Pakistan again test-fires Babur Missile with range 700km

[MastanKhan]

No.8 Sqn operates Mirage-VPA2 and PA3 aircraft, former is a dedicated for ground attack and latter is a dedicated aircraft for naval support/deep-sea interdiction missions. AM-39 is their primary weapon. After integration of C-802/803 with JF-17, PAF will be able to assign naval support role to more than one squadrons. Harpoons might be small in number, but could be used as a deadliest weapon against such targets.

Now question comes why Nuclear tipped weapons cant be used? Using a nuclear tipped weapon won''t be a strategic move...The aftermath of its use will be drastic for both sides....And definitely will be a very expensive kill as compare to a conventional weapon.

Also making a smaller warhead is a very difficult task, it takes too much cost and effort in making one. Nasr is one good punch for the enemy, but at the same time it has a price tag as well...i don't see any reason in shooting a smaller target with an expensive weapon.

What's the sense of sending $2 million missiles to hit a $10 tent that's empty?

— President George W. Bush, Oval Office meeting, 13 September 2001.

Sir,

I am totally lost with this answer-----in your other post you mentioned using non-conventional against air craft carrier----could you please elucidiate on that. Thank you.

I would like to know which non nuc option can take out an aircraft carrier----.

 

[SQ8]

Sir,

I am totally lost with this answer-----in your other post you mentioned using non-conventional against air craft carrier----could you please elucidiate on that. Thank you.

I would like to know which non nuc option can take out an aircraft carrier----.

Something the size of a KH-22..
However, you dont need to sink an aircraft carrier to put it out of commission.
Just disable its abilty to maintain flight operations. Making dents in what is essentially steel may not be easy, but can be done.

 

[Najam Khan]

Sir,

I am totally lost with this answer-----in your other post you mentioned using non-conventional against air craft carrier----could you please elucidiate on that. Thank you.

I would like to know which non nuc option can take out an aircraft carrier----.

Sir i wrote earlier...
Why would Pakistan risk breaking the Nuclear taboo of non-use and target an aircraft carrier with Nuclear missile when the same objective can be achieved through conventional weapons?

Non-nuke option is discussed in post#207.

 

[MastanKhan]

Sir i wrote earlier...
Why would Pakistan risk breaking the Nuclear taboo of non-use and target an aircraft carrier with Nuclear missile when the same objective can be achieved through conventional weapons?

Non-nuke option is discussed in post#207.

Sir,

Are you discussing it with yourself or with the board members----you discussed nothing in post #207---. I thought I missed something important----so I went back to post #207---so where is the inormation----or is that all.


Santro,

In that category---the kh 22 nuc capable is considered for that job----the conventional kh22 is not considered sufficient----beinglaunched from 200 + miles----.

You have to decide---do you need to take the enemy's assets out---or do you the wrath of the enemy----. If you have to take the enemy's assets out----then there is the only option---a nuc option---. So far the americans don't think that their a/c/c can be taken out by conventional methods.

Now---did pakistan get the KH22's!!!!!!!!

 

[Dazzler]

Sinking an AC is not an easy job because of sheer size among other factors but Cruise Missiles can be equipped with both nuclear and non nuclear warheads. in case of conventional warhead, the weight can be increased at a cost of slight range reduction. This can be achieved by Babur or C-602 at respectable ranges as both are medium sized CMs and able to carry heavy conventional payloads. Raad also comes into equation. Few other options can also be exercised.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

Please just say I don't know anything about it----.

Aircraft carriers will be taken out by nuc strikes only----primarly the first one with an air burst over the target---what it will do will to completely neutralize the surface acitivity on the ship---secondly all the complimentary surface fleet or most of it( the armada )would be rendered neutral as well----. Second nuc strike would probably obliterate the ship--depending on the size of the bomb---you may not need a second strike.

Conventional missiles---most of them will be taken out by anti air craft and anti missile defences----secondly---these conventional missiles don't pack that big a punch even if they hit the aircraft carriership.

The priamary air burst from a nuc will render all these on the ship defences useless as well---the heat wil light the ships on fire the shock wave and concussion will literally lift the ship upside down---or throw them sideways---the radiation will take care of the survivors.

The reason for using the tactical nuc missile is, that it is an anywhere weapons----it does not need to hit the target---even if it explodes in the viccinity---it will do the job---as a matter of fact an air burst on the top of the carrier will be preferred---whereas the conventional missile may do little damage---it may hit or it may miss----. If it hits---these ships are designed in such a way nowadays---that they can take severest form of punishment from missile strikes and still survive to fight another day.

 

[Dazzler]

Thats the problem. You think you know it all at least your attitude shows this. Read the post again, where did i say a conventional strike will sink the career for sure? I talked about possibilities that can be implied and these are practically applicable scenarios to keep it as conventional as possible. Going Nuclear will ensure a mutual destruction for both sides for sure. The career, even if not sunk, will still suffer enough damage that will force it dysfunctional for quite a while.

 

[MastanKhan]

Nabil---is the post I replied to by you or Najamkhan.

Stop putting the spin---. None of the items that you talked about would reach the aircraft carrier---it is too well protected by support vessels, aircraft and air sentries---and the aftermath won't be drastic as you would think in case of nuc strike----.

The oceans are the only place left that you may use indescretion to use nuc against the enemy---either through torpedoes---ie---submarine launched----or through aircraft-----aircraft carriers have too much protection surrounding them for the conventional weapons to reach them.

How many 802 /803 a jf 17 can carry---1-----how many missiles do you think you need to launch at that aircraft carrier battle group to get through the perimeter setup to protect it from such attacks------.

Now do I need to teach the THINK TANK that the aircraft carrier does not ride the waves on its own----it has a carrier battle group surrounding it----. A whole flotilla of ships----aircraft----awacs---submarines----.

The first issue with the jf 17 would be to reach within launch distance of the carrier battle group----which will be impossible----then it would have to launch atleast 50 ---802/803 missiles at the carrier group of which. Pak navy won't have 50 jf 17's to spare for a one way trip----they won't even have 25 jf 17's to spare for this trip---because all of them would be taken out by the enemy----either before launch of the missile.

So---for the 25 missiles launched maybe maybe 1 will reach the aircraft carrier----most of the others will be taken out---some will fall short----. But the bottomline is that this scenario won't happen---because paf doesnot have any air superiority fighters to intercept the aircraft carrier groups planes from intercepting the jf17's in the first place.

Don't put your thoughts on the paper because you want to----they are flawed----do some research---read some books on the subject---understand the significance of how the war can be fought with the carrier battle group----.

There is only one way pakistan can reach it----your diesel electric air propulsion submarine, submerged, lying in wait for the carreir battle group launched a nuc tipped cruise missile for an air burst right on top the aircraft carrier. A sudden surprise attack would take out all the communications----destroy smaller ships and make the aircraft carrier impotent----.

Paf cannot reach any aircraft carrier group on their own in numbers.

 

[dbc]

Conventional attack will be ineffective, in 1969 nine 500 lb bombs roughly the destructive force of 12 cruise missile accidentally exploded inside the USS Enterprise killing 27 sailors and injuring 300. The carrier resumed its strike mission one hour after that catastrophic event. Attacking a CBG with nuclear weapons isn't easy either the biggest challenge is detecting the ship and tracking it in order to guide a nuclear missile. The act of tracking the ship will expose the enemy radar, in 30 seconds a E/A-18 G will be in the air anticipating an attack, prepared to render the hostile emitter ineffective as soon as a missile launch is detected.

 

[Donatello]

Nabil---is the post I replied to by you or Najamkhan.

Stop putting the spin---. None of the items that you talked about would reach the aircraft carrier---it is too well protected by support vessels, aircraft and air sentries---and the aftermath won't be drastic as you would think in case of nuc strike----.

The oceans are the only place left that you may use indescretion to use nuc against the enemy---either through torpedoes---ie---submarine launched----or through aircraft-----aircraft carriers have too much protection surrounding them for the conventional weapons to reach them.

How many 802 /803 a jf 17 can carry---1-----how many missiles do you think you need to launch at that aircraft carrier battle group to get through the perimeter setup to protect it from such attacks------.

Now do I need to teach the THINK TANK that the aircraft carrier does not ride the waves on its own----it has a carrier battle group surrounding it----. A whole flotilla of ships----aircraft----awacs---submarines----.

The first issue with the jf 17 would be to reach within launch distance of the carrier battle group----which will be impossible----then it would have to launch atleast 50 ---802/803 missiles at the carrier group of which. Pak navy won't have 50 jf 17's to spare for a one way trip----they won't even have 25 jf 17's to spare for this trip---because all of them would be taken out by the enemy----either before launch of the missile.

So---for the 25 missiles launched maybe maybe 1 will reach the aircraft carrier----most of the others will be taken out---some will fall short----. But the bottomline is that this scenario won't happen---because paf doesnot have any air superiority fighters to intercept the aircraft carrier groups planes from intercepting the jf17's in the first place.

Don't put your thoughts on the paper because you want to----they are flawed----do some research---read some books on the subject---understand the significance of how the war can be fought with the carrier battle group----.

There is only one way pakistan can reach it----your diesel electric air propulsion submarine, submerged, lying in wait for the carreir battle group launched a nuc tipped cruise missile for an air burst right on top the aircraft carrier. A sudden surprise attack would take out all the communications----destroy smaller ships and make the aircraft carrier impotent----.

Paf cannot reach any aircraft carrier group on their own in numbers.

They have 5 billion dollar worth assets protecting 5 billion dollar worth Aircraft carrier.....we know that...however you cannot miss the USS Stark and USS Cole incidents.........meaning you cannot rely entirely on the technology to defend.

 

[ziaulislam]

Nabil---is the post I replied to by you or Najamkhan.

Stop putting the spin---. None of the items that you talked about would reach the aircraft carrier---it is too well protected by support vessels, aircraft and air sentries---and the aftermath won't be drastic as you would think in case of nuc strike----.

The oceans are the only place left that you may use indescretion to use nuc against the enemy---either through torpedoes---ie---submarine launched----or through aircraft-----aircraft carriers have too much protection surrounding them for the conventional weapons to reach them.

How many 802 /803 a jf 17 can carry---1-----how many missiles do you think you need to launch at that aircraft carrier battle group to get through the perimeter setup to protect it from such attacks------.

Now do I need to teach the THINK TANK that the aircraft carrier does not ride the waves on its own----it has a carrier battle group surrounding it----. A whole flotilla of ships----aircraft----awacs---submarines----.

The first issue with the jf 17 would be to reach within launch distance of the carrier battle group----which will be impossible----then it would have to launch atleast 50 ---802/803 missiles at the carrier group of which. Pak navy won't have 50 jf 17's to spare for a one way trip----they won't even have 25 jf 17's to spare for this trip---because all of them would be taken out by the enemy----either before launch of the missile.

So---for the 25 missiles launched maybe maybe 1 will reach the aircraft carrier----most of the others will be taken out---some will fall short----. But the bottomline is that this scenario won't happen---because paf doesnot have any air superiority fighters to intercept the aircraft carrier groups planes from intercepting the jf17's in the first place.

Don't put your thoughts on the paper because you want to----they are flawed----do some research---read some books on the subject---understand the significance of how the war can be fought with the carrier battle group----.

There is only one way pakistan can reach it----your diesel electric air propulsion submarine, submerged, lying in wait for the carreir battle group launched a nuc tipped cruise missile for an air burst right on top the aircraft carrier. A sudden surprise attack would take out all the communications----destroy smaller ships and make the aircraft carrier impotent----.

Paf cannot reach any aircraft carrier group on their own in numbers.

funny is the ACC in pacific ocean that PAf cant reach it!!!!!
if its within 1000 km any PAf aircraft and jf-17 can reach it fire 2 atleast (3 possible if sacrifying long range air to air missles). so 15 odd can fire 45 and having a chance to hit atleast 10%.it can give 4-5 hits which are possible to disable the carrier to carry its operation.


p.s
there are photos of jf-17 models showing 2 c-802 missles..just like before it was speculated that jf can carry only two sd-10 that was shown wrong with original photos . i am pretty sure once naval version comes in you would see 2 c-802

 

[regular]

funny is the ACC in pacific ocean that PAf cant reach it!!!!!
if its within 1000 km any PAf aircraft and jf-17 can reach it fire 2 atleast (3 possible if sacrifying long range air to air missles). so 15 odd can fire 45 and having a chance to hit atleast 10%.it can give 4-5 hits which are possible to disable the carrier to carry its operation.


p.s
there are photos of jf-17 models showing 2 c-802 missles..just like before it was speculated that jf can carry only two sd-10 that was shown wrong with original photos . i am pretty sure once naval version comes in you would see 2 c-802

Mr Mastan khan is right no matter what u do ,u can't hit the ACC with anything u have within ure inventory except the nukes. I highly doubt that our cruise missiles can even reach the carrier.I guess guys don't have an idea about the US tech. If u wanna see then ask ure naval or Airforce chief. why they can't even say a word against US. Cuz they know they are an easy prey for the US forces anytime...

---------- Post added at 03:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:27 PM ----------

Conventional attack will be ineffective, in 1969 nine 500 lb bombs roughly the destructive force of 12 cruise missile accidentally exploded inside the USS Enterprise killing 27 sailors and injuring 300. The carrier resumed its strike mission one hour after that catastrophic event. Attacking a CBG with nuclear weapons isn't easy either the biggest challenge is detecting the ship and tracking it in order to guide a nuclear missile. The act of tracking the ship will expose the enemy radar, in 30 seconds a E/A-18 G will be in the air anticipating an attack, prepared to render the hostile emitter ineffective as soon as a missile launch is detected.

Yes! absolutely right...that is a fact....

---------- Post added at 03:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:30 PM ----------

Conventional attack will be ineffective, in 1969 nine 500 lb bombs roughly the destructive force of 12 cruise missile accidentally exploded inside the USS Enterprise killing 27 sailors and injuring 300. The carrier resumed its strike mission one hour after that catastrophic event. Attacking a CBG with nuclear weapons isn't easy either the biggest challenge is detecting the ship and tracking it in order to guide a nuclear missile. The act of tracking the ship will expose the enemy radar, in 30 seconds a E/A-18 G will be in the air anticipating an attack, prepared to render the hostile emitter ineffective as soon as a missile launch is detected.

Yes! absolutely right...that is a fact....

 

[IND151]

Pakistan must test massive Tsar Bomba (50 MT), when shall we do that?

pak doesn't need 50 mt bomb.

200 kt warhead is enough.

and pak doesn't have technology, enough plutonium, uranium, test sigt and powerful bomber to deliver such massive bomb.

 

[regular]

pak doesn't need 50 mt bomb.

200 kt warhead is enough.

and pak doesn't have technology, enough plutonium, uranium, test sigt and powerful bomber to deliver such massive bomb.

Thats why we need to work hard day and night to achieve that level to keep our freedom to ourselves....

 

[Last Hope]

Actually, Sir Mastan has got a point. A/C/C are always well protected buy missile boats, frigates and submarines to avoid it getting damaged. We have a chance to break the back of the enemy. Not only the A/C/C but it's safety vessels can also be damaged with a nuke-tipped Anti-A/C/C. But if the radius of the safety circle is large, Air support can be called in. Air support by Mirage or JF-17 carrying Ra'ad with conventional warhead, as we do not have any other boats to take away.

Still, the problem that lies is, will our air support be able to reach the A/C/C in enemy waters?
Suppose our frigates and subs are protecting our waters, and beyond the range of torpedoes, sail the enemy vessels. And even further away is the A/C/C positioned. Do our Mirages or Thunders have enough fuel to make it towards the A/C/C and return back after firing the Ra'ad? And what about the safety barricades with the frigates. They may shoot us down.
Plus Babur has a range of, let's assume 800KM with conventional warhead. It wont be able to reach the A/C/C as well.

And the Naval version of Babur being worked on, is most likely to be attacked on land. It will carry nuclear warhead before its commission, unless you are telling me the respected frigate/submarine is sent for special purpose with conventional warhead.

Looking at the mentioned factors, a Nuke-tipped Anti-A/C/C will be used. Even if the A/C/C is being surrounded by other vessels, or not, it is the best option we have. And hence we are developing one.

(PS. Hope you are getting my point, if not, I will present you with diagrams).