SMASH SLBM Testing - Nov 2025

[safriz]

The Khalij-e Fars and other similar Iranian derivatives like the Hormuz-2. Also, china’s DF-21D, even though there’s a substantial range difference between it and the so-called PN SMASH ballistic missile.

Now try listing cruise missiles for the same use?
There will be far too many.

Point being its niche technology which not many countries in the world use.

 

[safriz]

I think SMASH is much closer to Khalij-e-Faris. The optical sensor on that, if it works, is impressive. SMASH has a radar seeker. I'm only guessing that a radar seeker vs an optical seeker points to a higher terminal speed - but this could just be hopium.

DF-21 is a whole different beast with an entirely different employment and targeting concept.

Would you like to calculate the terminal velocity of Smash?
I have an idea, but i am not good at maths.

 

[Falcon26]

Now try listing cruise missiles for the same use?
There will be far too many.

Point being its niche technology which not many countries in the world use.

I am sorry but many countries have anti ship cruise missiles. I mean Argentina’s use of the Exocet missiles against Great Britain in the Falklands war is well known.

 

[JamD]

Would you like to calculate the terminal velocity of Smash?
I have an idea, but i am not good at maths.

Mach 3.4 according to my calculations - see my earlier post.

 

[JamD]

I think the major problem with these missiles that follow a predictable trajectory is that 9/10 times they will be neutralized by a modern anti BMD systems. Might be useful for saturation attacks to exhaust enemy air defenses but if you don’t have other secrets for the enemy, you end up where Iran was in the 12-day war against Israel.

This may be true. However, its terminal speed, combined with its terminal attitude may prove challenging to ship mounted tracking radars that aren't designed to track objects falling vertically at Mach 3. But this is all hush hush stuff and we won't know if these systems are effective or not.

Also, comparing Israel+US+GCC states with IN is unfair. The employed ranges (and thus terminal speeds and terminal attitudes) are also very different.

 

[Oscar]

This may be true. However, its terminal speed, combined with its terminal attitude may prove challenging to ship mounted tracking radars that aren't designed to track objects falling vertically at Mach 3. But this is all hush hush stuff and we won't know if these systems are effective or not.

Also, comparing Israel+US+GCC states with IN is unfair. The employed ranges (and thus terminal speeds and terminal attitudes) are also very different.

Moreover these systems are misused if employed on their own.
A AshBM is usually coupled with a AshM launched prior and timed so both systems arrive simultaneously so it creates serious complications for the ships FCS regardless of how many tracks engagement the manufacturer claims. You also don’t have the Sea skimming slow system come in from the same bearing - that one you have pop up on the beam of the target and then your BM is in front so they now have to consider which threat to expose themselves to the most in evasive maneuvers and countermeasure spread.

If you’re smarter than that then you time it more on the lines of an attack when they are either engaging in close air ops so they have the choice to create a greater chance of fratricide.

 

[safriz]

Please don't laugh lol but I have a question, can we do this with Fatah 2 ?
View attachment 162031
first drawing is how we see F2 in action during Operation BuM, but can we turn the F2 launcher like in Drawing 2 (red) make it vertical and fit it in a Submarine ?

Dont think Pakistan has Submarines big enough to house the missiles internally

 

[safriz]

Mach 3.4 according to my calculations - see my earlier post.

Couldnt find the post

 

[JamD]

Couldnt find the post

This one

So I did this a while back when had dimensions and specifications from the Bunyan-al-Marsoos event. Take this with a pinch of salt - I used a ballistic simulator that I made with all the numbers I could get and then assumed some ballistic coefficient and burn time numbers that agreed with tests that we saw. I am basically assuming F2=SMASH. I have faith in this but you don't have to.


Ok so pure ballistic launches - no maneuvering. I swept through various launch angles. Three vertical red lines where first line corresponds to impact mach of 1.3 - like in the video we saw (first or second test) and the remaining two are 400 km range solutions both of which are >2 impact Mach
View attachment 161816

Also measured the impact angle on the F2 test...42 deg
View attachment 161815

Notice the impact angle on my plot 38 deg maybe? for the first 1.3 Mach impact
so very likely they tested F2 at 250 km range, but it validates all of the aero and controls.
View attachment 161817

It is capable of M>2 at two trajectories:
274 seconds. The second vertical line in the previous plot. Depressed trajectory I guess. Doesn't even go to space (above 100 km)
View attachment 161814


448 seconds. The third vertical line in the previous plot. Lofted trajectory. Goes to space. Comes back at a steeper angle and higher speed
View attachment 161813

The main point of all this is to show that you can do this test:
View attachment 161817
and this will essentially verify all of your numbers for you. Now you know with some certainty you can use this missile on the 400km trajectories. Obviously, you wouldn't start with the 400km tests because its difficult to get targeting and set up exclusion zones. But you can verify your model, which is what is done.

 

[Zarvan]

 

[safriz]

So I did this a while back when had dimensions and specifications from the Bunyan-al-Marsoos event. Take this with a pinch of salt - I used a ballistic simulator that I made with all the numbers I could get and then assumed some ballistic coefficient and burn time numbers that agreed with tests that we saw. I am basically assuming F2=SMASH. I have faith in this but you don't have to.


Ok so pure ballistic launches - no maneuvering. I swept through various launch angles. Three vertical red lines where first line corresponds to impact mach of 1.3 - like in the video we saw (first or second test) and the remaining two are 400 km range solutions both of which are >2 impact Mach
View attachment 161816

Also measured the impact angle on the F2 test...42 deg
View attachment 161815

Notice the impact angle on my plot 38 deg maybe? for the first 1.3 Mach impact
so very likely they tested F2 at 250 km range, but it validates all of the aero and controls.
View attachment 161817

It is capable of M>2 at two trajectories:
274 seconds. The second vertical line in the previous plot. Depressed trajectory I guess. Doesn't even go to space (above 100 km)
View attachment 161814


448 seconds. The third vertical line in the previous plot. Lofted trajectory. Goes to space. Comes back at a steeper angle and higher speed
View attachment 161813

The main point of all this is to show that you can do this test:
View attachment 161817
and this will essentially verify all of your numbers for you. Now you know with some certainty you can use this missile on the 400km trajectories. Obviously, you wouldn't start with the 400km tests because its difficult to get targeting and set up exclusion zones. But you can verify your model, which is what is done.

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

Can you see the shadow moving on the ground? Its linear movement , and assuming the circle is 10 meters radius, can we make something out of this?

 

[JamD]

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

Can you see the shadow moving on the ground? Its linear movement , and assuming the circle is 10 meters radius, can we make something out of this?

I actually estimated the impact speed in those tests and it is close to Mach 1.3 - same as the speed in one of the trajectories in my post.

 

[safriz]

View attachment 177320

Ok , so this Infographics says the terminal speed is less than Mach 2?
No that great.

 

[safriz]

I actually estimated the impact speed in those tests and it is close to Mach 1.3 - same as the speed in one of the trajectories in my post.

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

 

[safriz]

View attachment 177320

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 ?