3 replies to this topic

[Saqr]

Pakistan's missile technology seems to have come a long way. For example, its ballistic missile inventory includes solid-fuel based systems such as Shaheen II, and it has an arsenal of LACM in the form of Babur and Ra'ad for the Army and Air Force, respectively. However, what else could Pakistan do based on its capacities and, more importantly, its partnerships with countries such as China, Turkey, Brazil and maybe South Africa.

 

There are a few things I want to note or recall.

 

1. I'm not sure if Pakistan developed the turbojet (or turbofan) propulsion used by Babur and Ra'ad, i just don't know. But I do know that in 2006/2007 Pakistan signed an MoU with Turkey agreeing to develop turbojet technology for missiles. One way or another, I'd take it as an indication that as far as cruise missile propulsion goes, Pakistan 'has it down' or will secure the technology (for indigenous production) soon. 

 

2. Pakistan seems to have a fairly strong supply-line through China, and as a result, it may not see the need to develop certain systems, especially tactical solutions such as anti-ship warfare, among others. It boggled my mind as to why Pakistan didn't have its own precision-guided-bomb kit for its Mk-series bombs even though every other country in the sun (including UAE) had its own solution, but the existence of China may be the answer. Why commit financial resources for weapons for the sake of having them? Right? 

 

3. With a few exceptions, I think the bulk of Pakistani missile development moving forward will focus on stand-off missiles for use on platforms such as aircraft and submarines. In other words, further development and/or variants of Ra'ad and Babur LACMs. The exceptions to this might be more specialized missiles, especially air-to-surface solutions in the form of anti-radiation missiles, potential H-2/H-4 glide-bomb successors identical to J-SOW, etc.

 

In any case, here are my specific projections.

 

Ra'ad is the originator of Pakistan's ALCM capabilities, I see it evolving. For example, it wouldn't surprise me if the Ra'ad airframe were further developed into possessing a lower RCS (i.e. being stealthier). In addition, this could see an increase in range, thereby crossing the 350km mark and possibly touching alarmingly strategic milestones. In parallel, Ra'ad may also find itself watered down to below 300km in range with the benefit of being lighter and smaller, thereby allowing a single JF-17 to load out on multiple ALCMs.

 

Another develop I see happening is a replacement for H-2 and H-4. Imagine something identical to J-SOW and JSOW-ER. The core capabilities to produce a low-RCS airframe clearly exist, it's just a matter of applying the glide-bomb technology to it. Why? Basically to extend the range and to deal with issues such as weight, so as to make it easy as possible for use on JF-17s and potentially other platforms. 

 

 

 

 

[platinum786]

Considering we have the technology to make most modern missiles, i think we should look at working on the cutting edge. I've always though we could benefit from trying to be 1 step ahead. For example, one thing Pakistan doesn't have is SAM systems developed in-house. Why not start development on a S-300 equivalent in house, see what you can come up with. It may not have the same range, it may not be able to track and engage as many targets, it may not even have the same hit rate, but how close to that can they comfortably get?

 

Concurrently work on scramjet engines, see if Pakistan can manage to develop one of those. A SAM with the speeds a scramjet engine could provide would be game changing. It could be at least twice as fast as current sams, maybe even up to 4 times as fast. The possibilities could extend to anti ship missiles, or even to standard ballistic missiles. This is what the USA/China/Russia are working on, It doesn't mean we should wait for them to develop it first (obviously budget limitations mean exactly that).

 

What about the potential to use a railgun for anti missile defence? It may not be viable on the sea, but land based, i don't see why not.

 

I just think we need to help ourselves by thinking outside the box sometimes.

[Alpha1cavalier]

Any Update On MIRV capability? and I agree with @ Plati  

we desperately need to work on SAMs

[Saqr]

plati,

 

I agree, SAM development is a must, but I have a feeling that it's a bit more difficult to undertake than land-attack solutions. These days, surface-to-air missiles tend to possess the speed to intercept targets moving at supersonic speeds. Generally speaking, it seems that development experience in the area of air-to-air missiles tends to contribute to the development of SAMs. On that note I think it'd be wise for Pakistan to engage in a joint-venture with another country (e.g. Brazil and/or South Africa) in order to develop a short-to-medium range SAM system that could be used by each of the service branches. This system could be used to learn the foundations, and with another partner (e.g. China), Pakistan could develop a medium-to-long range SAM system. We'd need a solid 10-15 years.

 

As for anti-ship missiles, I think the core competencies are already present. If Pakistan is indeed producing its own turbojet engines (for missiles), it's likely that it's JVs with Turkey and China will result in faster and better turbojet (or even turbofan) designs. The main challenge would be in the area of guidance and targeting technology, but that could be acquired off-the-shelf from many suppliers, and learned indigenously over time. However, given how supplies from China are quite stable, I don't think developing an AShM is on the list. I wouldn't say Pakistan's being confident about its ties with China, but rather, with a tight budget it has to prioritize, and I think LACM and other A2G solutions are on top for development.