SMASH SLBM Testing - Nov 2025

[JamD]

Well then, its almost half the speed of P800 Onix / Brahmos

But that's only one trajectory. Please see the post I quoted.

 

[JamD]

Dual Thrust solid rocket motor , and Anti ship version has a smaller warhead than Land attack version. 384 Kg for Anti ship and 444 Kg for land attack.
I am guessing thats due to the Anti ship version having a bigger , heavier sensor suite ?

Anti ship has a radar seeker that the land attack version does not.

 

[safriz]

But that's only one trajectory. Please see the post I quoted.

Sure, but GIDS poster quoted above by Zarvan also says Terminal velocity of less than Mach 2.
That should be for all trajectories i guess?

 

[JamD]

Sure, but GIDS poster quoted above by Zarvan also says Terminal velocity of less than Mach 2.
That should be for all trajectories i guess?

more than 2 not less

 

[safriz]

more than 2 not less

Oh ok...Told you i am terrible at maths .
I have come up with another method of calculating terminal speed of Smash missile.
I will post here after i done the calculations with the help of Chat GPT.

 

[falcon34]

View attachment 177320

@JamD
What's the difference between F2 and smash?
both are basically the same thing the only difference is one has active radar seeker.
Wouldn't it more beneficial to market F2 also capable of being launched from ship
Or there is a difference between accuracy of the two.

 

[falcon34]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The dude is on PDF somebody needs to tell him the difference between hypersonic flight and terminal speed.
@RescueRanger kindly tag the guy, he's embarrassing himself on X

 

[JamD]

@JamD
What's the difference between F2 and smash?
both are basically the same thing the only difference is one has active radar seeker.
Wouldn't it more beneficial to market F2 also capable of being launched from ship
Or there is a difference between accuracy of the two.

I'm 99% sure that SMASH land attack and Fatah 2 are identical. The difference may be the slightly different launch control law due to the ship being slightly more unstable than the Earth. Or the launch laws could be robust enough to be the same and they're 100% same.

I absolutely love system commonality like this because it lets us scale production better.

The difference in name is probably just a marketing decision: One is marketed as part of an MRLS system while the other is marketed as a ship launched BM, while actually being the same product. Rare example of smart marketing if you ask me.

 

[Bilal]

I'm 99% sure that SMASH land attack and Fatah 2 are identical. The difference may be the slightly different launch control law due to the ship being slightly more unstable than the Earth. Or the launch laws could be robust enough to be the same and they're 100% same.

I absolutely love system commonality like this because it lets us scale production better.

The difference in name is probably just a marketing decision: One is marketed as part of an MRLS system while the other is marketed as a ship launched BM, while actually being the same product. Rare example of smart marketing if you ask me.

Dual pulse confirmed.

 

[JamD]

Dual pulse confirmed.

This throws off my simulations. I can certainly redo them but now there's yet another unknown variable - what's the dual thrust profile?

 

[Bilal]

This throws off my simulations. I can certainly redo them but now there's yet another unknown variable - what's the dual thrust profile?

That’s what I was hoping for. But strange that the numbers largely match even with single pulse modeling.

Maybe you can add multiple scenarios for second pulse at different points in flight or maybe the most optimal? But then we don’t know the burn time of each…

 

[Fatman17]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Ak01]

That’s what I was hoping for. But strange that the numbers largely match even with single pulse modeling.

Maybe you can add multiple scenarios for second pulse at different points in flight or maybe the most optimal? But then we don’t know the burn time of each…

dual thrust is not the same as pulse...no? @JamD

 

[JamD]

That’s what I was hoping for. But strange that the numbers largely match even with single pulse modeling.

Maybe you can add multiple scenarios for second pulse at different points in flight or maybe the most optimal? But then we don’t know the burn time of each…

I will try.

Also, if you look at the trends the 290km MTCR restricted shot will have a slower terminal Mach than the 400km shot. Unless you do a really slow trajectory. This might explain the Mach 2+ marketing. They would be say 3+ if it was that.

 

[Ak01]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

what i find interesting is this is very clearly designed for carrier killing.

A pretty niche capability. How many navies need to kill carriers?

For the export market, imo, a better sensor stack in exchange for slimming the warhead down to reduce your CEP so you can also target smaller vessels might be ideal? Maybe some form of terminal IR?