What's new

Nasr VS Parhaar | First Detailed Analysis.

I'm sure that the statement of this guy has been misquoted and misunderstood. Let me highlight (bold & underlined) and rectify (red colored) the relevant part, and then I will present my argument:

Theoretically, 1 kilogram of weapons-grade plutonium boosted with 4-5 grams of tritium gives a 10-20KT yield, provided the trigger is sophisticated," Ahmed said. "However, the diameter size of Nasr suggests that the warhead would produce 1 kiloton explosion, and would be of sub-kiloton range, suitable for battlefield use and could be a fission boosted sub-kiloton fission device."

Why do I think that this statement has been misquoted? Because he first talked about a theoretical, perfect TNW. But then he acknowledged the practical limitations and estimated the weapon yield.

Now for the tactical nuclear weapon core part:


Can a TNW with a 1kg Pu core be made?

Yes, it can be. But it would require a very efficient detonation mechanism, such as the Flying Plate design, in which a flatter sort of implosion is done and a relatively larger hollow core is used. This arrangement increases the volume of the warhead, so it is not practical. Furthermore, The mass of the implosion system, and the tamper/reflector will result in greater overall mass even though the core weight is less.

Cylinderimp.gif



What if minimum size/diameter is the requirement?

In this case, practical limitations are high, for example for a 155mm artillery shell design. So tamper/reflector are best omitted from the design to reduce diameter, and a high mass core is used instead (10-13kg of Pu) to achieve a ~250 ton explosion. The reason for this low yield despite usage of a larger core is the Linear Implosion design, which HAS to be used in this case. Obviously, this design is very costly and impractical.

Linimplosion.gif



So what type of warhead Nasr might be using?

Nasr has an estimated diameter of 300mm, which allows for a possible Spherical Implosion design (threshold is at ~260mm). This design has higher efficiency than the linear one, but still 4-5kg of Pu is required, because the thickness of tamper/reflector and the number of HE explosive lenses is very less due to limited diameter. Assuming that only weapons grade Pu is used in the core, a 4-5kg core could produce 0.3-0.5 kt yield. With tritium boosting, it could be further enhanced to 1kt.

Fission_methods_implosion.png

Ahaseeb sb mjhe pta shak ha k ap Dr Samar Mubarak hain:lol:
 
. .
"it would escalate the situation beyond control"
That is precisely the purpose of its development according to some, as it provides deterrence at the lower levels.

Of course it would prove handy as you rightly said. Pakistan is also developing a conventional platform to be used in higher numbers in a tactical role, with similar range capabilities.

This part in particular caught my interest.

Is this a brand new platform or is it a variant of NASR with extended range???
 
.
Parhaar has more range and more payload but it also is not as maneuverable and fast as Nasr, you will get the confirmation once i my hands on more data. For Parhaar we have Abdaali and Ghaznavi series to respond with.

The missile is based off an interceptor missile, which is very fast and maneuverable.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>



Prahaar is also

 
Last edited by a moderator:
. .
Back
Top Bottom