Shaheen 2 Training launch

[Khansaheeb]

Do you have any backup/proofs of your claim?

I wouldn't disclose them on a monitored platform.

 

[Khansaheeb]

That's your thinking with current financial issues Pakistan don't do the damn

And I'm muslim and came from karachi Pakistan in 2017 I want good and prosperous Pakistan

And no you can't convert S-3 into slv at least not for moon mission because it uses solid fuel with much less payload capacity than compared to liquid fuel rockets and make it much bigger then tiny S3 at least on par of Saturn V rocket (110 meter/363 feet)

Tell me brother how many solid fuel rockets reached the moon?

And there's no need ICBM and your imaginary S4 because our main enemies (India and Israel) within our BMs range

So please brother think logically not emotionally

You need to have a greater vision than meets the horizon. Don't blame you , it's the way you have been brought up and the environment you were in. Just because you don't have drive to try to do the impossible it doesn't mean others will be constrained by your negativity. Whatever little you can push to achieve then do it. "Can't do " shouldn't be in your vocabulary, "how can it be done" should be. I coined the phrase " everything is easy if you know how" when I was a technical trainer and showed my students ( just like my teachers showed me) that what looks difficult is actually easy , time and effort is all that is needed. When I studied laplace, fourier transforms , fourier series etc initially they seemed hard but then they became simple after diligent hours of studying. Plz don't try and impose your limitations and sense of inability on others. Go forth and do what others have not done before.

 

[Khansaheeb]

I highly doubt if its possible and what additional advantage can it provide even if possible??

Most missiles these days don't have large CEP (the probability of the re-entry vehicle missing the target) anyway (assuming you want a AESA radar to make sure the hit has pin point accuracy). The older missiles had large CEP ranges, due to olde guidance systems which have now developed well. Further when its a nuclear war (am sure Shaheen isn't for conventional warhead) even a larger CEP makes no difference. The effects will be devastating, given the fall out ranges.

As to my doubt for this being even possible: A warhead in free fall (and am mentioning terminal phase of a ICBM here), can travel at anywhere between 6 to 8 Km per second (a quick google mind you, not an expert here). At those speeds can AESA radar work? as if am not wrong the re-entry vehicle's surface must be suffering massive heat levels that cuts off electronics or at least hampers their working.

You guys aren't upto date on your technology:-


Fitting an Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar on a ballistic missile presents several technical challenges, but it's theoretically possible.

• The radar was designed for a small footprint, making it 30 percent lower in size, weight and power than other radars in its class. It is small, no bigger than two A4 pages side by side, weighs less than 20 kg (45 lbs) and uses about 1 Kw of power.

Now I bet US, China and Russia will do it but Pakistan and India will be held back by people like you. It's like when I proposed long time ago an independent autonomous hunter killer torpedo to trawl sections of the sea for ships. Was shocked to see that Russia actually built an autonomous doomsday nuke torpedo.

 

[NGAD IS THE BEST]

I wouldn't disclose them on a monitored platform.

Lol so you have no proofs to prove your claim are you working some classified organization of Pakistan? If not I assume you've wishful thinking and spreading false speculations about H-Bombs

 

[NGAD IS THE BEST]

Why you're laughing @Khansaheeb you knows nothing about rocketry and tell me how much solid fuel rockets can carry payloads? Today all solid fuel rockets can carry payloads of few kg to few hundred kgs whereas liquid fuel rockets can carry thousands of kgs

 

[indushek]

You guys aren't upto date on your technology:-


Fitting an Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar on a ballistic missile presents several technical challenges, but it's theoretically possible.

• The radar was designed for a small footprint, making it 30 percent lower in size, weight and power than other radars in its class. It is small, no bigger than two A4 pages side by side, weighs less than 20 kg (45 lbs) and uses about 1 Kw of power.

Now I bet US, China and Russia will do it but Pakistan and India will be held back by people like you. It's like when I proposed long time ago an independent autonomous hunter killer torpedo to trawl sections of the sea for ships. Was shocked to see that Russia actually built an autonomous doomsday nuke torpedo.

I have never said am an expert, or outright denied the possibility of such development. I hope you read what I wrote in my previous post.

I only expressed my doubt on the use of such incorporation firstly (on a practical basis), as usually any addition should be adding some advantage right? I also never expressed any doubt on Pakistan, or for that matter any country's capabilities. Humans are capable of lot of things.

Simply put what added advantage does a AESA provide, over current guidance systems (GPS guided or inertial guided) is my doubt. I also have this theoretical doubt of extreme heat negating, onboard electronics inside a missile nose cone.

 

[Oscar]

I have never said am an expert, or outright denied the possibility of such development. I hope you read what I wrote in my previous post.

I only expressed my doubt on the use of such incorporation firstly (on a practical basis), as usually any addition should be adding some advantage right? I also never expressed any doubt on Pakistan, or for that matter any country's capabilities. Humans are capable of lot of things.

Simply put what added advantage does a AESA provide, over current guidance systems (GPS guided or inertial guided) is my doubt. I also have this theoretical doubt of extreme heat negating, onboard electronics inside a missile nose cone.

None of these bloated capabilities exist - guidance is based upon a combo of Beidou/GLONASS/GPS with inertial. Sufficient for delivering nuclear payloads and even decently accurate conventional strikes.

 

[Khansaheeb]

I have never said am an expert, or outright denied the possibility of such development. I hope you read what I wrote in my previous post.

I only expressed my doubt on the use of such incorporation firstly (on a practical basis), as usually any addition should be adding some advantage right? I also never expressed any doubt on Pakistan, or for that matter any country's capabilities. Humans are capable of lot of things.

Simply put what added advantage does a AESA provide, over current guidance systems (GPS guided or inertial guided) is my doubt. I also have this theoretical doubt of extreme heat negating, onboard electronics inside a missile nose cone.

You obviously didn't read my orignal post , seems like you are too blinded by self confidence of Indian 27th February type. I was speaking about Pakistani weapons engineers incorporating this for countermeasures into anti-Ballistic missiles and for targetting, that's what I heard, my sources wouldn't tell me any more. I have no way of authenticating the truthfullness of this just like I had no way of proving after being told Pakistan possessing nukes a decade before Pakistan tested them. I would like to add however that this would be a natural evolution of having multiwarhead ballistic missiles. If you have many eggs in one basket you want to protect the basket!

 

[Khansaheeb]

Lol so you have no proofs to prove your claim are you working some classified organization of Pakistan? If not I assume you've wishful thinking and spreading false speculations about H-Bombs

OK HindJew.

 

[safriz]

Ballistic missile radar system is used to improve accuracy:

Based on the Pershing I and IA missiles, the Pershing II contained technological and operational improvements that resulted in greater range and accuracy. The accuracy was improved by the use of a new radar area correlation guidance system that compared incoming targets with images recorded on its computer memory.

From here.

The Pershing II also featured a new and more accurate reentry vehicle (RV) that included an active radar guidance system developed by Goodyear Aerospace. Upon reentry, terrain-mapping radar in the nose scanned the area below, comparing the resulting radar image with the map stored in the missile’s guidance computer.

From here.

A ballistic missile is not known to detect and attempt to avoid interceptors like a sophisticated manned aircraft due to its ballistic flight profile and appropriate sensor installation considerations. It can perform pre-programmed maneuvers or release PENAIDS in an attempt to complicate intercept process but it comes down to what it is up against. Shaheen II was never used in war so we do not know how Indian defenses stack up to it in current form. It may come down to speed, strategy, and timing.

And if a radar system is added to the re-entry vehicle then:

The Pershing II intermediate-range missile, deployed in 1983, had a warhead that performed a 25-g pull-up maneuver, although primarily not to evade anti-missile defenses but to slow the vehicle enough that the terrain-matching radar in its nose could find fixed targets on the ground (Perrett et al. 2014).

From here.

There is a trade-off, mate.

Yes sir, but none of that actually worked.
They did try.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Pakistan now even has H-Bombs and big MFs they are. Agreed Pakistan would need to undertake a major overhaul of the rocket's design, significantly enhance its payload capacity and thrust, develop and build the necessary infrastructure. Together with collaboration with China ( which is under way),Pakistan's successful human spaceflight mission is not far off. You will probably fall off your chair when you see the size and specs of Shaheen 4, Pakistan's ICBM. It is evolutionary my dear foolish man, Pakistan is cable of achieving anything it wants.

Thanks for the confirmation. Oscar had spilled it out before though....

 

[NGAD IS THE BEST]

OK HindJew.

Ok you ameture who can't think logically, I can prove you I'm Pakistani from karachi we sell our house last month and I can tell you lot of local areas name in karachi that is not in Google maps or in Google earth

 

[Khansaheeb]

None of these bloated capabilities exist - guidance is based upon a combo of Beidou/GLONASS/GPS with inertial. Sufficient for delivering nuclear payloads and even decently accurate conventional strikes.

You forgot terrain mapping and image processing, using multi military satellites for missile guidance using microwave beams by triangulation different to GPS

 

[Khansaheeb]

Why you're laughing @Khansaheeb you knows nothing about rocketry and tell me how much solid fuel rockets can carry payloads? Today all solid fuel rockets can carry payloads of few kg to few hundred kgs whereas liquid fuel rockets can carry thousands of kgs

The largest solid-fuel rocket ever built is the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster (SRB). Each of the two SRBs used on the Space Shuttle was the largest and most powerful solid rocket ever flown.

Key Specifications of the Space Shuttle SRB:​

• Height: 45.46 meters (149 feet)
• Diameter: 3.71 meters (12.17 feet)
• Thrust: Approximately 13.8 million Newtons (3.3 million pounds-force) at liftoff
• Payload Contribution: Each SRB contributed to lifting the overall payload capacity of the Space Shuttle, which could carry up to 24,400 kg (53,700 pounds) to low Earth orbit (LEO).

However, the payload carried by the Space Shuttle was supported by both the SRBs and the Space Shuttle's main engines, which were fueled by the external tank. The SRBs themselves didn't carry the payload independently but were crucial in providing the necessary thrust to help launch the Shuttle and its payload into orbit.

So, while the SRBs were part of a system that could carry significant payloads to space, they weren't standalone in determining the total payload capacity. The combined effort of the SRBs, main engines, and external tank defined the overall payload capability.

Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Khansaheeb]

Only used in boost phase and reach only sub-orbital altitudes can I post you what's the difference between solid fuel rockets and liquid fuel rockets and what's the pros of liquid fuel rockets and cons of solid fuel rockets?

You're really stupid man lifting capability of solid fuel rockets are least then compare to liquid fuel rockets man

OK simplistic Idiot, When did I say solid state missile wouldn't be combined with liquid fuel missiles? Also the limitation of solid fuel missiles is today who knows what break throughs may be made tomorrow?