This is why India's upcoming K-4 SLBM won't be MIRV

[amardeep mishra]

Sure , but really i like the innovations ..I am kind of shell scripting person ...but python is future

Yes I write a lot of bash.I love bash a lot.

 

[django]

As @amardeep mishra pointed out we have 300 kg warheads with a yield of 200-300 kt.

And this is a fact??????? just because some IIT kid claims so!....the facts are you folks have 20kt warheads, even your prominent scientists are saying so, dream on about 300kt or megatons dude.

US warheads are stuck in 80s & 90s, Safriz
Whereas China India have went on R&D into the 21st century.

Still a darn sight more capable than the crap you folks produce. Do not forget in the late 90s your so called hydrogen bomb turned out to be an embarrasing dud yet you have the audacity to claim your warhead technology has surpassed what the US and Russians had in the 90s, what are you smoking, I would not mind a spliff.

 

[Sloth 22]

A thread based on nothing.

I can challenge the OP to bring here 1 Release/Publication/Statement/Press Note by the GOI or MoD/India or Armed Forces Chief or DRDO/BDL or Defence Minister or any one else directly related to the program who has said MIRV and K4 in one sentence!

The media here is as good as $hit at reporting things. And no sane Indian falls for it.

 

[anniyan]

One day it will hit your county, at that time have a detailed analysis.

 

[Awan68]

US warheads are stuck in 80s & 90s, Safriz
Whereas China India have went on R&D into the 21st century.

Wtf did u just say

US warheads are stuck in 80s & 90s, Safriz
Whereas China India have went on R&D into the 21st century.

 

[Praise Kek]

Fail.
Pakistani yields were also much lower than claimed:

Acoording to Wallace 1998 an appropriate formula for the magnitude-to-yield relation in the Chagai district of Pakistan is:

Eq. 1 mb = 4.10 + 0.75 log YThis formula gives yield estimates of 8-12 kt for the 28 May shot and 4-6 kt for the 30 May shot. Barker et al 1998 also assigned yields of 9 kt (95% c.i. 6-13 kt) for the 28 May and 4 kt (95% c.i. 2-8 kt) for the 30 May shots. Walter suggests a tentative estimate range of 5-20 kt for 28 May, and 3-11 kt for the 30 May shot (Walter et al 1998)

Test: Chagai-I
Time: 10:16:15.8 28 May 1998 (UCT) USGS;
10:16:17.6 UCT (PIDC)
Location: Ras Koh mountains, Chagai District,
Baluchistan Province, Pakistan
28.7919 deg N, 64.9475 deg E
Test Height and Type: Multiple device (5?, 2?) in underground
horizontal tunnel, 1000 m long
Yield: approx. 9 kt (5-20 kt possible range;
claimed yields range from 18 kt to 40 kt)

Pakistani tests (conducted in a far different geological environment) is similar - claimed yields do not match the seismic evidence. No well-founded explanation is available for such a consistent pattern of deception by both India and Pakistan

httpwwwnuclearweaponarchive,org/Pakistan/PakTests.html

httpwwwnuclearweaponarchive,org/India/IndiaRealYields.html

 

[faithfulguy]

US warheads are stuck in 80s & 90s, Safriz
Whereas China India have went on R&D into the 21st century.

This is one of the most ignorant statement I've heared on PDF.

 

[Logicaldude]

This is one of the most ignorant statement I've heared on PDF.

You Are lucky you don't read the trash you have been posting for years.

 

[Bad Guy]

Too much timepassing with my old friend @safriz? Well, if I'm not wrong he posts on PDF as @shaheenmissile,

@shaheenmissile and @safriz are same person

my old friend used to misuse his knowledge to misguide little informed members.
He even had a wicked habit of "doctoring the specifications" and whenever we caught him, he used to call us butthurt & egoistic etc. and left the thread.
Well, as he again has started this, I don't think that it will harm to do same thing with more logical explanations.
I will start this with backlash at the title.
@ﺷﺎﮬﯿﻦ ﻣﯿﺰﺍﯾﻞ Get ready mate, either for arguing with me or calling your friend. I have made similar analysis for Babur-3 and I promise that nobody will be able to technically arguing, except calling me just a butthurt.
Let's go.
Here's why Pakistan is nowhere near making MIRVs
I'm afraid that it will be able to deploy 3 warheads only in final stages of development, capsule is too small but Pakistan has tested a new stage for MIRVs, not RVs actually. With current design, warheads won't exceed 5.

Here's the warning for Ababeel.

Clearly, not for MIRVs, at best, it's MRV.

This is how you issue a warning for MIRV tests.

Agni 5

Agni 3, world's most accurate operational IRBM

(depresed trajectory, so putting MIRVs isn't that easy, I don't know how Pakistan will solve this problem with Ababeel missile, flight altitude of at least 500-700kms will be needed which will require more powerful motor, probably an additional stage, overweighing,
no country in world now makes MIRV medium range missiles for this reason, only God knows what's being in Pakistani minds )
And I know safriz crying day and night for trajectory on Indian Missiles won't point it out.
India has tested it's re entry vehicles, heat shields and launched multiple satellites many times but even then, I won't call India able to deploy them because in MIRVs, each vehicle has it's own navigation system and computer.

That's why India (even China) couldn't realize deployed MIRVs.
So, My Conclusion:

Pakistan is yet to test a MIRVs, even MRVs or even RVs.
I was wondering if someone can validate entire MIRV tech steps and I was right. This test was just validation of the New Stage and it was written on official Press Release from ISPR,

no matter that desperate people like Zarvan on Pakistani forums claim that they tested MIRVs.

So,
Now
Pakistan has tested and validated a new stage.

What's Next?
Pakistan will have to perform re entry.

Pakistan will have to perform Multiple warheads.
(Two steps publicly demonstrated by India via other sector, and as per NOTAMs, who knows what it has done)

And finally, they will have to provide individual navigation and computer systems to each vehicle (not publicly known about India).

here is the reason why last test was not MIRV

Chinese DF 5C MIRV test NOTAM is the proof,

Chinese test has MIRV impact zone, while the Ababeel is no such impact area for MIRV, yellow area on the other is what should have been NOTAM for the test.

 

[Bad Guy]

Here is why Pakistan isn't near India in warhead miniaturization and reliability.
Now, let's go on number of MIRVs you could deploy which depends on your capability of warhead miniaturization.

India has demonstrated or has been doing through civilian sector in advanced reactor projects.

Come back and claim that you guys have miniature warheads when you make something akin to AHWR.

We know Pakistanis didn't test Plutonium warheads which are needed for miniaturization rather they tested HEU implosion type warheads to be replicated in plutonium type pit as New Labs facility at PINSTECH only came online.in may 1998 . So Pakistanis have not tested a Plutonium spherical implosion device but a Linear implosion device.

This device upon detonation the high explosive will drive the pusher plate into the tamper, which will then begin linear implosion of the fissile mass which will not only compress the plutonium but will push it inward and away from the control rods the same time, the lip on the outside of each control rod will "catch" a small portion of the force from the explosive.

Now these devices will not give more than 10% efficiency without testing which Pakistan has not , so Pakistan's triad will not be useful for countervalue targeting .

No matter how much they claim that can "miniaturize" their nukes.

Just by talking and bragging, Pakistan won't surpass India @faithfulguy.

This is 2016, India produces close to 90 out of 94 defined missile technologies when Pak is stuck at less than 50.
India's entry to MTCR was UAV tech & most importantly export oriented. Besides few critical techs of seeker, India actually wants to give the assistance to others.
Only P5 countries and other few major powers like Germany and Japan can produce equal or more missile technologies than India which reflects that India is itself one of premieres in missile technology.
Plus this noun isn't an exaggeration at all.

Pakistan has no capability in

1) proper warhead miniaturization

2) Independent research in Solid propellant just what the Chinese taught them, they have rarely made any new propellant besides that.

3) No spin stabilized booster during injection burn

4) Inertial altitude correction for injection burn

5) Cannot design nor manufacture all parts of the adapter

6) Cannot manufacture or design gimballed thrust engine in pbcv.

7) Cannot design or manufacture highly efficient gyros nor accelerometers

8) It cannot design re entry vehicle for the RVs to protect the warhead

pakistani Saheen 3 first stage Chinese solid stage also given to North Korea.

pakistani miniaturised Nukes are probably < 5 Kt does anyone think it will hurt us?

Plus just 3 MIRVs.

Can't go apart more than 200 kilometres. More than easy for Indian anti missile PDVs once operational, just few more couples will be needed to be deployed.

And beyond 3 MIRVs it needs range above 3,000 kms which overshoots India, (even at 2,200 kms, only God knows how Pakistanis deployed MIRVs on MRBMs.)

But interestingly, safriz digested it without questioning.
He is very active on Twitter these days you know.

This is one of the most ignorant statement I've heared on PDF.

LOL, never thought that I would agree with something you posted.

And this is a fact??????? just because some IIT kid claims so!....the facts are you folks have 20kt warheads, even your prominent scientists are saying so, dream on about 300kt or megatons dude.

Seriously? 20kT?
Just by one organization. India's H bomb was tested in modules, small igniters for initial spark and then a main sized whose yield is above 40kT by most institutes.

Case is different that Pakistanis love to use cherry pick numbers for comfort.
They use Credit Suisse report which shows them richer than Indians meanwhile Indians themselves laugh on this report when it showed us richer than Eastern Europeans.

Still a darn sight more capable than the crap you folks produce. Do not forget in the late 90s your so called hydrogen bomb turned out to be an embarrasing dud yet you have the audacity to claim your warhead technology

Prove it or believe our official declarations.
There must be some reason that India still makes reactors for subs, powering systems for spacecrafts, ion propulsion, most types of reactors or why world selected India for making thermonuclear reactors along with P5.

Comparing India with any other non NPT nuclear power is silly. India is way beyond comparison from them.

 

[The Deterrent]

Here's the warning for Ababeel.

Clearly, not for MIRVs, at best, it's MRV.

This is how you issue a warning for MIRV tests.

Do you actually understand the stuff you talk about before blabbering all over the place?

Keeping aside the MIRVs, Pakistan has always issued warnings for a longer/rectangular air/naval space enclosure, and India has always issued warnings for inverted conical shaped enclosures. The Indian ones are more scientifically accurate because the progressive error (that might occur during flight) builds up that way.

Coming back to MIRVs, the 1st area (conical) you see for the warning of Agni-5 is actually where the first/second stage are supposed to fall. The 2nd area (rectangular) is for the third stage and RV. There are no MIRVs involved in any of the currently flight tested missiles of India.

(depresed trajectory, so putting MIRVs isn't that easy, I don't know how Pakistan will solve this problem with Ababeel missile, flight altitude of at least 500-700kms will be needed which will require more powerful motor, probably an additional stage, overweighing,
no country in world now makes MIRV medium range missiles for this reason, only God knows what's being in Pakistani minds )

1. The warning envelope Pakistan issued for Ababeel had an altitude of 500km. Go ahead, ask me to prove it.
2. Motors -> check. Additional stage -> check.
3. You are probably not aware of the Soviet RSD-10 Pioneer and its min/max strike envelope. Today, none of the major nuclear nations (US/UK/Russia/China/France) deploy them because they have much more farther distances to strike. They simply don't need to target anybody that close. Besides, their SLBMs give the standoff distances in case the enemy is next door.

India has tested it's re entry vehicles, heat shields and launched multiple satellites many times but even then, I won't call India able to deploy them because in MIRVs, each vehicle has it's own navigation system and computer.
That's why India (even China) couldn't realize deployed MIRVs.

Pakistan is yet to test a MIRVs, even MRVs or even RVs.
What's Next?
Pakistan will have to perform re entry.

I just realized you really don't know what you're talking about. Every missile in the Agni series, Shaheen series, even the Ghauri missile has a re-entry vehicle (RV). Let me explain it to you in lay-man terms.
Ever see the 'red cone' of a Pakistani system (black in India's case)? That is called a re-entry vehicle. You don't need a space-shuttle style heat shield for them. A 3D carbon composite 'tip' takes majority of heat (3000-5000 C). The rest of the RV (metallic, coated with ablatives) can sustain lower temperatures than that. All of the missiles mentioned above have unitary RVs that rise above atmosphere during ascent, and re-enter the atmosphere in the terminal phase.

Pakistan will have to perform Multiple warheads.
(Two steps publicly demonstrated by India via other sector, and as per NOTAMs, who knows what it has done)

And finally, they will have to provide individual navigation and computer systems to each vehicle (not publicly known about India).

Oh God. MIRVs don't need their own navigation. Its just the way Agni-5's RV is designed (to be non-separable). For reference, see animation of Minuteman-III. The Post-boost vehicle injects the RVs in their independent trajectories. After that, they are spun-up and are on their own for the rest of the flight.

here is the reason why last test was not MIRV

Chinese DF 5C MIRV test NOTAM is the proof,

Chinese test has MIRV impact zone, while the Ababeel is no such impact area for MIRV, yellow area on the other is what should have been NOTAM for the test.

Everything related to Ababeel will be tested, in due time. Instead of jumping up and down on seeing Nav warnings (which are not NOTAMs), realize that the MIRVs can all be directed towards the same target as MRVs. Don't worry, the 'NOTAMs' you're so longing for will come soon.

Here is why Pakistan isn't near India in warhead miniaturization and reliability.
Now, let's go on number of MIRVs you could deploy which depends on your capability of warhead miniaturization.

India has demonstrated or has been doing through civilian sector in advanced reactor projects.

Come back and claim that you guys have miniature warheads when you make something akin to AHWR.

So now nuclear weapon design is 'demonstrated' in a nuclear reactor.

We know Pakistanis didn't test Plutonium warheads which are needed for miniaturization rather they tested HEU implosion type warheads to be replicated in plutonium type pit as New Labs facility at PINSTECH only came online.in may 1998 . So Pakistanis have not tested a Plutonium spherical implosion device but a Linear implosion device.
This device upon detonation the high explosive will drive the pusher plate into the tamper, which will then begin linear implosion of the fissile mass which will not only compress the plutonium but will push it inward and away from the control rods the same time, the lip on the outside of each control rod will "catch" a small portion of the force from the explosive.

Now these devices will not give more than 10% efficiency without testing which Pakistan has not , so Pakistan's triad will not be useful for countervalue targeting .

No matter how much they claim that can "miniaturize" their nukes.

Oh for God's sake, please form sensible sentences before copy-pasting like a buffoon. Pakistan tested U-235 spherical implosion devices, but from where are you bringing this linear implosion device design for Pakistan? You probably think that its Nasr's warhead because how could poor uneducated Pakistanis fit a spherical Pu device in a large MBRL.

Much to your disappointment, Pakistan has made it. And no, the same thing is not used in the RVs deployed for strategic deterrence. You obviously have not been keeping a keen eye on recent Pakistani developments.

(The MIRVs in Ababeel are an illustration of their probable arrangement & size, using the same design of RVs of Shaheen-IA and Shaheen-III)

Pakistan has no capability in

1) proper warhead miniaturization

See above.

2) Independent research in Solid propellant just what the Chinese taught them, they have rarely made any new propellant besides that.

Proof?

3) No spin stabilized booster during injection burn

"Spin"-stabilized-"Booster"???? What in the world are you smoking?

4) Inertial altitude correction for injection burn

Oh, then Shaheen series RVs must do nagan dance with all the stuff they carry with them post-boost.

5) Cannot design nor manufacture all parts of the adapter

Yeah we import adapters for consumer electronics from China.

6) Cannot manufacture or design gimballed thrust engine in pbcv.

Poor guy. Read somewhere India is deploying gimballed exhaust nozzles, now thinks the rest of the world lives in stone-age.
Does the term 'Retro-Thruster' mean anything to you?

7) Cannot design or manufacture highly efficient gyros nor accelerometers

8) It cannot design re entry vehicle for the RVs to protect the warhead

Been there, done that (since the early 2000s).

Can't go apart more than 200 kilometres. More than easy for Indian anti missile PDVs once operational, just few more couples will be needed to be deployed.

And beyond 3 MIRVs it needs range above 3,000 kms which overshoots India, (even at 2,200 kms, only God knows how Pakistanis deployed MIRVs on MRBMs.)

Sleep tight.

 

[Bad Guy]

Keeping aside the MIRVs, Pakistan has always issued warnings for a longer/rectangular air/naval space enclosure, and India has always issued warnings for inverted conical shaped enclosures. The Indian ones are more scientifically accurate because the progressive error (that might occur during flight) builds up that way.

That's why I put the example of DF 5C MIRV there.

Coming back to MIRVs, the 1st area (conical) you see for the warning of Agni-5 is actually where the first/second stage are supposed to fall. The 2nd area (rectangular) is for the third stage and RV. There are no MIRVs involved in any of the currently flight tested missiles of India.

Nobody has said that India has deployed MIRVs. But the post was to counter to counter the few folks (members post on PDF, well known, so don't wanna name him) who claimed that Pakistan has got through here even farther than India's and validated all techs in first attempt.
First Ababeel test answered one of your questions, not all.

Here is what Agni-5 actually looks like (courtersy: DRDO). Good luck with fitting MIRVs in there.

Isn't that a presentation by V.K. Sarswat.

I posted the outer way, the inter tank structure (used in Indian LVs too).
Regarding fitting MIRVs in cones, posted with graphics or a new missile.

1. The warning envelope Pakistan issued for Ababeel had an altitude of 500km. Go ahead, ask me to prove it.

What are you waitin for? Do it.

3. You are probably not aware of the Soviet RSD-10 Pioneer and its min/max strike envelope. Today, none of the major nuclear nations (US/UK/Russia/China/France) deploy them because they have much more farther distances to strike. They simply don't need to target anybody that close. Besides, their SLBMs give the standoff distances in case the enemy is next door.

Interesting, here I'll give up if true. Could you please provide me source about when Pak acquired RSD-10? All I know about NPO engines for Babur from Soviets (correct me if I'm wrong).

I just realized you really don't know what you're talking about. Every missile in the Agni series, Shaheen series, even the Ghauri missile has a re-entry vehicle (RV). Let me explain it to you in lay-man terms.
Ever see the 'red cone' of a Pakistani system (black in India's case)? That is called a re-entry vehicle. You don't need a space-shuttle style heat shield for them. A 3D carbon composite 'tip' takes majority of heat (3000-5000 C). The rest of the RV (metallic, coated with ablatives) can sustain lower temperatures than that. All of the missiles mentioned above have unitary RVs that rise above atmosphere during ascent, and re-enter the atmosphere in the terminal phase.

Dear, what are you talkin about?
I'm afraid you didn't even read the complete post.
Which Heat shields & RVs does Pak make?

What I know may be outdated beyond 2010. If you can prove me wrong for with something new, I will step back.

Oh God. MIRVs don't need their own navigation. Its just the way Agni-5's RV is designed (to be non-separable). For reference, see animation of Minuteman-III. The Post-boost vehicle injects the RVs in their independent trajectories. After that, they are spun-up and are on their own for the rest of the flight.

LGM 30 has altitude around 1,100 kms with intercontinental range. Ababeel has to carry just 3 warheads to a way closer target.
Obviously comparison won't be nice, it makes a little difference here otherwise.

ABM units won't have to distributed much apart.

Everything related to Ababeel will be tested, in due time. Instead of jumping up and down on seeing Nav warnings (which are not NOTAMs), realize that the MIRVs can all be directed towards the same target as MRVs.

What else I do say (for boldened part).
I said MIRV tech isn't deployed yet.
Here's where problem has occurred.

He didn't even bother to read ISPR press release.
(and sorry for calling NAVAREA warning a NOTAM)

Don't worry, the 'NOTAMs' you're so longing for will come soon.

What the heck? NOTAMs will come after missile tests?

So now nuclear weapon design is 'demonstrated' in a nuclear reactor.

It does matter a lot.
NSG was made for a very good reason.

Not weapon design but capability of making & utilizing fissile material at least which gives edge your weapons.
Regarding weapon design, you can simulate them but you must have experience from earlier tests to match the codes.
India did 1974 tests in that way.

Oh for God's sake, please form sensible sentences before copy-pasting like a buffoon. Pakistan tested U-235 spherical implosion devices, but from where are you bringing this linear implosion device design for Pakistan? You probably think that its Nasr's warhead because how could poor uneducated Pakistanis fit a spherical Pu device in a large MBRL.
Much to your disappointment, Pakistan has made it. And no, the same thing is not used in the RVs deployed for strategic deterrence. You obviously have not been keeping a keen eye on recent Pakistani developments.

What a judgemental post! Look fellow, you are a think tank, why do act like others?
Here do we go.

because how could poor uneducated Pakistanis fit a spherical Pu device in a large MBRL.

Is that? Pakistan spends little on R&D nor we hear much about ongoing research program.
You don't pour money on program, infrastructure required and you get the result.

Much to your disappointment, Pakistan has made it.

Make me more disappointed! Provide the source or at least any reason.

See above.

Saw & responded.
Off Topic: Sometimes I think why I feel I'm usual watching these oversized warheads.

Then, I grin.

You guys can put MIRVs on MRBMs?
If right I'm waiting for orbital launch from Pakistan.

Proof?

http://mtcr.info/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/MTCR_Annex_Handbook_ENG.pdf
Adding, isn't that question uselss.
Few weeks ago, some Pakistani asked me to prove that Pakistan doesn't produce Turbofan engines. (but actually, he was supposed to prove me it's opposite because Pakistan & turbofan development words aren't put together).

"Spin"-stabilized-"Booster"???? What in the world are you smoking?

What kind of question is this?
For such a short range, 3 vehicles and a close target when you have to counter BMD, not many guidance systems, what do you gonna do? Plus not assuming about RSD-10.

Oh, then Shaheen series RVs must do nagan dance with all the stuff they carry with them post-boost.

Or crashing pathetically!
Missile test failures occur in Pakistan also but not disclosed.
Here's one about Ghauri, if not Shaheen.
Not very long back, ISPR said:

Pakistan today successfully conducted the training launch of Medium Range Ballistic Missile Hatf V (Ghauri). The launch was conducted by a Strategic Missile Group of the Army Strategic Force Command on the culmination of a field training exercise that was aimed at testing the operational readiness of the Army Strategic Force Command. Ghauri ballistic missile is a liquid fuel missile which can carry both conventional and nuclear warheads over a distance of 1300 kms.
The test monitoring of the launch was conducted at the National Command Centre through the medium of National Command Authority&#8217;s fully automated Strategic Command and Control Support System (SCCSS). It may be recalled that the SCCSS enables robust Command and Control capability of all strategic assets with round the clock situational awareness in a digitized network centric environment to decision makers at the National Command Centre (NCC). The test consolidates and strengthens Pakistan&#8217;s deterrence capability, and national security.
The President and Prime Minister congratulated all ranks of the Army Strategic Force Command on the excellent standard achieved during training which was reflected in the proficient handling of the weapon system in the field and the accuracy of the training launch.

Now, history

Then ISPR released another statement that missile parts fallen on safe area

it was felling on Pakistani citizens head, later on they discontinuedland test, now it appears they started again.

Yeah we import adapters for consumer electronics from China.

Okay, believing you, case closed.

Poor guy. Read somewhere India is deploying gimballed exhaust nozzles, now thinks the rest of the world lives in stone-age.
Does the term 'Retro-Thruster' mean anything to you?

Hey, Pakistan makes retro thrusters?

:facepalm:

Been there, done that (since the early 2000s).

Source that Pak has heat shields & RVs.

Sleep tight.

Hell!

 

[kṣamā]

@Bad Guy : I have been asking the same questions on the original abdeele thread. Where actually @The Deterrent acknowledged that no MIRV was used in the test but who cold stop the overzealous crowd ?? I think they actually went till attacking US mainland. Anyways I was too questioning the logic of MIRVing a TBM..but it may have wrongly rubbed someones ego and i had a negative rating and the post was hidden...

 

[The Deterrent]

That's why I put the example of DF 5C MIRV there.

Nobody has said that India has deployed MIRVs. But the post was to counter to counter the few folks (members post on PDF, well known, so don't wanna name him) who claimed that Pakistan has got through here even farther than India's and validated all techs in first attempt.
First Ababeel test answered one of your questions, not all.

Don't dodge it, accept that you were wrong when you said "This is how you issue a warning for MIRV tests. ", in reference to NAVAREA warning for Agni-5.

I posted the outer way, the inter tank structure (used in Indian LVs too).
Regarding fitting MIRVs in cones, posted with graphics or a new missile.

If you have to make an argument, please form meaningful sentences. I don't care what you posted, Agni-5 cannot and will not board MIRVs. Agni-6 & K-5 are being developed for that purpose. Learn something about your systems first.

What are you waitin for? Do it.

Now go ahead and say that its fabricated.

Interesting, here I'll give up if true. Could you please provide me source about when Pak acquired RSD-10? All I know about NPO engines for Babur from Soviets (correct me if I'm wrong).

You're dumber than I thought. How could a Soviet system (RSD-10/SS-20 Mod 2) be even remotely related to Ababeel? I gave an example of a missile capable of delivering MIRVs at shorter than ICBM ranges. RSD-10's engagement envelope ranged from 600-5000km.

Dear, what are you talkin about?
I'm afraid you didn't even read the complete post.
Which Heat shields & RVs does Pak make?

What I know may be outdated beyond 2010. If you can prove me wrong for with something new, I will step back.

Here we witness the creation of another textbook-parrot keyboard warrior.
Its you who didn't understand the subject before posting, and still are unable to understand. Its a pity that you didn't even read (or couldn't comprehend) the information given in the MTCR handbook. Read it again, study about re-entry vehicles in general, then study about the Agni series. When you're done, look at this picture:

If you still can't comprehend it, you can guide yourself to forums of your country where you can have better "scientific" discussions. Pakistan is not obliged to release information to the MTCR.

LGM 30 has altitude around 1,100 kms with intercontinental range. Ababeel has to carry just 3 warheads to a way closer target.
Obviously comparison won't be nice, it makes a little difference here otherwise.

ABM units won't have to distributed much apart.

It was an example, to highlight that MIRVs don't have their own propulsion & guidance. Its the job of the PBV to insert them in their independent trajectories. Here, educate yourself:

The red arrow is the phase where MIRVs are deployed. More detail below:

What else I do say (for boldened part).
I said MIRV tech isn't deployed yet.
Here's where problem has occurred.

He didn't even bother to read ISPR press release.
(and sorry for calling NAVAREA warning a NOTAM)

It is one thing to not deploy any RV at all, another to jettison MIRVs as multiple RVs around the same target area, and completely another to deploy MIRVs at distinct target areas. You're intelligent enough to figure out which one helps you sleep better.

What the heck? NOTAMs will come after missile tests?

Soon =/= After.

What a judgemental post! Look fellow, you are a think tank, why do act like others?
Here do we go.

Aww, did I hurt your feelings? What happened to your yearning for a "technical" discussion?

Is that? Pakistan spends little on R&D nor we hear much about ongoing research program.
You don't pour money on program, infrastructure required and you get the result.

As I said before, Pakistan is not obliged to disclose anything to anybody. NESCOM is not DRDO, it works in secrecy and delivers the final product only when its ready.

Make me more disappointed! Provide the source or at least any reason.

If you had even a wee bit of "technical" sense, the images I posted would be enough for you. Alas, my MS Paint skills go to waste.

Off Topic: Sometimes I think why I feel I'm usual watching these oversized warheads.

Then, I grin.

You guys can put MIRVs on MRBMs?
If right I'm waiting for orbital launch from Pakistan.

Thats all Indian 'analysts' like you can do; Compare images and come up with "scientific" conclusions.

http://mtcr.info/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/MTCR_Annex_Handbook_ENG.pdf
Adding, isn't that question uselss.

Guess what, MTCR bases its study on open source information. Even North Korea and Iran have developed Re-entry Vehicles.

What kind of question is this?
For such a short range, 3 vehicles and a close target when you have to counter BMD, not many guidance systems, what do you gonna do? Plus not assuming about RSD-10.

You are too stupid to be explained how a PBV injects MIRVs, and how altitude is what's important, not range.

Or crashing pathetically!
Missile test failures occur in Pakistan also but not disclosed.
Here's one about Ghauri, if not Shaheen.
Not very long back, ISPR said:

Now, history

Then ISPR released another statement that missile parts fallen on safe area

it was felling on Pakistani citizens head, later on they discontinuedland test, now it appears they started again.

Failures happen all the time, Pakistan just doesn't feels the urge to explain them to the world.

Hey, Pakistan makes retro thrusters?

No, Pakistan uses stolen vedic tech to miraculously correct an RV's trajectory in space.

Source that Pak has heat shields & RVs.

Extremely sorry to shatter your dreams and beliefs of Pakistani incompetency, I've heard from your friends that the following technology is extremely effective in providing relief. Please don't bother me any further as we don't keep a stock of it here.
https://www.comedz.com/medicines/nhtdvsnyih4.jpg

@Bad Guy : I have been asking the same questions on the original abdeele thread. Where actually @The Deterrent acknowledged that no MIRV was used in the test but who cold stop the overzealous crowd ?? I think they actually went till attacking US mainland. Anyways I was too questioning the logic of MIRVing a TBM..but it may have wrongly rubbed someones ego and i had a negative rating and the post was hidden...
View attachment 374775

WTF is "abdeele"?
I never meant that no MIRV was even there. Read my above post for the detailed answer.

 

[Praise Kek]

WTF is "abdeele"?
I never meant that no MIRV was even there. Read my above post for the detailed answer.

What you mean or do not Mean had ZERO value.
Fact is no MIRVs or even MRVs were tested in this particular test.