Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

BharadwajV · Post by **BharadwajV** » 11 Dec 2015 12:56

RAWALPINDI: Pakistan on Friday conducted a successful test of the Shaheen-III surface-to-surface ballistic missile, a statement from Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) confirmed.

The missile is capable of carrying nuclear and conventional warheads to a maximum range of 2,750 kilometres. The test flight was aimed at validating various design and technical parameters of the weapon system.

Pakistan successfully test fires Ghauri Missile

“The successful flight test with its impact point in the Arabian Sea, validating all the desired parameters, was witnessed by senior officers from Strategic Plans Division, Strategic Forces, scientists and engineers of Strategic Organisations,” the statement said.

Director General Strategic Plans Division, Lieutenant General Mazhar Jamil lauded the efforts of the scientists and engineers on achieving the significant milestone.

“Pakistan desires peaceful co-existence in the region for which nuclear deterrence would further strengthen strategic stability in South Asia,” he said.

Further, he appreciate the dedication and commitment of those involved in making the launch a success, while expressing confidence over Strategic Command and Control System and the Strategic Forces’ operational preparedness to defend against any aggressive design.

Both Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and President Mamnoon Hussain have congratulated those involved on the successful test of the missile launch.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/1008173/pak ... i-missile/

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 11 Dec 2015 13:10

It looks exactly like Shaheen II.

BharadwajV · Post by **BharadwajV** » 11 Dec 2015 14:23

Aditya_V wrote:It looks exactly like Shaheen II.

Answered by Lt. Col Mullah Syed "Self Destruct" Abdul from the Army's SFC

It has an updated paint job, with a greener shade of green.
And has the Islamic launch sequence countdown: Starts from Zero and takes off at 72.
We have also had a major breakthrough with the instructions leaflet provided as we are using an updated Korean to Urdu Dictionary, ~~to increase interoperability between the various non-uniformed Jehadi factions and the sole Uniformed Jehadi organisation.~~ which helps us in firing the missile.
Several(One) innovations made by our esteemed scientists(me) include the addition of a red button in the Samsung Laptop(provided by the OEM) allowing for the initiation of self destruct sequence.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Dec 2015 15:08

member_27581 · Post by **member_27581** » 11 Dec 2015 16:58

the nose cone is red. Have they stopped painting it green/brown in irshad bhai's workshop. Or is cost saving on the paint?

Jokes apart, is there any impact on heat absorption characteristics due to color? Or does it vary only with the paint material

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 11 Dec 2015 17:06

ranjan.rao wrote:the nose cone is red. Have they stopped painting it green/brown in irshad bhai's workshop. Or is cost saving on the paint?

Jokes apart, is there any impact on heat absorption characteristics due to color? Or does it vary only with the paint material

I would think any paint is purely cosmetic and would ablate during the ascent phase itself due to heat and friction. If anything, the paint may serve as color coding - e.g. red = dummy, green = real deal.

arun · Post by **arun** » 13 Dec 2015 07:15

X Posted from the STFUP thread.

Green on Green Intra-Mohammadden violence as the Un-uniformed Jihadi’s of the Taliban take on the Uniformed Jihadi’s of the Punjabi dominated military of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to prove who is more green. RFE/RL affiliate Radio Mashaal reports that the Un-uniformed Jihadi’s of the Taliban have taken responsibility for two attacks targeting present and retired member/s of the Uniformed Jihadi’s :

Taliban Claims Responsibility For Two Pakistan Attacks

arun · Post by **arun** » 13 Dec 2015 07:33

X Posted from the STFUP thread.

In the Green on Green Intra-Mohammadden struggle in North Waziristan dubbed Zarb-e-Azb between the Uniformed Jihadi’s of the Punjabi dominated military of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Un-uniformed Jihadi’s of the Pathan / Pushtun dominated Taliban to determine who is the Greenest of them all, the Uniformed Jihadi’s claim losing 488 of their own with 1,900 injured while killing 3,400 of their erstwhile strategic assets:

Pakistan: 3,400 Militants, Nearly 500 Soldiers Die in Counterinsurgency Operation

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 13 Dec 2015 14:14

488 soldiers. That approaches the yearly peak we saw in J&K through the 1990s.
http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries ... alties.htm

BharadwajV · Post by **BharadwajV** » 15 Dec 2015 17:13

Rawalpindi - December 15, 2015: Pakistan today conducted a successful flight test of Shaheen 1A ballistic missile. The flight test was aimed at re-validating several design and technical parameters of the weapon system. Shaheen1A is capable of delivering different types of warheads to a range of 900 kilometers.
Today’s launch with impact point in Arabian Sea was witnessed by senior officers from Strategic Plans Division, strategic forces, scientists and engineers of strategic organizations.

Director General Strategic Plans Division, Lieutenant General Mazhar Jamil, congratulated the scientists and engineers for their dedication, professionalism and commitment towards yet another display of strengthening Pakistan’s defence. Shaheen-1A with its sophisticated and advanced guidance system makes it a highly accurate missile system. He reiterated that Pakistan’s strategic capabilities are based on Credible Minimum Deterrence and desire for peaceful co-existence in the region.

The successful test launch has been warmly appreciated by the President and Prime Minister of Pakistan who congratulated the scientists and engineers on achieving another outstanding milestone

https://www.ispr.gov.pk/front/main.asp? ... r_link3129

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 15 Dec 2015 19:07

Do paki missiles ever reach their target? No mention of radar tracking or ships at sea tracking the splashdown.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 16 Dec 2015 00:53

Viv S wrote:Pakistan to stick with RD-93 engine for JF-17, say PAF officials

Reuben F Johnson, Dubai - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly

18 November 2015

A Pakistan Air Force JF-17 Thunder making the type's first European display at the Paris Air Show on 15 June. Source: IHS/Patrick Allen

The Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) has no plans to replace the JF-17 fighter's Klimov/Sarkisov RD-93 powerplant despite Chinese suggestions otherwise, according to Pakistan Air Force (PAF) officials.

While several, non-specific statements have been made by representatives from Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) during the past few months, a PAC senior representative recently told IHS Jane's , "We are completely satisfied with this Russian-made engine.

"When we designed the JF-17 we evaluated a number of design alternatives and we determined that the RD-93 in this single-engine installation is absolutely right for this application," he said. "We worked extensively with the people from Klimov bureau in St Petersburg [Russia] and this engine turned out to be an ideal solution."

PAC representatives added that the next step is to establish a full-scale servicing and overhaul facility for the RD-93 at their plant in Kamra.

"What does this tell you?" asked one programme officer rhetorically. "If the situation was as it has been portrayed at times - that we are just utilising the RD-93 as a temporary solution until the Chinese can 'save' us with their own new engine - then we would not be expending the resources to set up this overhaul base. For us, changing to another engine would not make any sense and would be disruptive and cause a huge expense for the JF-17 programme."

PAF officials told IHS Jane's at the 2015 Dubai Air Show that improvements to the JF-17's design and the reliability of the RD-93 have attracted a number of interested parties.

"The experience at [the Paris Airshow in] Le Bourget brought about 11-12 countries that approached us with some interest in a JF-17 acquisition," said one of the officials. "Out of all of those there are today some four or five customers that we regard as being serious prospects in the near term." PAC representatives declined to name any of those countries, however.

ANALYSIS - by IHS Janes
The course charted for the JF-17 now demonstrates an increasing level of independence by the PAF from the aircraft's original Chinese design team at Chengdu, according to analysts of China's defence sector. The JF-17 programme not only has no plans to introduce a Chinese-made engine in place of the RD-93, but Pakistan is also in the process of replacing other Chinese components in favour of alternative options.

Representatives from the different PAC branches state that the China Electronics Technology Corporation (CETC) KJ8602BC radar warning receiver that has been installed in the aircraft up until now will be replaced by a new system produced by Indra in Spain. The Indra system will be retrofitted to existing aircraft, as well as into new-build models coming off the line in Kamra.

An additional conclusion is that Russian concerns expressed in the early stages of the JF-17 programme that providing an engine for the Pakistan fighter would hurt Russian industry's business interests in India seem to no longer be a factor.

"India is in a tough situation today," said one Russian industry analyst. "They do not have too many options that are practical beyond programmes like the Sukhoi Su-30MKI [Russian-designed fighter]. Western aircraft like the Rafale have turned out to be too expensive for New Delhi to acquire in large numbers, so the options presented for them now by Russia may end up being the only choices that can provide the capacity they need at a price they can afford."

member_27581 · Post by **member_27581** » 16 Dec 2015 02:41

Bheeshma wrote:Do paki missiles ever reach their target? No mention of radar tracking or ships at sea tracking the splashdown.

Unlike the SDREs who define their targets using Newtonian mechanics, their targets are defined using uber advanced quantum mechanics. As per KRL's equations, they have found out that missiles have pre-ordained targets and follow a GBM path, hence their missiles reach that automatically.
Anyways even a Madarsa going kid knows that if it's a nuclear mizzile it doesnt make difference if it falls few 1000Kms away or takes a lateral trip to parallel universe along the 11th dimension.

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 16 Dec 2015 02:49

Blast from the past.

Levitating packees.

arun · Post by **arun** » 16 Dec 2015 10:34

X Posted from the STFUP thread.

Uttam wrote:Cross-posted.....

BREAKING NEWS: Terrorism sponsors form a anti-terror coalition

Muslim Nations Form First Islamic Coalition Against Terrorism

A coalition of Muslim nations will form a joint operations room in Riyadh to combat terrorism in Islamic countries, in the first coordinated Muslim military effort to combat extremism.

The military coalition includes 34 nations and is backed by 10 others, Saudi Arabia’s Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is also the kingdom’s defense minister, said in a televised press conference Tuesday. The coalition includes Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Morocco, Bangladesh and Turkey, according to the official Saudi Press Agency.

The grouping of Muslim nations will confront any terrorist threat, including Islamic State, and coordinate with “globally important countries and international organizations,” he said.

The decision to form the coalition is part of a broader effort by Saudi Arabia to establish itself as the leader of the Sunni Muslim world’s battle against terrorism. It’s unclear how such a coalition would function across the Islamic world and if countries would allow it to conduct military operations within their own borders. ..................................

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan, at least the Civilian Bureaucracy portion, says surprised to read the news that Saudi Arabia had named Pakistan as part of the 34-nation military alliance of 9Sunni?) Mohammadden countries meant to combat (Shia?) Mohammadden terrorism.

A case of:

1.The Punjabi dominated Military doing the usual thing of striking out on their own while keeping the civilians in the dark?

2.The Saudi Arabian’s accidently letting slip the secret involvement of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in a Sunni Military coalition which has as its principle unstated aim, the aim of nobbling Shia Mohammadden Iran in order to prevent an sectarian fall out within the Islamic Republic?

Pakistan surprised by its inclusion in military alliance

Baqir Sajjad Syed — Published about 4 hours ago

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan found itself in the crosshairs of Middle Eastern politics on Tuesday as Saudi Arabia named it as part of its newly formed 34-nation military alliance of Muslim countries meant to combat terrorism, without first getting its consent.

Talking to journalists, Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry said he was surprised to read the news that Saudi Arabia had named Pakistan as part of the alliance.

He said he had asked the country’s ambassador in Riyadh to get a clarification from Saudi Arabia on the matter.

Another senior official also confirmed that Pakistan was not consulted before inclusion in the alliance.

From Dawn at the below weblink:

Clicky

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 16 Dec 2015 10:42

^^^^ we have a proverb in my native. "Looks like you are going to scold me, let me beat you by my scolding you first".

Muslim countries want to be seen as part of the solution when they themselves know that many of them are part of the problem. Before someone comes and says let us attack all Islamic nations, they pose like they have the organizational mettle to band together, look beyond their own differences and fight terror. It is a meek attempt at saving face. 4 or 5 nations, understandable, 34 is just laughable.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Dec 2015 10:45

can someone tell why we are shitting bricks about 1-engine landing on the Mig29K when the TSP is happily running the same engine for years on dozens of 1-engine JF17?

BharadwajV · Post by **BharadwajV** » 16 Dec 2015 12:03

Singha wrote:can someone tell why we are shitting bricks about 1-engine landing on the Mig29K when the TSP is happily running the same engine for years on dozens of 1-engine JF17?

Not the same engine, Sirji..
The Sea Wasp(RD33MK) is the most modern variant from the Klimov bureau featuring a FADEC unit and further improvements.
The NauSena needed MiG to qualify the 29K for Single Engined Carrier landing for additional safety and since we got them before the RN did.

The Indian Navy has reportedly asked Russia to prove single engine landing of the MiG-29K on the INS Vikramaditya aircraft carrier as a safety measure in case one of the two engine fails on India’s only carrier based fighter.

The Hindu newspaper reported last week that the Russian side will be carrying out the proving trials on its own carrier in Russia, Admiral Kuznetsov.

Quoting an unnamed Indian official, the report said, “The aircraft is just too good and has a very powerful engine. To allay the fears of pilots, we have asked Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG to prove single-engine landing of MiG-29 K on board the Russian carrier Admiral Kuznetsov. This will happen in a fortnight.”

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/12299/ ... nESBFV97IU
Ganja's Joint.........Fighter 17 gets the RD33 baseline variant(Corrections would be welcome).
Even our "Upg" 29s get the Series 3 RD33 with enhanced MTBO, low smoke etc.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 16 Dec 2015 12:05

Singha wrote:can someone tell why we are shitting bricks about 1-engine landing on the Mig29K when the TSP is happily running the same engine for years on dozens of 1-engine JF17?

Cause TSP is using these hanger queens while thier 80 odd F-16's do the hard work, only time it tried to do a 6.5g move it crashed, not BVR capable. They have H&D nothing else in JF 17, it cant complete a full loop.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 16 Dec 2015 17:46

arun wrote:X Posted from the STFUP thread.

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan, at least the Civilian Bureaucracy portion, says surprised to read the news that Saudi Arabia had named Pakistan as part of the 34-nation military alliance of 9Sunni?) Mohammadden countries meant to combat (Shia?) Mohammadden terrorism.

A case of:

1.The Punjabi dominated Military doing the usual thing of striking out on their own while keeping the civilians in the dark?

2.The Saudi Arabian’s accidently letting slip the secret involvement of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in a Sunni Military coalition which has as its principle unstated aim, the aim of nobbling Shia Mohammadden Iran in order to prevent an sectarian fall out within the Islamic Republic?

Pakistan surprised by its inclusion in military alliance

Baqir Sajjad Syed — Published about 4 hours ago

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan found itself in the crosshairs of Middle Eastern politics on Tuesday as Saudi Arabia named it as part of its newly formed 34-nation military alliance of Muslim countries meant to combat terrorism, without first getting its consent.

Talking to journalists, Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry said he was surprised to read the news that Saudi Arabia had named Pakistan as part of the alliance.

He said he had asked the country’s ambassador in Riyadh to get a clarification from Saudi Arabia on the matter.

Another senior official also confirmed that Pakistan was not consulted before inclusion in the alliance.
From Dawn at the below weblink:

Clicky

They seriously have no shame or spine. Looks like their lies are now part of their DNA.

Its an open secret that they hosted drones on their soil to attack their own folks, all authorized while claiming that USA is violating them. Well... it was rape b/w consenting adults.

Now this, everyone knows SA practically owns them and probably boots are already on the ground to support their offensive. And when cought with their pants down the same lies all over again. BS.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 19 Dec 2015 22:20

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 19 Dec 2015 22:30

^^ Truly the TSPAF will do anything for publicity. Can anyone even imagine a foreign reporter being taken around on combat ops by the IAF showing off its sensitive capabilities in this manner. Bizarre.

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 19 Dec 2015 22:34

Karan M wrote:^^ Truly the TSPAF will do anything for publicity. Can anyone even imagine a foreign reporter being taken around on combat ops by the IAF showing off its sensitive capabilities in this manner. Bizarre.

It might be a way of showing how US equipment is being used to combat insurgency and/or posturing for UAV baksheesh.

BharadwajV · Post by **BharadwajV** » 19 Dec 2015 22:37

Which FLIR does the IAF use on the Veiled Viper?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 19 Dec 2015 22:59

KrishnaK wrote:
Karan M wrote:^^ Truly the TSPAF will do anything for publicity. Can anyone even imagine a foreign reporter being taken around on combat ops by the IAF showing off its sensitive capabilities in this manner. Bizarre.
It might be a way of showing how US equipment is being used to combat insurgency and/or posturing for UAV baksheesh.

Yes, true but they went overboard. Now for instance a C-130 will be a high value target in any conflict especially if ground ops are being undertaken since India now knows these birds will be used for ground surveillance. I mean, their bragging went above & beyond PR.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 19 Dec 2015 23:00

BharadwajV wrote:Which FLIR does the IAF use on the Veiled Viper?

The same, Star Safire - III. But until the PAF bragged about how its using it for ground ops, the IAF may have not known this dual tasked mission for PAF C-130s.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 20 Dec 2015 01:01

IAF C-130Js were always intended to be used for spec ops, and kitted out accordingly. Not quite MC-130J, but more than the average joe Hercules.

The display aboard the C-130. No P-8I this.

Installed aboard Mi-17:

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 20 Dec 2015 02:28

The Pakistanis biggest gain from the farcical war on terror where the Americans paid them blood money more or less, even as the Pakistanis backstabbed them daily, has been (IMHO) the huge number of JDAMs and Paveways the PAF got, plus the AMRAAMs & the TOW-2s plus Harris radios, NVGs Pak Army would have received. These directly influence our ability to wage a swift war on our terms. All this while we got the most corrupt 3'rd rate, Pak pasand Govt with MMS and gang in power. Truly a multi year bonanza for Pakistan.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 20 Dec 2015 21:20

The Helos have Pak army camouflage pattern. But why not the Army sign?

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 20 Dec 2015 23:18

Paul wrote:The Helos have Pak army camouflage pattern. But why not the Army sign?

Hmmm this particular one may be one of the set that was leased from US DoD.

It is clearly a specialist aircraft. Note the square windows and all sorts of external attachments.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 23 Dec 2015 04:18

Singha wrote:can someone tell why we are shitting bricks about 1-engine landing on the Mig29K when the TSP is happily running the same engine for years on dozens of 1-engine JF17?

because of the possibility of a "bolter"- where the arresting hook doesn't engage with the arresting wire and the aircraft has no other option but to engage full thrust and take off again for a go-around followed by another approach and attempt at hooking the arresting wire. a single engined MiG-29K would have half the thrust generally available to it when it lands on the carrier.

Eric Leiderman · Post by **Eric Leiderman** » 23 Dec 2015 08:27

Kartikji understood the bolter issue. However all naval aircraft should have a fuel dump option
So in an emergency situation where fuel and munitions are dumped, a bolter on one engine should be able to do it.
The f18 with a lower t/w ratio than a '29 manages it. Somebody has to auctually try it. The russians are not interested in trying same out.
Some guru with TW / velocity /lift calculations. Beyond my league.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Dec 2015 08:38

Eric Leiderman wrote:Kartikji understood the bolter issue. However all naval aircraft should have a fuel dump option
So in an emergency situation where fuel and munitions are dumped, a bolter on one engine should be able to do it.
The f18 with a lower t/w ratio than a '29 manages it. Somebody has to auctually try it. The russians are not interested in trying same out.
Some guru with TW / velocity /lift calculations. Beyond my league.

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 4#p1954874

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 23 Dec 2015 22:48

Eric Leiderman wrote:Kartikji understood the bolter issue. However all naval aircraft should have a fuel dump option
So in an emergency situation where fuel and munitions are dumped, a bolter on one engine should be able to do it.
The f18 with a lower t/w ratio than a '29 manages it. Somebody has to auctually try it. The russians are not interested in trying same out.
Some guru with TW / velocity /lift calculations. Beyond my league.

The MiG-29K would be able to dump fuel but there has to be enough for at least a couple more approaches and attempted landings, plus enough to use the afterburner to generate adequate thrust so that the aircraft can still take off in such a short distance on just one engine.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 Dec 2015 07:27

this is a test we ourselves can easily do in the fake runway in goa. ... though I suppose if the thrust is not quick enough to engage it is equally dangerous on land....OEM has got to do the math for various configs and help us out.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 24 Dec 2015 09:29

And we cant rrisk a Pilot life or an aircraft. Both are too precious for us.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 Dec 2015 10:10

Unless I am mistaken landing speed is always higher than take off speed. Takeoff velocity has to be higher than stall speed and there should be no risk of stall while landing - hence higher speed approach. Carrier landing approaches are fast and steep, and in an emergency the carrier will be moving full speed against the wind giving a relative windspeed of 30-40 kt (50 plus kmph). So a single engine landing and subsequent takeoff should be feasible in a MiG 29 provided stores and fuel are dumped

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 Dec 2015 10:15

Singha wrote:this is a test we ourselves can easily do in the fake runway in goa. ... though I suppose if the thrust is not quick enough to engage it is equally dangerous on land....OEM has got to do the math for various configs and help us out.

No need to put anyone at unnecessary risk. Use a long runway to approach on one engine, touch down, then immediately accelerate on one engine and measure the parameters achieved - ensuring there is enough runway ahead to land if takeoff parameters are not safe after single engine touch and go. In practice the ship will give and extra 50 kmph of headwind by sailing full zip against the wind.

All civil twin engine airliners are capable of single engine takeoff on a full load in case of bird ingestion.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 Dec 2015 11:14

IN must know something we dont know. afaik civil jet engines take about 30 seconds to spool to full thrust after the levers are pushed all the way forward, maybe the Mig29 is not so hot in that time curve as well

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 Dec 2015 18:45

^^afterburners?