Ababeel SSM - Pakistan gains MIRV technology.

[RedStar86]

im maybe a little late with my reply, so Happy Chinese new year to all of my dear pakistani mates! two reasons to celebrate!
so I read all posts, and i have a few things to say/ask:
1. the next thing that pak should develop is a shield from all the funny indian comments here..which i simply laughed about..
2. I saw a lot of comments about BMD systems and the way the missile can handle it, but from my little knowledge - there are 2 MIRV's - MIRV BUS and an Independent MIRV, but MIRV BUS is to hit a couple of targets. (maybe im wrong)
so do we know that is was really a MIRV BUS this test as said? whats the purpose?

 

[krash]

They dont get votes from sindh because they dont do any development projects in sindh when they have federal govt

If only it worked that way. We wouldn't see any of these parasites around.

 

[razgriz19]

I thought there was going to be another test...maybe it failed so it never made it to the news lol

 

[amardeep mishra]

Yeah you need to call your Research papers & patents expert @amardeep mishra

Hi
The aerodynamic configuration does seem to suggest enhanced payload fairing for supposed MIRV bus.This is indeed the first step towards developing a MIRV missile--because pakistani missiles have a smaller dia of just 1.4m(legacy chinese solid rocket) and for any meaningful MIRV bus they'd require something like ~2m dia. However how far pakistan has been able to develop MIRV bus is another debate entirely and would depend on a lot of other parameters. Anyways,we should wait for more tests wherein actual MIRVs are tested before making any claim.
But one thing is certain,pakistan is indeed working towards augmenting their strategic forces with MIRV capable missile.

after the 2 main stages, the rest of the narrower white section seems to be the third stage.

Hi @The Deterrent
I dont think there is any 3rd stage for if there were,we would have seen cable runners,running down the 3rd stage. The enhanced payload fairing is indeed quite visible which points to two main facts-
1)Good fact: Pakistan is indeed working towards MIRV bus and this is the first step to validate the aerodynamic performance of the system.
2)Not-so-good fact: Pakistan is still stuck with legacy solid rocket with dia 1.4m and hasn't progressed to ~2m or >2m rocket engines. This is the reason why they went for larger dia payload fairings in the first place.

Indeed. Congratulations to all Pakistanis.

Along-with introducing the second-strike capability, Pakistan has declared active development of massive first-strike capability, thus ensuring Full-spectrum deterrence. The Indo/Pak arms race just got a new angle.

Tidbits:

1. As evident from the released photo, the missile is based on the previously well-established line of Ballistic missiles i.e Shaheen-II/III.
2. An extra stage has been added, presumably giving the ability to inject RVs in their independent trajectories.
3. The payload fairing has been made larger and wider, to accommodate the MIRV-bus and up to 3 MIRVs.
4. The stated range is highly variable, depending on the number of RVs in the payload. However, the maximum range of this system will not exceed the limit set by Pakistan.
5. The decrease in range is because of the additional mass of MIRVs and third stage.
6. The nomenclature comes from the historic Islamic (Abrahmic) event, when the Abyssinians intended to invade and destroy Ka'abah, using elephants. Allah then sent thousands of 'Ababeels' (swallows/larks), each with 3 stones (one in beak, two in each claw) to kill the elephants.

For instance in this pic above,I cant see the 3rd set of cable runners,whereas first two are quite visible.

 

[Safriz]

Hi
The aerodynamic configuration does seem to suggest enhanced payload fairing for supposed MIRV bus.This is indeed the first step towards developing a MIRV missile--because pakistani missiles have a smaller dia of just 1.4m(legacy chinese solid rocket) and for any meaningful MIRV bus they'd require something like ~2m dia. However how far pakistan has been able to develop MIRV bus is another debate entirely and would depend on a lot of other parameters. Anyways,we should wait for more tests wherein actual MIRVs are tested before making any claim.
But one thing is certain,pakistan is indeed working towards augmenting their strategic forces with MIRV capable missile.


Hi @The Deterrent
I dont think there is any 3rd stage for if there were,we would have seen cable runners,running down the 3rd stage. The enhanced payload fairing is indeed quite visible which points to two main facts-
1)Good fact: Pakistan is indeed working towards MIRV bus and this is the first step to validate the aerodynamic performance of the system.
2)Not-so-good fact: Pakistan is still stuck with legacy solid rocket with dia 1.4m and hasn't progressed to ~2m or >2m rocket engines. This is the reason why they went for larger dia payload fairings in the first place.


For instance in this pic above,I cant see the 3rd set of cable runners,whereas first two are quite visible.

You and your biased analysis again. You do have knowledge but your impartiality makes your thinking clouded and comments look like from a banana seller's.

First thing is that the Motor stages are 1.4 or 1.5 Meter wide if from Shaheen-2 or shaheen-3 respectively and hunch is that its from Shaheen-3 , but the Payload fairing or MIRV bus is much wider. We did make an educated guess and it is 1.8 Meter wide. That's wide enough to carry 3 to 4 Shaheen-3 sized Warheads,which is 0.76 Meter wide and 2 Meter Tall. Three or 4 of these can fit on top of Ababeel easily.
The 2 meter width you are metioning is probably reference to not yet MIRV Agni 3 and 5 or 2.11 meter wide Trident which carries 8 MIRV and hence the graeter width.

Here are the measurements done primarily by @JamD and contributions by me too. The bold numbers are if the First two stages are from Shaheen-2 and 1.4 meters wide. The bold numbers are if the first two stages are from Shaheen-3 and 1.5 meters wide.

Also there is a third stage for which you don't see the cable runner as in liquid motor body the cables can be run internally.
In solid motor the fuel grain has to be perfectly circular and internally passing cables with deform the round shape of fuel grain.Also the fuel burns upwards from bottom like in a Fire cracker and hot gasses will burn the cables.
In Liquid moor body the fuel can have additional tanks inside and dont need to be perfectly circular and no hot gazes are inside produced inside the motor body,only in cumbustion chamber and below. So cables can be passed internally.

 

[amardeep mishra]

You and your biased analysis again. You do have knowledge but your impartiality makes your thinking clouded and comments look like from a banana seller's.

Tell,me why do you think I am biased?I did not write anything to demean the missile. Whatever I wrote was based on my understanding and available open source literature. The tested and reliable solid rocket that we see in ababeel is perhaps from shaheen series that in turn uses a 1.4m dia rocket. In case you find this information objectionable then kindly prove me wrong based on "credible engineering literature". I would be more than willing to correct myself!
Thanks!

In solid motor the fuel grain has to be perfectly circular and internally passing cables with deform the round shape of fuel grain.Also the fuel burns upwards from bottom like in a Fire cracker and hot gasses will burn the cables.
In Liquid moor body the fuel can have additional tanks inside and dont need to be perfectly circular and no hot gazes are inside produced inside the motor body,only in cumbustion chamber and below. So cables can be passed internally.

My understanding was that it is entirely a solid fuel missile. Why would someone use liquid motors as 3rd stage in 2017(other than reaction control system ofcourse!)?

First thing is that the Motor stages are 1.4 or 1.5 Meter wide if from Shaheen-2 or shaheen-3 respectively and hunch is that its from Shaheen-3 , but the Payload fairing or MIRV bus is much wider. We did make an educated guess and it is 1.8 Meter wide.

Thats what I too eluded to in my last comments--i.e the solid rocket is 1.4m dia and the payload fairing is close to 2m dia(as you yourself claimed a dia of 1.8m)!. Now they had to design an entirely new payload fairing because they couldnt accommodate 3 MIRVs in 1.4m dia! Also this points to the fact that they still rely heavily on their 1.4m dia motors!

The 2 meter width you are metioning is probably reference to not yet MIRV Agni 3 and 5 or 2.11 meter wide Trident which carries 8 MIRV and hence the graeter width.

Yes I was referring to ICBMs class dia that has shown MIRV capability. In case of Agni-3 and 5 it is simply a matter of time when MIRV bus is tested. But let me tell you,the development on this side of the border is more skewed in favour of developing a longer range SLBM i.e K-5 with 3 MIRVs.

PS-kindly note that Agni-3 wouldnt be deployed with strategic forces command of India,it was a test bed to test rocket with dia=2m,that eventually found itz way into Agni-5 with a host of other improvements. It is Agni-4 and 5 that are being/will be inducted in numbers.

 

[Cool_Soldier]

Its off topic but if anyone here shed some light.

Why K-4 test was not done by India on 31st Jan 2017?

Why planed test of some NEW/OLD BM was not test by Pakistan as warning was issued for 27th 28th Jan?

 

[Safriz]

My understanding was that it is entirely a solid fuel missile. Why would someone use liquid motors as 3rd stage in 2017(other than reaction control system ofcourse!)?

Using liquid fuel motor in later stages of missile is not uncommon specially in Russian missiles and some western ones too.
Reason is simple. The initial thrust has to be massive and quick to get the momentum and also to gain quick altitude. later a liquid motor can be used as they bun for much longer albeit with a slower thrust, which is great in the vaccum of space where you dont need massive thrust but benefit if it is for longer.

 

[The Deterrent]

However how far pakistan has been able to develop MIRV bus is another debate entirely and would depend on a lot of other parameters. Anyways,we should wait for more tests wherein actual MIRVs are tested before making any claim.
But one thing is certain,pakistan is indeed working towards augmenting their strategic forces with MIRV capable missile.

I wonder what those parameters are. Care to shed some light on them?

Hi @The DeterrentI dont think there is any 3rd stage for if there were,we would have seen cable runners,running down the 3rd stage.

Let's just say that it is not exactly a boosting stage. If you know how MIRVs are injected in their individual suborbital trajectories, you would also know that a very specific component does that job. Otherwise adding the MIRV-bus and shroud directly on top of second stage of Shaheen-III would've done the job.

PS-kindly note that Agni-3 wouldnt be deployed with strategic forces command of India,it was a test bed to test rocket with dia=2m,that eventually found itz way into Agni-5 with a host of other improvements. It is Agni-4 and 5 that are being/will be inducted in numbers.

I had the same notion that it would be pointless to deploy Agni-3 when Agni-5 was also coming up with much better capabilities. However can we have an authentic source for this?
Also, does that mean that the only nuclear capable missiles deployed as of this moment are Agni-1, Agni-2?
As Prithvi series was retired from the nuclear role, Shaurya (land-based K-15) probably never went into production and Agni-IV & V are still in the developmental phase.

 

[Safriz]

A-3 uses the older larger Uranium warhead. A-5 uses newer smaller Plutonium warhead. I am not sure why A-3 wont be used by India

 

[amardeep mishra]

Using liquid fuel motor in later stages of missile is not uncommon specially in Russian missiles and some western ones too.
Reason is simple. The initial thrust has to be massive and quick to get the momentum and also to gain quick altitude. later a liquid motor can be used as they bun for much longer albeit with a slower thrust, which is great in the vaccum of space where you dont need massive thrust but benefit if it is for longer.

Hi dear Shaheen Missile(yes I can read urdu!)
Whatever you said about the liquid rocket is correct however let me add a couple of more points.First off,a liquid rocket offers superior mass fraction vis-a-vis solid rocket.Initial thrust indeed has to be massive but that thrust can very easily come from any engine either solid or liquid--it doesnt have to be necessarily solid! For instance the highest mass fraction known to human kind is offered by cryogenic engines burning LOX and LOH,but we cant really use them in our ICBMs--where requirement is more skewed towards compactness and quick reaction. And no,liquids doesnt burn with a slower thrust--kindly refer to George P Sutton's book on propulsion! Normally a similar sized liquid engine burning UDMH would have a higher ISP. The only problem with liquids is storage and time taken to fill the tanks.
Secondly,the burnout out point of a strategic missile is way close to earth than you think--for instance the burnout point of a long range ICBM is hardly at 60-100kms altitude--that means all the motors gets separated by 100kms and the missile is given the trajectory of a projectile!
Thirdly,no modern missiles these days use liquid engines(burning UDMH-or any kind of hypergolic fuels) in any of the stages! It will take at least a couple of hrs to fill both the 3rd stage and RCS tanks for roll manuevers. Btw,have you ever wondered why does it take at least 30 mins for even missiles like shaheen-2,3 to launch? Most of the time is spent in fueling the RCS tanks. Kindly note that either fuel or oxidizer cant be stored for prolonged period of time.For instance peroxide releases oxygen which is highly corrosive,similarly di-nitrogen tetroxide exists as nitrogen oxide in equilibrium not to mention the highly toxic nature of UDMH itself.
So in all likelyhood,ababeel is also a solid fuel missile.

Also, does that mean that the only nuclear capable missiles deployed as of this moment are Agni-1, Agni-2?
As Prithvi series was retired from the nuclear role, Shaurya (land-based K-15) probably never went into production and Agni-IV & V are still in the developmental phase.

Hi @The Deterrent
You're partially correct,inspite of what a lot of folks say,If we carefully monitor various seminars etc,then A-1,2 and to some extent A-4 are the only missiles mass deployed for strategic purposes.Some reports however do point to couple of A-3s part of some strategic missile units in hyderabad,however I do not know the authenticity of such reports. A-4 and A-5 aint in development phases anymore.In fact user trials of A-4 have been finished recently,clearing itz path for mass production,whereas accelerated user trials of A-5 are scheduled to begin soon. So,in very near future,probably in 1-2 years both A-4 and A-5 are going to be part of strategic forces command. Another thing is A-2,3,4,5 can be launched from rail-wagons! Shaurya was a land based version of k-15--army preffered Agni over newly designed shaurya. This has more to do with internal bickering than anything else.For instance Agni series was designed by a group headed by ex-Director General of DRDO Dr Chander(who btw was an IIT Delhi alumunus--he was the chief project director) whereas K-series are being handled by a different group. But now,K-series are being given more priority in terms of development than Agni.

Let's just say that it is not exactly a boosting stage. If you know how MIRVs are injected in their individual suborbital trajectories, you would also know that a very specific component does that job. Otherwise adding the MIRV-bus and shroud directly on top of second stage of Shaheen-III would've done the job.

So just like shaheen missile(that guy) you're saying that it is a liquid rocket engine?
http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_1/Rest_World/Taimoor/Description/Frame.htm
http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets/Specials/Dong-Feng/index.htm

 

[The Deterrent]

So just like shaheen missile(that guy) you're saying that it is a liquid rocket engine?
http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_1/Rest_World/Taimoor/Description/Frame.htm
http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets/Specials/Dong-Feng/index.htm

Well now I'm saying that you should read up on how MIRVs are injected in their individual suborbital trajectories.

 

[amardeep mishra]

Well now I'm saying that you should read up on how MIRVs are injected in their individual suborbital trajectories.

Sure I will give it a try! But i still cant fathom the reason as to why they'd use a liquid engine as a 3rd stage.

 

[xyxmt]

Last I heard ISPR reported of *MIRV CAPABLE* missile. And that's enough to nullify S400 which was a result of few decades of Russian RnD. Damn! I suppose this abdul releases about 100 warheads at a time... definitely someone's uncle's grandson's wife's brother heard something like that from his time in army.

Common guys you are taking characteristic of an ICBM and projecting it for a TBM. This missile dose not even come under IRBM. The warheads once lobbed cannot be distributed very diversly as the bus itself following a balestic trajectory will also reenter the atmosphere.

And yes we know all about the "Classified" RnD Pakistan dose after China announces it will help Pakistan develop newer balistic missiles. Pretty good "RnD"

hehehe

 

[Praise Kek]

Does Pakistan’s Ababeel Medium Range Ballistic Missile Really Have MIRV Capability?
3429 By Rajaram Nagappa - February 3, 2017

It is not unusual to see news of a Pakistani ballistic missile launch close on the heels of an Indian ballistic missile event. The launch of Agni 5 took place on 26 December last year followed by the launch of Agni 4 a week later. For the Pakistani missile establishment, the year 2016 was a comparatively quiet year and one did expect a response to the Agni launches. Sure enough, Pakistan carried out a missile test – it was not another training or pre-deployment test of Shaheen 2 or Shaheen 3, but the test of a new missile called Ababeel on 24 January 2017. The missile is claimed to have a range of 2200 km and is said to be capable of carrying Multiple Independently Targetable Re-entry Vehicles (MIRV).
Unlike the Shaheen 2, the new missile has three stages. The Ababeel thermal fairing (heat shield) has a larger diameter than its core vehicle. The extra volume thus available is consistent with the requirements for MIRV capabilities. It must however, be noted that there are a number of technical constraints that have to be overcome before one can infer that Pakistan has succeeded in developing MIRV capability.
MIRV, as the name implies replaces a unitary warhead with a larger number of smaller warheads, with each of them programmed for different targets. It is therefore a more potent and powerful attack system. In a global scenario where a number of countries are developing Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) Systems, MIRV capability is needed to overwhelm such defences. Many BMD systems have capability limitations when it comes to dealing with multiple incoming warheads and may fail to engage all of them. By increasing the number of warheads along with decoys deployed with the real ones, BMD systems can be saturated. The US and Russia field such MIRV weapon systems and the numbers they field are governed by the strategic arms limitation treaty between them. The Chinese are also said to have incorporated MIRV in their DF 5, DF-31 and the JL 2 (the submarine launched version of the DF-31) ballistic missiles.
Over the last several years India has carried out a number of tests related to terminal phase BMD. These involve the interception of the warhead outside the atmosphere just before the re-entry of the incoming missile. For a country confronted with such an adversary, developing MIRV capability is the logical technology growth route to follow. One is therefore not surprised if Pakistan were to adopt such a route.
The rhetoric in the Pakistani establishment against Indian ABM capability is indicative of this. Sartaj Aziz, Pakistan’s advisor on Foreign Affairs is reported to have commented in June last year that India’s testing of anti ballistic missile system could lead to ‘unexpected complications’ . He is further stated to have told the Pakistani senate that Pakistan has serious concerns over these developments and will take ‘all necessary measures to augment its defence capabilities’.
Has Pakistan really overcome the technological challenges?
Though it is easy to express a need for the development of MIRV capabilities realizing it requires significant advances in a number of key technologies. The question to ask before we come to any conclusion is ‘Has Pakistan been able to master and overcome all the technical issues?’ In this regard, a critical assessment of the following issues is particularly necessary.
1. Weapon miniaturization: For MIRV requirements both the warhead and the re-entry vehicle (RV) need to be smaller and lighter. The US Minuteman-3 missile warhead had three Mk-12A RVs. The RVs had a base diameter of about 0.5 metre (m) and a length of approximately 1.81 m. Three such RVs could be accommodated within the missile shroud, which had a diameter of approximately 1 m.
2. Ababeel has a bulbous fairing at the top with a diameter estimated to be 1.7 m in which it may be physically possible to house three to four MIRVs of the Mk-12A type. The warhead fitting into this RV must have dimensions lower than that of the 0.5 m diameter. Has Pakistan managed such a miniature design and if so, how reliable is it?
3. The tests carried out by Pakistan on 28 and 30 May 1998 were all based on highly enriched uranium. Pakistan till-date not carried out any plutonium based weapon tests. The Plutonium route for warhead design is needed for developing smaller warheads required for MIRV. Without testing such a device the design confidence, performance repeatability, as well as system reliability is likely to be low. This raises the question of credibility behind Pakistan’s claims of MIRV developments.
4. A major requirement for a MIRV system will be the Post-Boost Control Vehicle (PBCV). The MIRV’s need to be supported on top of the PBCV, which houses a bank of liquid thrusters for 3-axis stabilization and for providing the axial thrust needed for maneuvers. In addition, each MIRV has to be positioned and released at different times during the trajectory based on the various targets that need to be reached. The MIRVs also act as a thermal protection system for their miniature warheads and protects them from the heat generated during reentry into the atmosphere.
5. The PBCV is essentially a missile stage housing liquid propellant tanks, pressurization tanks and banks of thrusters with intricate plumbing. Though Pakistan has exposure to liquid propulsion technology through the Ghauri missile, the same cannot directly be applied to PBCV. PBCV related developments require expertise in design and fabrication of small thrusters, fabrication of propellant and gas tanks, precision fabrication of valves, high-pressure plumbing, quality control and storable liquid propellants.
From media reports, it would appear that Pakistan has been working on liquid propulsion systems for use on missiles. The coverage of the successful launch of Shaheen-1A in the Dawn Newspaper of 25 April 2012 included a statement that suggested the missile possessed a ‘post-separation attitude control system’ . The post-separation attitude control system (PSAC) is essentially a liquid propulsion package used for providing thrust in the axial direction as well as for stabilizing the RV. RV of Shaheen-2 by extension would incorporate this system. Shaheen-3 flight-tested twice in 2015 is said to have a range of 2750 km. The additional range seems to have been achieved by combining in the PSAC the functions of a third stage as well as stabilization. System engineering from this to a PBCV therefore seems doable.
As argued above, the technical feasibility of a liquid propulsion package is possible, but the possibility of external help either from China or North Korea cannot be ruled out. The fact that design-engineering, testing, qualification and incorporation in three missile systems has been achieved in record time is also indicative of external support including material, component and sub-system supply.
6. The Notice to Mariners issued by the Pakistan Navy earmarks the missile flight range safety zone and in this case the farthest points of the safety zone are located at 1100 km from the launch range at Winder and far short of the claimed range of 2200 km. This could mean that the Ababeel flight of 24 January was a proving test of a new missile system. The lower range was the result of achieved design parameters (e.g. higher inert mass, lower propellant energetics) or by trajectory shaping. One usually expects to test a missile to its the full potential on the first developmental flight and not for a shorter range.
To Conclude
In summary, it would appear that Pakistan is in the process of putting together the building blocks for a MIRV capable missile. However, their assertion of possessing miniaturized warheads is open to doubt. The Chinese transfer of the CHIC-4 nuclear weapon design to Pakistan , which even involved orchestrating a test of the system for Pakistan in 1990, is well documented. According to Thomas Reed, co-author of the book ‘The Nuclear Express – A Political History of the Bomb and Its Proliferation’, the speedy response by Pakistan to the Indian nuclear tests of May 1998 was on account of the fact that they had a ‘carefully engineered device in which they had great confidence’. This confidence emanated from the receipt of the CHIC-4 design, training received by them and the test carried out by China for Pakistan in 1990 . China’s interests today are economic; China is close to achieving big power status; and has no major stake in furthering Pakistani nuclear weapon capability. Pakistan may therefore have to depend upon itself for achieving the required miniaturization of weapon systems for use in MIRVs.
The US has built and tested a large number and variety of weapon systems. Consequently, when they undertake a re-design or reliability upgrade programme, they have reams of test data to back their design effort. In spite of this they have had number of problems and many issues related to safety. The description of accidents during carriage and other near-miss situations that US nuclear weapons have been involved in is lucidly described in the book ‘Command and Control’ authored by Eric Schlosser. Seen in this light, the reliability of an untested weapon system is open to question.
While one can question whether the recent Ababeel can deliver on all the claims made by Pakistan there is no doubt that Pakistan will move towards maneuverable and MIRV missiles to counter Indian BMD systems. From an Indian perspective, it is necessary to continuously monitor and assess the evolution of Pakistan’s capabilities and the connections these capabilities have with Pakistan’s war-making and deterrence strategies. This will ensure that Indian responses are measured, responsible and aligned with Pakistan’s true capabilities.
Missiles from Pakistan, irrespective of the type of warheads they carry pose a problem for India. Their very short flight times make it imperative that India develop systems for the early detection of missile launches for activating Indian countermeasures.. India will need to supplement its ground-based detection with space-based detection systems to better manage shortcomings in early warning capabilities.
Rajaram Nagappa is Professor and Dean of the International Strategic and Security Studies Programme, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bengaluru. A noted expert on missile technology, Prof. Nagappa has specialized in aerospace propulsion and has worked extensively in the design and development of solid propellant rockets. He has made major research contributions to the analysis of Pakistani ballistic missile production capability. His recent work includes an assessment of Pakistani cruise missiles and an assessment of the Iranian satellite launch vehicle Safir.