Shaheen 2 - proliferation unlimited?

Rudra · Post by **Rudra** » 12 Mar 2004 07:14

its stands to reason that any attack on India from KSA would attract Agnis on these sites and saudi cities - whether unkil likes it or not.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 12 Mar 2004 07:37

its stands to reason that any attack on India from KSA would attract Agnis on these sites and saudi cities - whether unkil likes it or not.

Why do you insist on bringing the US into every calculation/scenario that you can dream up? KSA is totally concerned with Israel. There is not much of a chance that India and KSA would ever get into a shooting match. It's just not there. But yet you insist on hissing veiled threats to the US on every possiblity? Take some Zoloft for that obsession, will ya? Good grief.

Rudra · Post by **Rudra** » 12 Mar 2004 08:23

correction: KSA is willing to let Pak do its thing in exchange for Pak help against israel.

seeing Unkils pussyfooting on even slapping the KSA on the wrist doesnt fill me with any hope...

I will save the Maalox for when a JDAM(P) appears on horizon of a major US city - hopefully not mine ofcourse!

JCage · Post by **JCage** » 12 Mar 2004 08:31

KSA houses Mecca and Medina...and can India with its 140 million muslims afford to nuke KSA in turn?
If the Pak KSA tieup is true, its pretty clear whey the Pakis roped the KSA in. They count on us being goodie goodie while they continue being b@stards.

John_Doe · Post by **John_Doe** » 12 Mar 2004 08:37

Originally posted by nitin:
KSA houses Mecca and Medina...and can India with its 140 million muslims afford to nuke KSA in turn?
Psywar issues!

Let an Indian Muslim tell you that if a nuclear weapon that lands in India has any connection to Saudia Arabia, Most of us will support a full retaliation on Saudi, Pakistan and anyone else involved. Regardless of it being the Holy land of Islam, Saudi Arabia is not untouchable.

Some Muslims may not like it, but they will get over it or be taken care of if they agitate. In any case India can retaliate against locations in Saudi Arabia other than Mecca and Medina.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 12 Mar 2004 08:37

If KSA attacks us, I see no problem whatsoever in bombing them. We shall not bomb any holy places (and that would hold whether or not we had a minority for whom it was a holy place or not). I am 100% sure that all patriotic Indians, irrespective of faith, will come together in such a situation.

But guys, can we focus on the main issue of this thread.

JCage · Post by **JCage** » 12 Mar 2004 08:41

Sridhar noted.

John Doe, see edited post- more clearly worded.

I have no doubts as to the patriotism of Indian muslims, I have doubts as to the constraints placed on Indian decision makers and its pretty clear that the decisions will have more "variables" factored in.

Rudra · Post by **Rudra** » 12 Mar 2004 08:50

internal cohesion is never a problem in such situations - but I will bet my bottle of Maalox that SD/Powellji/london will be hard at work trying to restrain India from retaliating in whatever way they can. in exchange KSA might hand over some more mid-level Keeda types.

the report on serious prep for non-state WMD attacks in india makes me feel sick. clearly some serious intel has come in or nobody would be going to such planning/logistics given the legendary speed of our MOD. PMO must have forced a fasttrack tunnel through the bushes on this one.

JCage · Post by **JCage** » 12 Mar 2004 09:18

What makes me sick is that such stuff is expected from non state actors..who will be given the real goods by the asura's. The US will tut and we have to take the sucker punch and will do its utmost to prevent us from taking action. A few thousand Indian dead aint no skin off some State Dept guy/woman's back.
Interestingly, re: Cohesion- its interesting to note Humphrey Hawksleys thoughts on this. Chap's works reflect the attitude towards India in certain quarters...per that book (Dragon Strike), post nuke attack on delhi some peace chick leads a procession against nukes which escalate into riots when she is killed in police firing or the like. Thats what the west expects from the likes of Bidwai and Arundhati, i wager...keep the junta "down and candle kissing", even when we get nuked. Goes to show why they are feted. Useful assets, boss.
Thats what they think. In reality junta will bay for blood. And TSP will be glass.

Anyway,I shouldnt distract more from the thread topic.

JaiS · Post by **JaiS** » 12 Mar 2004 10:02

PML-QA, PML-N senators clash over missile plan

ISLAMABAD: PML-Q Senator Qazi Javed Ashraf and PML-N Senator Ishaq Dar clashed in the upper House on Wednesday on the issue of missile programme.

Qazi accused Nawaz of slashing the budget of science and technology that damaged the missile development programme.

Qazi, former DG ISI, said major credit must be given to former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto who during her second tenure approved the launching of the missile programme and gave huge budget for the purpose.

He said actually the same project was earlier given to SUPARCO but it failed to manufacture a guided missile. He said the country needed guided missiles for the safe delivery of nuclear bomb.

He said this was Benazir Bhutto who actually launched the programme and the required technology was actually purchased. He said this programme successfully continued till General Musharraf took over and gave final touches to it.

He wondered today Qazi was criticising the former prime minister who appointed him secretary. He said had the ISI chief any courage, he should have resigned from secretaryship when Nawaz decided to slash the budget of science and technology. Senators from both the sides congratulated the concerned functionaries over the testing of Shaheen-II.

Sunil · Post by **Sunil** » 12 Mar 2004 19:48

I would really appreciate it if people read this post. I think it is important and I would like to hear your views on it. I know I make boring posts sometimes, and every day I get complaints that I speak in riddles but please bear with me just this once.

Pak-Saudi nuclear cooperation does not necessarily imply India-Saudi nuclear antagonism. India does not view the world through a `Pakistan Prism'.

Saudi aid to Pakistan is an irritant in Saudi-India relations but fundamentally speaking *not even Saudi Arabia* can pull Pakistan out of its grave so it doesn't matter if Saudi Arabia pays Pakistan for making missiles and nuclear weapons. Saudi Arabia cannot feed 150 Million Pakistanis, it cannot give them water, it cannot give them food, all the Ummah-feeling in the world can't feed that many empty stomachs.

A lot depends on how a Nuclear Armed Saudi Arabia places itself in the world. We all know the role played in Islamist terrorism by Saudi charities and religious leaders, so that is something one is inclined to watch now.

If a nuclear armed Saudi Arabia continues to support Islamist terrorists by paying for the subversion of the institutions of faith, then Saudi Arabia will become another Pakistan. If on the other hand, Saudi Arabia completely stops the financial export of hate and thus exerts a positive influence on Pakistan's jihadi apparatus, then Pakistan's condition could actually improve. All of Pakistan's problems would not be solved, but there would be a marked improvement in Pakistan - which would be visible to India and maybe even the rest of the world.

At the regional level a nuclear armed Saudi Arabia will completely alter the picture in the middle east. I am not sure if the Pakistanis who advised the Saudi Government in this matter are fully capable of understanding the consequences. The Saudi Arabian monarchy must remember that the entire Arab region looks upon their conduct as a international social marker - some gauge of what constitutes acceptable behavior. So the Saudis will have to be careful about what a "Nuclear Armed Saudi Arabia" means to its neighbors. It would become very complicated if Bahrain, UAE, Dubai, etc... all were to start acquiring nuclear weapons. So these things need to be given more thought and it is not clear to me if this has already been done. If it has been done, no one has communicated on behalf of the Saudi Government.

Now I state the obvious, not because people don't know it, but because it is easy to lose sight of it:

1) I value the peace and tranquility of India more than I value some farce of an international treaty,

2) I value India's economic prospects in the Middle-East more than some hi-fi sounding declaration of principles, and

3) Most importantly I understand why a country may feel the need to acquire nuclear weapons in the face of international disapproval. I think every Indian who is aware of the state of world affairs today understands the need for the nation to sleep with a pistol under its pillow.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 Mar 2004 20:25

Me am the culprit who started this side tracking.

Could we respect Sridhar's request and take this very interesting discussion to another thread please.

Another thread started for Chicom-TSP-KSA connection and implications.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 12 Mar 2004 21:11

when there is no clean links to shaheen-2, and how does one discuss about shaheen-2. Aren't the targets for shaheen-2s part of the shaheen-2 discussion? the topic does not scope anything to that effect.

The targets of the Shaheen-II are vague at best. Nothing is known about the Shaheen-II system to say that it will actually reach its targets. An investigation of the Shaheen-2 system itself and its origins is a much more productive discussion at this time.

- Admin

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 Mar 2004 21:45

January 19, 2004 issue for Aviation Week and Space Technology, 2004 Aerospace Source Book:

Under Surface to Surface Missiles (Page 192):

People's Republic of China:

M-11::(Max L)29.8':(Body dia)3.3':(Type)Intertial:(No., Make and Model)Two Stage:(Max Range)162 NM:(Status)aka:DF-11. US Designation is CSS-X-7.Called Shaheen 2 in Pakistan. Fired from mobile launcher.

Under Pakistan:
Haft 2::(Max L)25.0:(Launch wt)11000 lbs:(No., Make and Model)Two stage rocket:(Max Range) 162 NM:(Status)Two-stage missile with a 1,100 lb payload

Other TSP missiles:
Ghauri 1: single-stage liquid: 809 NM: NK No Dong derivative. Payload 0.7 tons. Also called Haft 5
Haft 1: single-stage solid: 43 NM

BTW folks, this issue is a must read

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 12 Mar 2004 21:57

Originally posted by sunil s:
I would really appreciate it if people read this post.

Sunil,

I see Saudi Arabia as being less capable of reform than Pakistan. Sitting on the world's largest reserves of oil,they are extremely unlikely to go bankrupt any time. They are extremely dangerous, and GOTUS turns a blind eye towards them just as much as it does to Pakistan.

-Arun

abrahavt · Post by **abrahavt** » 12 Mar 2004 22:53

I find it hard to believe that the Saudis will allow themselves to be drawn into a Indo-Pak nuclear exchange and risk their own country being nuked. It is highly plausible that they are getting new Chinese missiles arranged by their good friends the Pakis and mounted on these missiles are the famous islamic bombs made by their good friends the Pakis (using their money). Since they lack the technical skills to man the missiles, they have enlisted the help of TSP, but I sincerely doubt that they would risk their country getting blown to smithereens by getting involved in an Indo-Pak fight. They are more concerned about Israel and Iran and their missile/nukes are geared to that threat. They are using the Pakis for their contacts with the chinese and for the technical know how, just as most of those Arab countries use Paki pilots to fly their airforce planes. After all they can't have the infidel chinese on their holy soil manning the missiles.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Mar 2004 01:10

Arun_S,

Can you please e-mail me at indicgroup at netscape dot net

Thanks

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 Mar 2004 01:14

http://www.hindu.com/2004/03/12/stories/2004031201871000.htm

SIGNIFICANCE OF SHAHEEN - II

James Bund · Post by **James Bund** » 13 Mar 2004 02:02

anuary 19, 2004 issue for Aviation Week and Space Technology, 2004 Aerospace Source Book:

Under Surface to Surface Missiles (Page 192):

People's Republic of China:
From AWST
M-11::(Max L)29.8':(Body dia)3.3':(Type)Intertial:(No., Make and Model)Two Stage:(Max Range)162 NM:(Status)aka:DF-11. US Designation is CSS-X-7.Called Shaheen 2 in Pakistan. Fired from mobile launcher.

Interesting support for my contention that the Shaheen is another of Pakistan's cons. AWST is considered very reliable, has connections with th e US intelligence community.

Leonard · Post by **Leonard** » 13 Mar 2004 03:30

I got a copy of pages 192 and 193 from AWST.

Paki Ding-a-lings

Ghauri

L -->48.6 Feet

Diameter ---> 3.9 Feet

Launch Weight ----> 32000 LBs

Powerplant ---> Single-Stage Liquid rocket.

Max Range ----> 809 Nautical Miles

Status/Outlook ---> Derivative of No-Dong
Also Called Hatf-5

Payload ---> 0.7 Tons

Shaheen 2

L -->29.8 Feet

Diameter ---> 3.3 Feet

Launch Weight ----> ????? LBs

Powerplant ---> Two-Stage Solid rocket.

Max Range ----> 162 Nautical Miles

Status/Outlook ---> Derivative of DF-11
Also Called Shaheen 2 in
Pakistan
Mobile Launcher

Payload ---> ????? Tons

--------------------------------------------------
DF-15 ----> US Designation CSS-6 ---> Range 324 NM

M-18 ----> Iran Designation Tandar-68
900 lb Warhead
Mobile Launcher

Sunil · Post by **Sunil** » 13 Mar 2004 03:48

Hi,

The AWST numbers look similar to an Shaheen-1.

The Pakistanis have most likely taken a ready made Chinese configuration developed for the Saudis as part of their CSS-2 upgrade in 1997 and simply re-designated it as the Shaheen-2.

The Shaheen-2 imo should simply imply that it is second solid fuel missile configuration to pass out of the PAEC's missile production and testing facility. The name says nothing about where the configuration came from or where it was intended to go.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 13 Mar 2004 04:23

The SaltLake Tribune: Pakistan test-fires long-range missile

Calvin · Post by **Calvin** » 13 Mar 2004 10:09

Folks:

What is the consensus on this thread regarding Shaheen II and the CSS2. THe CSS2 uses RFNA and Nitrogen tetroxide, which would create a reddish plume. Did the Shaheen II test have that?

COuld we create a list of Shaheen II specs, and CSS2 specs to see what significant differences there might be?

http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/wmd/ballistic/ballistic/css2-01.htm

Spec ---- CSS2 --- Shaheen II
Length - 21.2 m -
Dia ------ 2.3 m - 1.4 m
Launch Wt- 64 T -- 25T
Stages --- ........2

Also, what is the significance that the Shaheen II test being announced on 2/5, the same day that Powell and Musharraf talked and the same day that the AQK pardon was publicised? The visit to KSA came much later.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 13 Mar 2004 11:24

Seems to me like Shaheen 2 is just like Shaheen 1 is equal to M9. Or even a modernised version of M11.

S-2 looks like S-1 and does not look like parade mock up of M-18 = shaheen 2.

the band in the middle may have just been painted on.

as far ding dong is concerned then its range shoud be around 500-900km only (as there were earlier reports that it did not leave the atmosphere)

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 13 Mar 2004 21:00

Originally posted by Calvin:
[QB]Folks:

What is the consensus on this thread regarding Shaheen II and the CSS2. THe CSS2 uses RFNA and Nitrogen tetroxide, which would create a reddish plume. Did the Shaheen II test have that?

COuld we create a list of Shaheen II specs, and CSS2 specs to see what significant differences there might be?

http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/wmd/ballistic/ballistic/css2-01.htm

Spec ---- CSS2 --- Shaheen II
Length - 21.2 m -
Dia ------ 2.3 m - 1.4 m
Launch Wt- 64 T -- 25T
Stages --- ........2
QB]

Calvin: The launch video on BBC site clearly indicate that Shaheen-2 was solid fueled. It left a permament trail of soild fuel residue that is absent in liquid fueled rockets. Thus comparison w/CSS2 is not useful.

From the video I am not able to see the two sets of fins one on each stage, as seen in photos of Shaheen paraded on TSP's national day. Most news channels are showing photo's of old Shaheen without two sets of fins.

Where did you get the 1.4 meter diameter number?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Mar 2004 22:14

The CSS url states it is a liquid-fueled system.

Calvin · Post by **Calvin** » 13 Mar 2004 22:18

ArunS: The 1.4m diameter was from the GeoTV report:
http://www.geo.tv/main_files/pakistan.aspx?id=8688

Niranjan: ArunS and others are saying that the comparison with CSS2 is not valid *because* the CSS2 is liquid fueled (RFNA) and the Shaheen II appears to be solid fueled (given the resid trail).

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 14 Mar 2004 01:05

The trail Sunil and I have been following is the CSS-2 'refurbishment' not the original CSS-2. That is, under the cover of 'refurbishment', China may have supplied a new missile to the Saudis or to the Pakistanis and Saudis jointly. Fairly early on in this discussion, we realized that it cannot be the CSS-2 itself.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 14 Mar 2004 02:12

Refurbish from liquid to a solid and from a single to a two stage?

Sunil · Post by **Sunil** » 14 Mar 2004 21:00

Map of Pakistani EEZ on page six. I love environmental studies.

http://www.comsats.org.pk/latest/riffat_qureshi2.pdf

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Mar 2004 21:31

"De-fanging" Pak won't work.If you look at the missiles in Pak and Saudi Arabia in another manner,Chinese controlled missiles based there as did the Soviets with their missiles in Cuba,the plot thickens.The next country that will suddenly surprise the world with missiles is going to be Burma,where the Chinese are building a massive infrastructure for their armed forces in the future.China is quietly putting into operation a long planned strategy of establishing military bases in the IOR through arrangements with friendly Afro-Asian govts,especially those who are at the receiving end of US foreign policy.It is accelerating this policy because of the US's military intervention both in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Calvin · Post by **Calvin** » 14 Mar 2004 22:08

Phil: Did you see the articles on NK transfers of MRBMs to Burma, as well as "advisors" at Monkey Bay and NK official airlines flying into remote Burmese locations, either carrying technology for the nuclear reactor or ballistic missiles.

Vriksh · Post by **Vriksh** » 14 Mar 2004 23:52

off topic- Admin

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 15 Mar 2004 00:04

FWIW, editorial in the Pakistan Weekly (a staunch Mush critic, published out of CA):

Shaheen -II Experiment: A Prelude To Signing NPT

...but one thing is for sure that this test is announcement of Pakistan’s willingness to sign NPT and may be CTBT. Pakistan may ink NPT and CTBT as early as next month.

http://www.pakistanweekly.com/Editorial.html

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 Mar 2004 06:38

philip,

I read the artciles to mean that Chinese presence is for maintenance and not for control over the facilities, nor do they have control over policy.

What you seem to be saying is that the Chinese can use these facilites in the future for their own purposes. Conventional? I may agree. Nuclear? I am not that sure. In fact I would suspect the current dynamics will not allow it.

WRT Burma, India had better read the riot act.

(Any URLs on teh Chicom-Burma info you state?)

On teh NPT and CTBT stuff. PURE BS. sorry for teh caps.

Check which countries were involved with the Xerox LLC. Every one must have signed some sort of a treaty. What is the big deal, escapes me.

What they should do instead of having TSP sign a treaty is they should reverse the pardon that Xerox got and then take the authority to pardon away form any Pakistani. Then MAY BE I will start thinking of believeing these guys. Else give CP twice the number of air miles.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 Mar 2004 06:51

Philip,

If you look at the missiles in Pak and Saudi Arabia in another manner,Chinese controlled missiles based there as did the Soviets with their missiles in Cuba,the plot thickens

I read that again. It bothers me. Are you saying that Chicom actually controls missiles IN TSP too?

That would mean that either TSP policy dictates the behavior of Chicom or beyond a certain threshold, China has control over the policy of TSP.

I am not sure you meant to say that. But if indeed that is what you meant, then TSP is no longer a sov., state.

Sunil · Post by **Sunil** » 15 Mar 2004 18:04

Hi,

There is no way for them to test at Sonmiani and still have the thing land in Pakistani territorial waters.

If they did launch it from Sonmiani, and it did go 1800 Km, then it must have landed somewhere east of the Oman-Yemen border.

BTW here are pictures of what appears to be the same launch site firing the ghaznavi and the Shaheen.

http://www.pakistanidefence.com/images/GhaznaviPictures.htm

http://www.allworldnews.net/images/580.jpg

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1008-06.htm

http://asia.news.yahoo.com/031008/ap/kar10110081156.html

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/rdonlyres/45183455-5D D2-4D17-BBB1-DA2768E9C33B/13746/1CBB46C578C340E1987E9F7A2B33F5C6.jpg (this photo gives size information).

We should be able to construct a size ladder with these photos.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 15 Mar 2004 20:53

"The world is not going to stop us because this is a question of our national prestige," - Musharraf for more shaheen 2 missile tests.

Are the following too part of national prestige:
- cross border terrorism
- stealing and copying nuke tech
- selling nuke tech
- harbouring intl terrorists & their training camps
- 911 and misguiding world in the name of anti-terror ops.
- hawala
- illicit drugs
- dicatorship and no-religious freedom
- telling lies all times

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 15 Mar 2004 20:57

if we take average paki height as 5.8, then shaheen can't be more than 5.8x4 = 23.2 feet.
dia may be arround 4 feet.

Shaheen - I is not greater than 24 feet is my answer. But, I can be wrong since that might be a dud dummy one springing all over pakistan - you see its a national prestige!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 15 Mar 2004 22:32

Finally, the unfolding and proposed advances in India's air combat, air-defense, and long-range reconnaissance capabilities are channeling Pakistani investments into a ballistic missile-based capability for which India has no defense at present.

During the mid-1990s, China apparently transferred an entire production line for M-11s and possibly M-9s to the NDC.

Chinese assistance most likely encompassed equipment and technology transfers in the areas of solid-fuel propellants, manufacture of airframes, re-entry thermal protection materials, post-boost vehicles, guidance and control, missile computers, integration of warheads, and the manufacture of transporter-erector launchers (TELs) for the missiles.

Hatf-VI/Shaheen-II/M-18?

The NDC is reportedly also developing a 2,000-2,500km-range missile dubbed as the Shaheen-II, about which little is known.[25] Mock-ups of the missile displayed during the National Day celebrations in March 2003 suggest that it is a two-stage, solid-motor, road mobile system, transported on an 12-wheel TEL vehicle. Analysts speculate that the Shaheen-II is possibly a two-stage version of the M-9, or more likely a copy of the M-18, which was publicly displayed at an exhibition in Beijing in either 1987 or 1988. The M-18 was originally advertised as a two-stage system with a payload capacity of 400-500kg over a range of 1,000km.[26] US intelligence sources suggest that Pakistan remains heavily reliant on external assistance for the Shaheen-II program and that China is actively assisting Pakistan through the supply of missile components, specialty materials, dual-use items, and other miscellaneous forms of technical assistance.[27]

http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Pakistan/Missile/index_3066.html#fnB25

More significantly, the SRBMs lack the range to strike targets in eastern, central, and southern India. These shortcomings are expected to be addressed by the medium-range Shaheen-II and Ghauri-II programs

...

the current pattern of Chinese assistance is apparently restricted to design advice, specialty materials, missile components, guidance systems, and related dual-use machine tools and technologies.

...

Pakistan might be able to flight-test both missiles in the near-term and possibly produce a small number of prototypes for test-demonstration purposes, Islamabad is unlikely to be able to build and deploy them in large numbers. This is largely because Pakistan does not have a large and vertically integrated research, development, and manufacturing infrastructure to build long-range rockets.

..

Furthermore, it is also unclear whether China, which is in the midst of a gradual course correction in its relations with India, and already under considerable US pressure to terminate missile assistance to Pakistan, would aid Islamabad in any proposed efforts to acquire a sea-based nuclear missile capability

..

Although an Indian theater missile defense would not create a leak-proof defense umbrella, a limited missile defense coupled with improvements in Indian long-range air and satellite-based reconnaissance capabilities could severely undercut the deterrence value of a Pakistani SRBM force.

...

In the future, China could conceivably help Pakistan develop intermediate-range ballistic missile systems, land- and sea-launched cruise and ballistic missiles, and missiles with fast burning boosters using high-energy solid-propellants, multiple warheads, maneuverable re-entry vehicles, decoys, and other means to fool ballistic missile defenses.

..

see also:
http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Pakistan/Missile/3297_3299.html
Missile Imports