What's new

USA ‘s Tomahawk Vs India’s Nirbhay Vs Pakistan’s Babur-Three subsonic cruise missile

Status
Not open for further replies.

jaiind

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Dec 27, 2011
Messages
2,399
Reaction score
-23
Country
India
Location
Russian Federation
Description
USA ‘s Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM) is an all-weather,long range,subsonic cruise missile used for land attack warfare,Launched from U.S. Navy surface ships and U.S. Navy and Royal Navy Submarines.

India’s Nirbhay is an all-weather low-cost,long range subsonic cruise missilecapable of being launched from multiple platforms on land,sea and air and shall be inducted in to Indian Navy,Army and Air force.

Pakistan’s Babur is the first land attack cruise missile to developed by Pakistan.It is medium ranged subsonic cruise missile launched from ground-based transporter erector Launcher,warships and submarines.

Design and Warheads
USA’s Tomahawk missile family consists of number of subsonic,jet engine-powered missiles designed to attack a variety of surface targets.Tomahawk has a modular design,allowing a wide variety of warhead ( nuclear and conventional ),guidance,and range capabilities. Currently only sea launched variants are in service.

India’s Nirbhay is the two stage missile and capable of carrying 24 different types of nuclear warheads .the size of Nirbhay is no too big as it will be without booster type.It blasts off like a rocket and turns it into aircraft and has wings and tail fins.

Pakistan’s Babur is made with tubular fuselage,with a pair of folded wings attached to the middle section and the empennage at the rear along with the propulsion system.Propelled by either turbofan or turbojet jet engine.It iscapable of carrying either conventional or nuclear warheads.

Key Features
USA’s Tomahawk Block III versions incorporates engine improvements,an insensitive extended range warhead,time-of,arrival control and navigation capability which can reduce mission-planning time and increase navigation and terminal accuracy.Enhancements includes increased flexibility utilizing two-waysatellite communications,increased responsiveness with faster launch timelines,loiter capability in area of emerging targets and improved affordability .

India’s Nirbhay blasts off like a rocket and unlike from other missiles it turns into the aircraft.After its launch in early flights the rocket falls off and small wings get deployed.At that time gas turbine comes into work and it turns into full aircraft.It cannot be jammed as it operates on fire and forget system.It is very maneuverable and cost efficient.and can fly over tree-top level and cannot detected on enemies radar.

Pakistan’s Babur missile is stated to have a high degree of maneuverability and have the ability of terrain hugging that helps the missile to avoid enemy radar detection by utilizing”terrain masking”,giving it the capability to penetrate enemy air defense systems undetected and survive until reaching the target.On its launch, a booster rocket provides additional thrust to accelerate the missile away from the launch vehicle. After the launch the wings unfold, the booster rocket is jettisoned and the jet engine started.
 
Last edited:
They're all quite similar, so any comparison is going to be one comparing very, very minor details. Long-range, sub-sonic, ground hugging, adaptable, nuclear capable missile that are multi-platform. The range and degree of accuracy and target discrimination is the only significant detail difference
 
Genral SpecificationsUSA’s TomahawkIndia’s NirbhayPakistan’s Babur
Weight2900 lb (1300 kg),3500 lb (1600 kg) with booster2200 lb (1000 kg)Less than 3000 lb(1500 kg)
Range1500-2000 kmsoperational range1000-1500 Kms operational range700 km operational range
WarheadsNuclear and conventionalNuclearNuclear or conventional
SpeedSubsonic: about 550 mph(890 km/h)or 0.7 MachSubsonic: about 600 mph ( 980 km/h ) 0.8 Mach orSubsonic: about 550 mph (890 km/h) or 0.7 Mach
EngineTH-dimer fuel,solid-fuel rocket boosterGas turbine engineSolid fuel (booster rocket),Liquid fuel (jet engine)
NavigationGPS,INS,TERCOM,DSMACINS IRNSSINS,TERCOM/DSMAC,


GPS,GLONASS
 
Evolution my friend
1. Tomahawk is 30 year more evolved and
2tgey have better navigation system. So us has better system to deliver.
3 tomahawk is ready to use. India willtake 3 to 6 yr to deliver to army navy and iaf.
4. Tomahawk is pioneer system.


These 4 points alone should tell us aukat. be in limit. Stop being over enthusiastic and work harder.
 
Evolution my friend
1. Tomahawk is 30 year more evolved and
2tgey have better navigation system. So us has better system to deliver.
3 tomahawk is ready to use. India willtake 3 to 6 yr to deliver to army navy and iaf.
4. Tomahawk is pioneer system.


These 4 points alone should tell us aukat. be in limit. Stop being over enthusiastic and work harder.

To add to your 4 points, the Tomahawk is being replaced, while the Nirbhay and Babur are much more recent developments. For a more fair comparison the Babur and Nirbhay should be compared to a modern US cruise missile such as the JASSM. While the JASSM might not be the Tomahawk's true replacement, its diminishing the tomahawk's role.
 
Evolution my friend
1. Tomahawk is 30 year more evolved and
2tgey have better navigation system. So us has better system to deliver.
3 tomahawk is ready to use. India willtake 3 to 6 yr to deliver to army navy and iaf.
4. Tomahawk is pioneer system.


These 4 points alone should tell us aukat. be in limit. Stop being over enthusiastic and work harder.
Can you shed some light on the navigation system of tomakawk in comparison with nirbhay? Going by your logic, will any modern fighter like rafale be inferior to mig 21 since migs are "evolved" platforms?
 
Can you shed some light on the navigation system of tomakawk in comparison with nirbhay? Going by your logic, will any modern fighter like rafale be inferior to mig 21 since migs are "evolved" platforms?

There is a huge gap in technological know how. While the Tomahawk is operational, we are yet to make the Nirbhaya operational.
 
To add to your 4 points, the Tomahawk is being replaced, while the Nirbhay and Babur are much more recent developments. For a more fair comparison the Babur and Nirbhay should be compared to a modern US cruise missile such as the JASSM. While the JASSM might not be the Tomahawk's true replacement, its diminishing the tomahawk's role.

Could you go further in detail of the Tomahawks replacement? I'm not aware of a sea based LACM follow on program.
 
Could you go further in detail of the Tomahawks replacement? I'm not aware of a sea based LACM follow on program.

The LRASM will not be solely an anti-ship missile, though technically you are correct in saying that no replacement has yet to be determined. What I meant when I said that the JASSM is diminishing the role of the Tomahawk was not that it's the Tomahawk's outright replacement, but that the Tomahawks will not needed to be used as much, given that there is a limited stockpile and few being produced still, the JASSM will be a supplement. The LRASM is the JASSM, also capable of air or sea lauch and while it's called the Long Range Anti-Ship Missile, it will not solely be an anti-ship missile, it will have a land attack capability. Keep in mind that so to does the Tomahawk have an anti-ship capability (interestingly so to does the SM-2 as seen in Op Praying Mantis), it's just not used.
 
The LRASM will not be solely an anti-ship missile, though technically you are correct in saying that no replacement has yet to be determined. What I meant when I said that the JASSM is diminishing the role of the Tomahawk was not that it's the Tomahawk's outright replacement, but that the Tomahawks will not needed to be used as much, given that there is a limited stockpile and few being produced still, the JASSM will be a supplement. The LRASM is the JASSM, also capable of air or sea lauch and while it's called the Long Range Anti-Ship Missile, it will not solely be an anti-ship missile, it will have a land attack capability. Keep in mind that so to does the Tomahawk have an anti-ship capability (interestingly so to does the SM-2 as seen in Op Praying Mantis), it's just not used.

Thanks for this. LRASM is essentially a variant of JASSM with upgraded electronics. I was not aware it would be used for land attack though.
 
ndia’s Nirbhay blasts off like a rocket and unlike from other missiles it turns into the aircraft.After its launch in early flights the rocket falls off and small wings get deployed.At that time gas turbine comes into work and it turns into full aircraft.It cannot be jammed as it operates on fire and forget system

WTF :omghaha: :omghaha:

Who wrote that BS? I mean every cruise missile works like that. It's not something Nirbhay does

The true difference b/w Tomahawk and South Asian's LACM is former can target moving objects with the inclusion of a ESM seeker while later can only target stationary objects for now.

It took Pakistan 8 years from first test to Operationalizing the Babur.

India would need 6 years If it sticks to the basic and evolve LACM with stationary target capability. If DRDO wants to become ambitious and go after a Seeker in Nirbhay, then I would add another 2 years in program until it becomes operationalize
 
Last edited:
Pakistan Babur is a copy of a fewTomahawks that landed failed to explode in Osma Bin Laden Attack in Afghanistan by Clinton in the 1990's. They were able to get their hands on it and reverse engineer whatever they could.
 
Tomohawk is most advanced weapon-system as of now.

Pakistan's BABUR is most advance land-attack nuclear cruise missile in South Asia.

India's Nirbhay isn't operational yet.

I have seen videos where Pakistan has launched its cruise missiles from multi-tube launch vehicle...

Very impressive capability...

Pakistan also has quasi-ballistic tactical weapons designed specifically to defeat defence-systems like Iron Dome etc...

India on the other hand have really impressive systems, too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom