident was not the only one and each and everytime the altimeter also cant be tweaked. Perhaps the story was created to reassure the pilots that it was some sabotage and not the capability of SA-2 or weakness of U-2.

India did not hesitate in firing on RB-57F and even we did not hesitate when FLt Lt Younas shot down IAF Canberra over Rawalpindi but I dont know what happened later on that even before the nuclear tests of 1998, Pakistan seems to think more about not escalating the tension and less about its soveregnity and national pride.

The safe exit of Mig-25R in 1997, Kargil war IAF activity, IAF recent intrusions and drone attacks all indicate a greater overall weakness than anything else.