Pakistani missile development program

Canisterised yet hot launched can't be navalised as of present.

If Pakistan has proved of such a progress; cold launch technology be just hands away from Pakistan engineering society:tup:.

Because the missile is tilted before the booster separated out  in cold launch however this would be reversed I.e the missile must be tilted to respective direction before boosting ever starts. This usually is achieved by

Control jets are small orifices in the top/bottom and/or sides of the object to be controlled, through which gas can be ejected. This gas may be tapped from the main engine or generated separately from compressed gas in bottles or by burning fuel. If mounted in the front of the vehicle, a gas jet blowing out the left of the nose will push the nose, and therefore the object, to the right. If mounted behind the center of gravity of the object the opposite effect will occur - a gas jet on the left side will turn the object to the left. Varying the amount of gas exiting the jet will control the amount of force and therefore the rate of turn.
Gas-dynamic control systems are typically found on high-altitude jet aircraft (such as the Sukhoi Su-35, F-22 Raptor and X-15), spacecraft (such as the Space Shuttle), ballistic missiles, air-to-air missiles (such as the Vympel R-73 (AA-11) and surface-to-air missiles (such as the S-400 "Triumf" (SA-20) and 9K332 "Tor" (SA-15)).

So it is a hot launched subsonic... fairly large cruise missile?

Apart from its flight range it is pretty much an SS-N-2 then.

Good individual effort I suppose.

Pakistan has recently tested Tactical Multi-Tube Ballistic Missile named Nasr
ranged 60km



For comparison with A100 MRLS, take a look at this:

This is the Indian BM-21 Grad

Indian Smerch with max range of 90 KMs

@Garry
our Nasr system as far as I know will remain 2 tubed piece...It is destined to work in parallel with the A-100 MLRS [Smerch Chinese copy]; YES the A-100 has been upgraded from 10 rockets to 12 rockets. A-100 does comes with computerized fire control system and it wouldn't be a hard thing to synchronize multiple launchers into firing at the same target or to cover a specified target area. It can be done through radio system or data communication setup, which would be an easy job.
Nasr job is to neutralise the Indian Cold Start strategy
You can read the detail related to Nasr here:
http://defencedog.blogspot.com/2011/04/pakistan-tactical-multi-tube-ballistic.html
~~time saving if you read the bold parts alone.

Are you sure that link is right NC?

It seems rather empty like it is a page not found like page but in Chinese.

It is hard to gauge size with the photos given... the Nasr can fly 60km and there are two rockets per vehicle, while the A-100 system will have 12 rockets per vehicle and a range of 100km.

I find that a little strange as I would expect the longer range rocket to be larger and heavier and fewer in number on the launch vehicle.

Is the NASR designed for shoot and scoot operations with lots of vehicles scattered all over the place?

Or is it just a test vehicle?

its a test vehicle for now...
the URL has been corrected; click it

the Nasr can fly 60km and there are two rockets per vehicle, while the A-100 system will have 12 rockets per vehicle and a range of 100km.

Sir, they are ballistic missiles not rockets

What a very strange weapon system.

It is basically a FROG-7 but guided.

This brings a few questions to mind... why would a 60km range missile need accurate guidance if it has a tactical nuclear warhead?

Presumably normal targets would be HQs or armour concentrations that warrant an escalation from conventional weapons to nukes and in my mind would actually be rather counter productive.

The suggestion that a lack of tactical nuclear weapons in the armoury of Pakistan being a weakness is a little silly because the positioning of Pakistan right next to India means that most nuclear delivery methods are both strategic and tactical in nature.

A comparison could be made with Russia and China... an Iskander could hit targets almost 500km distant but a Topol could just as easily do the same job... with the INF treaty IRBMs are withdrawn so in effect the ICBMs become the tool to use when the target is more than 500km away.
The concept of limited nuclear strikes has always been a bit suspect in my opinion anyway.

In India-Pak Nuclear scenario a limited nuclear strike or tactical nuclear strike would be the most likely scenario , considering the IA has its own Cold Start doctrine which would force the PA to use tactical nuke.

Yeah, the Americans talked about such rubbish during the potential WWIII in Europe.

I believe the Russian reply was that when cowboys fight in the movies they put each other down verbally and then throw a chair and then a punch and eventually they go for their guns.

Problem is that in the real world a real cowboy is not going to pick up a chair because if he does the other guy can just draw his gun and kill him. Both will go straight for their guns when they realise this is going to be a lethal encounter.

India forcing Pakistan to use nukes is dumb because their first strike might be an all out strike to wipe you out.

Morality has nothing to do with it... look at history today... Dunkirk was a victory but Soviet forces pushed back to Moscow was a rout. Soviets killing German soldiers in ground combat led to war crimes claims, but strategic bombing of German civilians and Japanese civilians was OK.

Take a leaf from the west and do what you have to do and then come out smelling of roses because you write the history.

^^ Wrong thread to discuss but the idea of Cold Start is to fight a rapid conventional war keeping below the nuclear deterrent threshold ( or what the Indian Generals would think is below the Nuclear threshold )

But if pakistan uses Nuclear Weapons in a full scale manner then deterrence is already lost and not working and its a full scale Nuclear War.

But I really do not think there will be any nuclear war since America has a good grip on Indian Leadership and pakistani military ,So it will depend on what America thinks and wants to be.

India's Cold Start Is Too Hot
http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2011-03/indias-cold-start-too-hot

Our Pakistan is small & in case of Indian attack all our Silo based nuclear main arsenal may be lost...Provided tht we haven't any ballistic submarine nor do we have any money for that it makes quiet a sense to put such weapon systems (along with Abdali Missile) that are concealable, mobile & yet can giv a nuke punch near to Indian borders

Pakistan tests fire nuclear capable ballistic missile: army

IRNA - Islamic Republic News Agency

Islamabad, March 5, IRNA -- Pakistan successfully test fired a nuclear-capable, short-range, surface-to-surface ballistic missile on Monday, the military said.

The Hatf-2 ballistic missile can travel up to 180 km, an army statement said.

“Hatf-2 carries nuclear as well as conventional warheads with high accuracy,” the statement from the Inter-Service Public Relations said.

The test is part of the process of validation of land based ballistic missile system, it said.

“The test provides an operational level capability to Pakistan’s strategic forces, additional to the strategic and technical level capability with Pakistan already posses,” the military said.

Test was witnessed by director general Strategic Planning Division, Lt. Gen. (retd) Khalid Kidwai and Commander of Strategic Force Command Lt Gen Tariq Nadeem Gilani.

President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani congratulated the army and its engineers and all team involved in the missile system on the successful test of the ballistic missile.

The statement did not identify site of the test.

Pakistan and India routinely carry out tit-for-tat missile tests.

Pakistan conducted nuclear tests in May 1998 several days after similar tests by its rival India.

**1412
Islamic Republic News Agency/IRNA NewsCode: 80024694

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/pakistan/2012/pakistan-120305-irna01.htm?_m=3n.002a.446.dd0ao031i6.ehe

With the new military hardware that india collect and pay billions to obtain ahigh military technology , pakistan has two ways,first: to buy modern air defences to counter india air force as pakistan has no money now to buy typhoon and make adeal on pakfa or 120 su-35 !!

or they will depend on their nuclear forces to counter india traditional weapons and nuclear power,
The point that i wonder ,did really U.S want to solve the kashmir issue ?
it support the two with modern military technology

The US doesn't have friends, it has interests... and US interests in this case was all about weapons sales to promote peace and stability in the region...

GarryB wrote:The US doesn't have friends, it has interests... and US interests in this case was all about weapons sales to promote peace and stability in the region...

U.S helps india to apply this equation ( india chineese war = destruction for each )

U.S didn't want pakistan as anuclear power ( it's islamic country and muslims are terrorists,terrorist and proud ) ,but she can't bomb pakistan now ,so U.S tried to destroy pakistan from inside (economic and security ) , Drones go through pakistan and kill some pakistani citizens that U.S call them terrorists , and go out, then more hate from pakistani citizens to their government and try to take revenge , So U.S call them terrorists again and so on , as aresult low investments in pakistan ,low income and can't Keep pace with india army ,

but U.S gave pak some F-16 to look like as friends .

ahmedfire wrote:With the new military hardware that india collect and pay billions to obtain ahigh military technology , pakistan has two ways,first: to buy modern air defences to counter india air force as pakistan has no money now to buy typhoon and make adeal on pakfa or 120 su-35 !!

Lets be honest here Pakistan has no money to feed its people let alone buy any thing. Their military is being supported by US military aid. That is how wages are paid and some people are making a lot of money from all this as well. Secondly they get soft loans from China, which are not much anyway. So all in all they cant get the toys you are proposing. They cant compete with India. Their only chance is keep some sort of parity in nuclear weapons. Which means draining their limited resources even more. India just needs status quo and keep patience as Pakistan is on self destruct mode already.

The point that i wonder ,did really U.S want to solve the kashmir issue ?

India has never accepted US or any other mediation in Kashmir. That has been official Indian policy on this.

ahmedfire wrote:but she can't bomb pakistan now

US is bombing Pakistan almost every day.

so U.S tried to destroy pakistan from inside (economic and security ) , Drones go through pakistan and kill some pakistani citizens that U.S call them terrorists , and go out, then more hate from pakistani citizens to their government and try to take revenge , So U.S call them terrorists again and so on , as aresult low investments in pakistan ,low income and can't Keep pace with india army ,

but U.S gave pak some F-16 to look like as friends .

So why are Pakistani's so stupid that they cant sense it and so something about it. The fact is they are neck deep in **** and have no clue how to get out of it. Doesnt US pays Pakistan govt. as the aid. Isnt Pakistan a nuclear country and they can show middle finger to US and say dont cross the border. I am afraid it is much complex than what you said. Even Hilary said this blutly Go to 7:10 on this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5OG184mDyQ

GarryB wrote:The US doesn't have friends, it has interests... and US interests in this case was all about weapons sales to promote peace and stability in the region...

And also In India's case it is weapon sales and large market for US companies and maybe India on their side against China but we have to wait and see how will this paly out in long run.

In Pakistan's case it is so called war on terror, supply routes for NATO and maintaining Pakistan as a hedge against India and keeping India on edge.

U.S helps india to apply this equation ( india chineese war = destruction for each )

Unfortunately they believe in the concept of the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Some take that litterally, but in actual fact what it really means is the enemy of my (biggest) enemy is someone I can use to hurt my biggest enemy and I don't really care what happens to either... if they wipe each other out fighting is as good a result as any for me.

Lets look at that track record... they used Communist China in their fight against... Communism... but it was declared as a fight against the Soviet Union. The result is that the last major communist country has now become a threat and Russia still has all those nuclear missiles it had that made it a threat in the first place.

The strategy now will likely be to break up the Russian federation to the point where it is a lot of little states that couldn't be trusted with nuclear weapons, and in Chinas case they will try to use either India or Russia against China and stir up things to try to get a conflict/competition from.

They also trained and equipped the rebels in Afghanistan... the money they spent created forces that became the Taleban. That worked out pretty good too right?

India just needs status quo and keep patience as Pakistan is on self destruct mode already.

Sad to say that the US has abandonned ship and is scrabbling onto the good ship India... if India realised that the first thing they will do when they get on board is head to the captains cabin to tell him he should point his guns at that chinese ship over there and that they can't trust the Chinese captain... but you can trust them...

And also In India's case it is weapon sales and large market for US companies and maybe India on their side against China but we have to wait and see how will this paly out in long run.

In Pakistan's case it is so called war on terror, supply routes for NATO and maintaining Pakistan as a hedge against India and keeping India on edge.

The US has clearly lost interest in Pakistan... Pakistan was a useful ally in the war in Afghanistan, but that is ending in 2014 so that is when their "interest" will end. After that watch American interest shift to India, and in a way that is in Indias interests as that will weaken Pakistan in almost every sphere.

It could be as bad as Iraq after the Kuwaite invasion... before that Saddam was the good guy keeping them Persians in check. After he was an evil dictator that gasses his own people!

After the US pullout in 2014 how will Pakistan be treated? They have no interests there anymore.

I think Pakistans real future rests on the untapped mineral wealth of Afghanistan... we all know the Taleban gets most of its support in Pakistan so the real question is who does Pakistan back?

If the US tries to leave a presence in Afghanistan then probably their best bet would be to support the Taleban to overthrow what will be a US puppet government and then hopefully take afghanistan quickly and when things die down so to speak create Pakistani mining companies and go in there and dig... with Taleban protection... they wont approve of drugs (which will make the Russians happy... in fact Pakistan could contact Russia and get some cooperation deal in getting rid of the poppy fields and benefit from something the Taleban will probably do anyway).

This, being something the US would never do, could be used to protect Pakistan from any UNSC resolutions over the new Afghanistan.

Of course if the US just leaves (which is very unlikely) then you need to look at where negotiations between Karzai and the Taleban go and be the nice supportive neighbour.

One of the problems is the split of nationalities so an agreement to split Afghanistan into two autonomous regions might actually be a good place to start in negotiations.

GarryB wrote:
Lets look at that track record... they used Communist China in their fight against... Communism... but it was declared as a fight against the Soviet Union. The result is that the last major communist country has now become a threat and Russia still has all those nuclear missiles it had that made it a threat in the first place.

The strategy now will likely be to break up the Russian federation to the point where it is a lot of little states that couldn't be trusted with nuclear weapons, and in Chinas case they will try to use either India or Russia against China and stir up things to try to get a conflict/competition from.

I agree. I do think India should keep their distance from US. Keep friendly relations and deal with US in all spheres but stop short of being a ally in a war or international cold war. look at this: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-15/u-s-may-sanction-india-over-level-of-iran-oil-imports.html

If the US tries to leave a presence in Afghanistan then probably their best bet would be to support the Taleban to overthrow what will be a US puppet government and then hopefully take afghanistan quickly and when things die down so to speak create Pakistani mining companies and go in there and dig... with Taleban protection... they wont approve of drugs (which will make the Russians happy... in fact Pakistan could contact Russia and get some cooperation deal in getting rid of the poppy fields and benefit from something the Taleban will probably do anyway).

They could have done that in the first instance if they wanted that. But they wont be stopping at that. Fights that are half the world away in Middle East will keep on spilling into Pakistan, then their is Kashmir that they have to capture, no matter what. Then their is also something like this: we will eat grass or leaves

It is a buyers market... anyone with cash to spend should take advantage of that and buy up and fix local infrastructure and start projects that would normally not be cost effective...

The point is that the US is not reliable and should not be trusted and it should be remembered that anything the US can offer they can probably get from Europe or Russia for less money, however good relations with the US are also necessary. It is a balancing act.

Pakistan Tests Babur Cruise Missile

RIA Novosti

11:28 05/06/2012 NEW DELHI, June 5 (RIA Novosti) - Pakistan carried out a successful test-firing on Tuesday of its Hatf-7 "Babur" nuclear-capable cruise missile, GEO-TV reported, quoting army sources.

The weapon was fired from a mobile launcher, from an undisclosed location.

Babur is a highly accurate Pakistani-developed cruise missile with a range of 700 km, according to local media. The system employs elements of stealth technology to reduce its radar signature.

The Pakistan armed forces test-fired an air-launched Raad cruise missile at the end of May. Babur and Raad share many main components and technologies.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/pakistan/2012/pakistan-120605-rianovosti02.htm#

Pakistan Test-Fires Nuclear-Capable Missile

ISLAMABAD — Pakistan on Wednesday test-fired a ballistic missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead, the military said.

The Ghauri Ballistic Missile has a range of 1,300 kilometers (807 miles) and can carry both conventional and nuclear warheads.

It came a month after the test-firing of the surface-to-surface nuclear-capable Shaheen III missile with a range of 2,750 kilometers.

"The training launch of the Ghauri missile system was aimed at testing operational and technical readiness," the military said in a statement.

Pakistan and neighboring India — which have fought three wars since independence from Britain in 1947 — have routinely carried out missile tests since both demonstrated a nuclear weapons capability in 1998.

Tensions are higher than normal after Pakistani authorities last Friday freed on bail Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, the alleged mastermind of the 2008 Mumbai attacks.

The move was furiously condemned by India and denounced by the United States and France.

The release followed nearly four months of wrangling over Lakhvi's detention after a judge granted him bail in December. Pakistan's government slapped Lakhvi with a series of detention orders but judges repeatedly canceled them.

Media Fear Pakistan Moving Toward Having Third Biggest Nuclear Stockpile

A paper released by two American think tanks titled “A Normal Nuclear Pakistan” suggests that Pakistan could have the third-biggest nuclear accumulation within a decade and could result in the production of 20 nuclear warheads annually.

The report, co-written by two scholars of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the Stimson Center, mentions that Islamabad is successfully competing with and possibly outperforming New Delhi in the build-up of its nuclear arsenal.

It was written in the report that Pakistan is estimated to possess around 120 nuclear weapons against India’s 100. Foreign affairs magazine The Diplomat went as far as saying that the increased nuclear arsenal will not help Pakistan resolve its internal challenges.

Yet, Pakistan’s Foreign Office rejected a report by two American think tanks calling it ‘utterly baseless’ that Pakistan was accelerating its nuclear weapons development program and may have the third biggest arsenal in a decade, Pakistan’s newspaper The Tribune reported.

The foreign office further said that such reports tend to divert public attention from the exponential increase in India’s fissile material stockpiles as a result of nuclear deals with a number of Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) countries.

“We strictly abide by the concept of credible minimum deterrence and our nuclear program is only aimed at maintaining peace and stability in South Asia. Pakistan has no desire to engage in a nuclear arms race,” Foreign Office spokesperson Qazi Khalilullah said in a statement on Friday.

He further said Pakistan had come forward several times with initiatives to promote conventional and strategic stability in South Asia, including the proposed Strategic Restraint Regime, but India has failed to respond positively.

The report published in the US think tank suggested that the larger amount of fissile material used in the production of nuclear weapons could give Islamabad “a nuclear arsenal not only twice the size of India’s but also larger than those of the United Kingdom, China, and France, giving it the third-largest arsenal behind the United States and Russia,” The Diplomat reported.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20150831/1026404227/pakistan-nuclear-arsenal-media-diversion-strategic-stability.html#ixzz3kQZtXAaX

Pakistan Will Be Fifth Largest Nuclear Power By 2025

WASHINGTON: Pakistan could turn into the fifth largest nuclear weapons state in the world by 2025, a report by a top US think tank has said, highlighting the country's rapidly expanding nuclear programme. The report comes just a day after Islamabad acknowledged having developed "low-yield, tactical nuclear weapons" to deter an attack by India.

"Pakistan has a nuclear weapons stockpile of 110 to 130 warheads, an increase from an estimated 90 to 110 warheads in 2011," the report, titled 'Pakistani nuclear forces 2015', says. It adds that the stockpile could realistically grow to 220 to 250 warheads by 2025, based on Islamabad's record over the past 20 years and its current and anticipated weapons deployments.

"With several delivery systems in development, four operating plutonium production reactors, and uranium facilities, the country's stockpile will likely increase over the next 10 years, but by how much will depend on many things," says the report, authored by Hans M Kristensen and Robert S Norris.

Key among the factors will be the number of nuclear-capable launchers Pakistan plans to deploy, and how much India's nuclear arsenal grows, the report said.

India, the report says, is "paying more attention to China in its nuclear planning than Pakistan" and hoped that Islamabad's "nuclear plans does not set off an action-reaction route".

The release of the report coincides with Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's visit to the US. Mr Sharif is due to meet US President Barack Obama today where he is expected to tell the President that Islamabad will not accept limits on its use of small tactical nuclear weapons, according to Pakistani officials.

Pakistan appears to possess six types of currently operational nuclear-capable ballistic missiles, the report said, adding at least two more are under development - the short-range Shaheen-1A and medium-range Shaheen-3.

The country is also developing two new cruise missiles, the ground-launched Babur (Hatf-7) and the air-launched Ra'ad (Hatf-, the report said, adding there are signs that Pakistan is developing a nuclear weapon - initially probably a nuclear-capable cruise missile - for deployment on submarines.

- See more at: http://www.defencenews.in/article/Pakistan-Will-Be-Fifth-Largest-Nuclear-Power-By-2025-30#sthash.ebNIqSaG.dpuf