What's new

IS SAM & AAM TECHNOLOGY DIFFICULT THAN SSMs

Ababeel

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
1,050
Reaction score
-1
Country
Maldives
Location
United Arab Emirates
Is it really difficult to make RADARs and SAM & AAM missiles?
There are many countries including Pakistan, N Korea, Iran etc who are successful in making SSMs and even Cruise Missiles but lack in making AAMs, SAMs & RADARs.

What are the hurdles in mastering these technologies? The guidance systems, the engine etc in case of missiles? and what blocks or parts in case of RADARs?
 
. .
i hope pak and nk are workin on this but iran is far behind NK and pakistan in defence production....
 
.
I think SAM and AAM are really very different from SSMs as they are required to track and shoot a moving target at speeds equal to or exceeding MACH value. Pakistan already has short range SAMs and hopefully will develop long and medium range missiles soon
CHAO:pakistan:
 
.
They are surely difficult, but on their own terms. The thing is that Pakistan never facilitated or paid attention to produce such systems on its own. Only recently have they realized to create their own missile in the collaboration with the Chinese so their missiles will not be vulnerable to the electronic counter measures of the other countries who might have the know how about certain missiles which are available in the export market.
 
.
i hope pak and nk are workin on this but iran is far behind NK and pakistan in defence production....

I think Iran is more advance than Pakistan as it has produced various types of Anti Ship Missiles, Cruise missiles, SSMs, Fastest sea launched anti ship missiles, shoulder fired SAMs etc.
 
.
I think Iran is more advance than Pakistan as it has produced various types of Anti Ship Missiles, Cruise missiles, SSMs, Fastest sea launched anti ship missiles, shoulder fired SAMs etc.

Anti-ship missiles. Yes, great edge there.

Cruise missiles? Pakistan has them too.

Shoulder fired SAMs? Pakistan has it too.

midget subs? Pakistan has it too.
 
.
In short, yes. AAMs, AGMs, SAMs are more difficult to design and produce than SSBMs.

But at the same time, u must differentiate between the Inertial Navigation equipped ballistic missiles and Radar Area Guidance (RADAG) equipped ballistic missiles. IN is easy to install than RADAG. I dont believe that either Pakistan or India employs RADAG in their ballistic missiles. Politicians (even the military) dont know anything about weapons systems engineering and the scientists can cheat them easily.

Range also introduces new difficulties. Long range guidance is not easy. Effect of earth rotation become important, a stationary target becomes moving target due to earth rotation.

AAMs are mainly of two type, heat-seeking and radar-guided. Both are not easy. Guidance algorithms for AAMs are entirely different from SSMs. SAM and AAM guidance is designed to hit a moving target. Guidance is a completely different area of engineering and the experts are rare in Pakistan.The reason is that in USA and Europe, its almost impossible for a pakistani to enroll in such training programs or degree programs except some short courses or Masters in Guided Weapons at Royal Military College of Science at Cranfield University in UK whose chages are extremely high but I suppose that they too dont teach much.

India successfully developped the ballistic ones, Agni and Prithvi but is facing teething troubles with SAM and AAM. Even USA took decades to develop and perfect its cruise missile guidance. It was the arrival of GPS that improved the guidance and made it easy too.

The readers of this forum may be aware that European countries like France dont allow INTERNSHIP or Experimental Work for Pakistani students of Engineering. You can verify it from HEC scholarship holders. Only theoretical or numerical work is allowed. No permission for experimental work.

On the top of this, young pakistani engineers are not allowed to do experiments by the military. Sorry to say but military tends to trust the foreigners. Unless local engineers are encouraged to do small projects, its impossible to advance.

PAF technicians and engineers are capable of doing projects with some support and training. Many years ago, a podded radar was developped for A-5 aircraft but the pilots reports were not good and the project was dropped. It should have been supported at the highest level with support provided from all sources, local and overseas.

Keeping in view this aspect, the future is not very bright. But still one should not loose courage and continue to do whatever can be done.
 
.
Pakistan has been working on producing AAMs and SAMs for at least a decade now, but through joint-ventures or as a foreign commercial partner. With AAMs, the South Africans offered us a development package in 1998-1999 in the form of cooperation in A-Darter, T-Darter & ramjet technology. We know that Pakistan took up assistance offers in precision A2G technology which helped in the H2/H4-series and Ra'ad ALCM. Denel offered a 'renewed' deal during IDEAS 2006 - also included Umkhonto IR & R SAMs along with the Darter-series.

Things to consider...the PAF said JF-17 will use a 5th generation WVRAAM. Given the sensetivity of such an advanced system on a main workhorse, it would be best that it is not directly imported. In other words the system must be customized by Pakistan to ensure its commercial nature cannot be used against us. NATO has been known to use methods of cracking source codes or screwing with weapon-systems of Iraqi fighters.

Of all known 5th generation WVRAAMs on the market & offered to PAF...of which I can recall IRIS-T and A-Darter - the A-Darter is the most realistic and feasible. For one the South Africans repeatedly offered us a space in the project. Secondly, the European IRIS-T will be a financial, political and technical pain...however NATO technology cannot be discounted. Hence the news reports of Pakistan negotiating with Thales for MICA...I don't think it is the missile we want. French-MBDA assistance in seeker, data-link & guidance technology would be much more desirable.

Clues that support my argument have already surfaced. For one the PAF revealed JF-17's HMD which appears to look very similar to the Denel (South African) Archer HMDS. Richard Fisher also claimed that JF-17 will use an "A-Darter derived WVRAAM". However the system PAF will use might be based off A-Darter, but it would be very different in some critical areas...probably guidance, seeker, data-link communication, etc.

The same applies to the BVR project. Do note that we Pakistanis have been hearing about a "T-Darter" project for years now. Well recently Denel unveiled the "T-Darter" project officially; and it will be a missile in the league of the MBDA Meteor. Maybe not as good as Meteor...but it may make use of ramjet technology and be a medium to long-range AAM - i.e. a contemporary of Meteor. Nonetheless...I have a feeling Pakistan is also involved in this project in a similar fashion as A-Darter.

As for SAMs...well for at least short and medium-range systems, I think Pakistan may use its AAM capability as a basis. The nature of A-Darter and T-Darter would allow us to produce our own effective and modern short & medium range SAMs. Not to mention the fact that Pakistan could have exposure to Spada-2000, Saab BAMSE, RAM and possibly even ESSM (as per pshamim on PakDef). So the initial basis is all there...we just need to put it all together. Plus other countries such as Turkey & South Korea are developing their own new short & medium range SAMs for land & naval use.

With foreign cooperation, IMO Pakistan will produce its own SAMs by 2019. I think a good bet would be to use T-Darter - especially if it is ramjet - and design a Vertical-Launch medium range SAM similar to the Aster-15/ESSM. This system could be applied to our naval ships as well as land based air defences. In fact, if we work on it in a similar fashion as the Israelis with the Barak-system, a T-Darter based SAM could have a range of 50-70km - giving us a singular HiMADS. PDMS systems can be developed using A-Darter...though I hope we could pull off a Rolling Airframe Missile like concept using A-Darter...

For long-range SAMs similar to S-400...we would probably use an existing and tested concept and develop it further locally. I think HQ-9 is the most likely choice, but you never know. I guess it would depend on when Pakistan wants such a system, if it it plans on inducting them in a couple years - then HQ-9 should be expected. If Pakistan plans to have it from 2019 or later, then I think a full local development of the missile should be expected. The ideal goal would be to produce a SM2 like missile, i.e. not resorting to the size of Chinese or Russian designs for long-range.

Though note...Pakistan might be on the ramjet boat and is working on at least turbojet technology - maybe even turbofan. Key would be to look at Turk-Pak cooperation, if the two countries decide to pear up on a long-range SAM - then expect an SM2-like design IMO.
 
.
There are many countries including Pakistan, N Korea, Iran etc who are successful in making SSMs and even Cruise Missiles but lack in making AAMs, SAMs & RADARs.

May be Korea not being able to do that explain why Pakistan has not done so either!

Just a thought. ;)
 
.
May be Korea not being able to do that explain why Pakistan has not done so either!

Just a thought. ;)
Maybe it would be nice to just post your point instead of hinting to a point and infesting it with literary style! The way I took it, you're saying that Pakistani projects are based off North Korean ones.

Just a thought. ;)
 
. . .
Thanks for the compliments. ;)

It was a light hearted joke. Don't take it too personally. I now feel that Pakistani scientists have made a lot of progress in missile technology lately. Full credit to them.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom