What's new

SAM system based on Nasr missile

Status
Not open for further replies.
Prithvi series of ballistic missiles is what modified into India's Anti-Ballistic Defense missiles which falls under the category of SAMs. So I guess the same can be done with Nasr too.
 
.
Continuing my post..

The guidance system for the NASR SAM:

This system will have two possible paths to take. It can be a PESA for cost savings measure and a AESA for greater performance. In either case it will require that Pakistan develop the design for the modules that go into the Radar, along with associated hardware. and then develop the software too. It then has to decide if it wants to manufacture these at home or outsource it to the Chinese. Each has its own costs.
Then there will have to be the communications systems that go into the SAM system; these too will have the same options as above but also similar cost/time difference.

R&D Cost for designing AESA/PESA and communications system: $25-45 million/ 60 to 84 Months.

R&D Cost for developing manufacturing for the same: $30-60 million/ 36 to 72 months.


So now we've developed a SAM system that is roughly similar to many available Chinese systems along with many western systems.

The total cost for the best case development is around $300 million roughly if we sum up both under budgets and over budgets(I am not even going into the various commissions that will go around) with the lower end option probably around $150(with comparable performance drawbacks too). Lets assume it does as well in costs as India' s AKASH system and is comparable to it(even though India had certain advantages with associated programs utilizing similar tech saving on R&D)

The AKASH was ordered by the IN with 12 batteries and associated missiles was around 2943.841 million dollars and took around 23 years from inception to induction.
Lets assume that Pakistan only needs 5 batteries of its similar priced and similar performing NASR and their missiles so the total cost for Pakistan is around $600 million to a total program cost of around $800- 900 million.
Now why have I kept the time to induction for Pakistan so short?

I have played the devil's advocate and assumed that Pakistan will try to bypass a lot on the technological stepping stones by working off existing Chinese designs and ideas. Hence being able to leapfrog through them as it has with other R&D(in reality, even with such access the SAM system will take at least 8-12 years).

So around 7 years from 2016 and $900 million dollars later, Pakistan has a NASR based sam with a 30km range that is roughly ok for our needs.

Today however, the Chinese have systems based off the SD-10 and various other platforms that can given 3 more years perform the same or better than the AKASH and cost around $750-800 million at maximum for the same number of missiles and batteries.

So

Cost of Developing NASR SAM that is roughly OK: $900 million and 7 years

Cost of Buying Chinese system that is better: $750 million and 3 Years:.

Difference: $150-200 million dollars, 5 years.

Realization that we dont need to develop everything in-house like India and should only make what we really cant get elsewhere: PRICELESS
 
.
@JamD
referring to ur post..
i agree new rocket motor design is needed. plus some stremgth of material is required to sustain turns..
suppose we get a good seeker.. can we develop just guidance kits which can maneuver missiles?
like JDAMs kit.. which can turn simple gravity bombs into precision bombs.. idea is instead of making control fins, we can make a thrust vector out door/plant unit, which can vector the thrust isntead of fins controlling aerodynamically.so this kit can make any regular missile (with seeker etc) into a SAM, if not tehn a SAM into a very good SAM.. like sukhoi maneuver.... ? any insight ?
@MastanKhan @syedali73

on second thoughts, teh temperature and velocity of escaping gas may make it impossible... i am not sure but THAAD may use thrust vectoring.. its launch seems like that... or may eb we can use control like TOR which uses sudden gas emission (at launch) to manuever.. ? bcz settalite uses this technology.. and pak has made numerous satellites..
I know good control engineers are rare in pak (even in UK , many control eng are chinese)
@Technogaianist ur professional opinion on using thrust vectoring in missiles..

on 3rd thoughts ( :P if this kind of phrase exist)

the plane thrust vector control seems an ADD ON. i mean if we can develop this, we can use it on jf-17 whenevr mission reuires.. its not permanent...

To your first question about using something like a JDAM kit. The answer is no. A dumb bomb and a JDAM bomb falls pretty much the same way. There is little additional loading. The kit just nudges it into the right place throughout its descent. This hypothetical SAM-JDAM (lets call it that for now lol) would be prohibitively heavy and then you are having to make the missile structure and rocket casing (two different things) from scratch anyway so why have a bolt on kit. It will literally have to be a new missile.

An analogy would be to say you take a mehran and want it to fly. It will be a shitty aircraft and youll have to spend bajillions. It would be better to buy or build an aircraft. The mehran skycar will be expensive and horrible simply because of all the compromises you had to make to try to do it by modifying a mehran in the first place.

Your second question about thrust vectoring. It is entirely possible to install jet vanes in the exhaust of rockets and this is a very common thing to do. Even newer versions of our ballistic missiles have these now (please see the video on the facebook page Pakistan Affairs about our ballistic missiles. It is informative). We have the capability to add thrust vectoring, this is not as big a deal as you make it out to be.
EwRZ6NW.jpg
Please look at the bottom of our Ghaznavi. It has no control fins at the rear but has vanes in its exhaust path.

And what I had suggested in my earlier post was that you would need control fins IN ADDITION to thrust vectoring not in place of. Such are the maneuvering demands of the mission profile. We have the capability to do both, that is not the issue. The issue is that this system too will have to be REdesigned for more maneuverability (larger control fins etc).

That thrust vectoring petal design isn't as ADD ON as you seem to suggest. There are hydraulics and control systems for it. You design or redesign aircraft for it. Sadly the world isn't lego lol.
 
Last edited:
.
it needs hell of things to convert it into SAM.. same as building a new one...

It is better to explore the possibility to see whether any of NASR technology can be used in SAM. Converting S to S missile in SAM is not possble and impracticle.
 
. .
BM vs SAM :: Apple vs Oranges.
One word No. , Nothing is common between Prithvi and Astra AAM ( a close relative of SAM ).

Nuclear tipped NASR SAM- indians gona sh!t their pants- lol

lol, do you realize the detonantion would be in your own area ?

Prithvi series of ballistic missiles is what modified into India's Anti-Ballistic Defense missiles which falls under the category of SAMs. So I guess the same can be done with Nasr too.

Prithvi is NOT used as SAM, its the TARGET.
Plus, India is yet to have its own Seeker, the seeker on Astra is Russian.

Besides, SAM is far more complex than BMD , the Trajectory of the incoming BM is far more predicatble than a Figher Jet or Crusise Missile.
 
.



It makes sense why would you say , why can't this missile be a SAM as the launch platform looks very close to SAM launcher.

But really its about the locking system /Radars which track the objects (enemy objects not your own planes in air) and obviously reliability in flying the missile to target with objects

NASR is what is it !!!
 
.
Prithvi is NOT used as SAM, its the TARGET.
Plus, India is yet to have its own Seeker, the seeker on Astra is Russian.


Prithvi is used as the target as well as the launch vehicle.

Both PAD, and PDV, which is basically a two stage Prithvi used for exo-atmospheric interception, are Prithvi based anti ballistic missiles.

ulkJlNc.jpg



PDV is using an DRDO-developed Ku-band active radar seeker.

Ku-band+Active+Radar+Seeker.jpg

I8dK8Ru.jpg
 
.
the obsession of building everything at home wont do us much good. Consider the number of batteries we will require, then think about the R&D Costs involved and calculate where it will take the cost of the system.
The requirement wont be in huge numbers so it is best to buy directly instead of "reinventing" them. A wise man learns from his mistake but a wiser man learns from the mistake of others, so he don't have to make them himself. There will be mistakes, issues that we will have to invest time and money on to resolve. So we must be wiser and instead of going through all that process simply buy whatever limited number we require. THERE IS NOT NEED TO BUILD EVERYTHING AT HOME. We need a MAIN battle tank, it will be in number, YES WE MAKE IT AT HOME WITH A LOT OF LOCAL INPUT AS WELL. We need a main multi-role fighter to form the back bone of air force, to provide the numbers, YES WE ARE MAKING THAT AT HOME AS WELL. Main assault rifle, APC, IFV, these are the things we should build and we do. However attack helicopters that we may induct 30 40 examples of, or SAM that we will need 12 to 14 batteries of are not necessarily to be built here, in fact, the should not be. We can buy them from a manufacturer who have already made mistakes, learned from them, have improved the product through evaluation and gradual evolution. At best, what we can do is get the missile assembly technology, get some of the components made at home, get the complicated ones imported and assemble them here in Pakistan to keep a steady supply of missiles. However investing in whole SAM system (that includes launcher radars command and control vehicles and set up etc) indigenous production is not really required.

AND, all said, making a SAM out of a tactical ballistic missile (ground attack) wont be much beneficial, you will need to design an entirely new system.
 
.
i think that all we can take from this is that the nasr missile can be used as a sam, but it will be unviable. hense why procuring sam's from china would be the most cost effective solution. and possibly if you order enough you may be able to get tot. the hq-19 variants can be used as vls missiles of future frigates. so tot would be a good idea.

also i heard during the musharaf era that pakistan was looking for long range sam/s with tot. but they were only offered the sams without tot, the government dropped the deal.
 
.
pretty much the same way
ok..

take a mehran and want it to fly
don't question your knowledge but car and aircraft are both different vehicle. yes Jdam-mehran result w'd be clumsy

vanes in its exhaust path
saw that..

isn't as ADD ON
i thought it has servos.. but yes hydraulic r needed to exert such powers.. but what about if we have it on SD-10 or other BVRs.. those can fitted with servos

We have the capability to do both, that is not the issue.
good news :)

Pakistan Affairs about our ballistic missi
have watched their 13 videos i think.. these r very informative but admin of these lack resources for a good anime.my favt is about cm 400akg...

HERE IS NOT NEED TO BUILD EVERYTHING AT HOME.
very true.. pakistan need carbon fiber for UAVs.. we buy from balck market (banned item) at 10 mill$ per roll (original price 3 million $) .. the speaker was saying that we can build the plant but cost is 2 billion $.. thats not the only problem.. as the consumption is low, teh palnt w'd remain close most of teh time..
 
.
I think the OP created this thread due to the reason that India have done the same with their Prithvi SRBM.

Quote:

india11.png
Prithvi Air Defense (PAD)


Source: Army Technology

Originated From:India
Possessed By:India
Warhead:HE or Kill Vehicle
Range:250 km
Basing:Land
Status:Development
In Service:2015 - 2017 (Expected)
The Prithvi Air Defence (PAD) is a liquid and solid fueled two stage ballistic missile defense system that is designed to intercept at a high altitude. The system is based on the Prithvi missile. PAD is said to have a maximum interception altitude of 80km.1 The PAD is currently being developed by India, and it is expected to be operational by 2014.2

The PAD system uses the Prithvi missile in conjunction with Israel’s Green Pine radar to detect, track, and intercept airborne threats.3 Since the system is currently under development, more information will be added as it becomes available.


Source: Indian Defense



Source: India Today

Unquote:


Prithvi Air Defense (PAD) - Missile ThreatMissile Threat

@Penguin @gambit as India is developing PAD / PDV based on SRBM for BMD, which Pakistani BM will be better for converting in BMD?

I think Ghouri (as they are not in front line service) missiles for very high altitudes / ASAT (if possible) & Shaheen-1 for role of what PAD is for. expert opinion is requested from knowledgeable members.
 
Last edited:
.
tracking, guidance and target acquisition system.. it is very sophisticated and expensive technology. we have capability to develop 3rd generation SAMs but not 4th or 5th generation..
Then lets start from 3rd generation and based on experience from them research and develope 4th then 5th gen.
 
.
I was thinking if it would be possible to develop Nasr into a SAM.

Will it need a new motor because it has to be more manueverable?
we are in process of getting new SAMs systems from countires like china, germany and south africa ( unoffical news )
Then lets start from 3rd generation and based on experience from them research and develope 4th then 5th gen.
we are already working on 4th generation missiles like anza mk3 and 4
 
.
we are in process of getting new SAMs systems from countires like china, germany and south africa ( unoffical news )

we are already working on 4th generation missiles like anza mk3 and 4
Anza is a point defense system at best, short range missile. We need medium to long range and medium to high altitude air cover. HQ-9 and HQ-16 combination seem most probable and is suitable. Other options can include Aster 15 and Aster 30 (not very likely as it will be expensive as well as i don't think they will be willing to supply readily), another excellent option can be getting S-350 from Russia, that is an awesome system and will take a significant load of PAF fighters used in area defense. Also will act as a decent anti-missile shield.

The Advantage of the first mentioned HQ systems is that we may see the similar equipping heavier frigates for PN in the future, also we can get maintenance or even manufacturing ability for the missiles at home.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom