Pakistan Armed Forces | Page 12 | World Defense

Pakistan Armed Forces

Armchair

MEMBER
Joined
Sep 21, 2019
Messages
457
Reactions
1,577 56 0
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Bangladesh
What is the future of NASR missile ?? Pakistan made it to put an end to India's cold war doctrine which we have achieved, but what is its future , Increased range to 100 km ? Capable of shooting aerial threats??? A version that can be launched from Thunders ??? Or this is as good as it gets ??? @Khafee @Zeeman

Nasr's real range is classified. I am guessing 120 kms. The level of technology demonstrated with the Nasr, makes me feel that the people that built Nasr can easily build a basic LR-SAM. If such a system can be developed inhouse, it would be a gamechanger for Pakistan.
 

Armchair

MEMBER
Joined
Sep 21, 2019
Messages
457
Reactions
1,577 56 0
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Bangladesh
Army Successfully Tests Pakistan-Made Automatic Grenade Launcher
Posted 20 hours ago by Haroon Hayder
Pakistan Army has successfully tested an Automatic Grenade Launcher named PAK-40, further consolidating the country’s defensive capabilities.

What makes the latest addition unique is the fact that it is indigenously developed at Pakistan Ordinance Factory (POF).


PAK-40 weighs around 41 Kgs and has a range of 2,200 meters. The launcher fires 40mm grenades with a radius of 10 meters and is capable of firing multiple types of grenades.
The automatic launcher can operate in temperatures ranging from 55C to -24C, meaning it can perform effectively in the arduous terrain of the Cholistan desert and the unforgiving Siachen glacier.
ALSO READThe launcher can be equipped with night vision and thermal sights as well, making it a perfect weapon to use in military operations at night and adverse weather conditions.
Moreover, PAK-40 can be easily mounted on vehicles or helicopters and requires a small team to operate it.​

I really love this weapon, although it is on the heavier side. It is the first private weapon system to used by the PA as a major weapon. Would love to see a long and healthy production run for the system.

Combine this with mortars, ATGMs and a dug in force can take on anything thrown at them. Put it on a helicopter as a door gun, or on a AC-130 type platform, and you have a COIN and mountain warfare capability at minimal cost.

Now, if only the company that made this can build Pakistan a G-3 replacement, preferably with 6.8x48.
 

Khafee

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 17, 2017
Messages
12,354
Reactions
24,510 1,297 0
Nasr's real range is classified. I am guessing 120 kms. The level of technology demonstrated with the Nasr, makes me feel that the people that built Nasr can easily build a basic LR-SAM. If such a system can be developed inhouse, it would be a gamechanger for Pakistan.
Someone on PDF had leaked about Babur2, Babur3, and Raad2. The same guy also mentioned NASR2 & 3.
 

Mechanic

MEMBER
Joined
Jun 14, 2020
Messages
163
Reactions
308 2 0
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Nasr's real range is classified. I am guessing 120 kms. The level of technology demonstrated with the Nasr, makes me feel that the people that built Nasr can easily build a basic LR-SAM. If such a system can be developed inhouse, it would be a gamechanger for Pakistan.
I was thinking it would be cool if Pakistan develops a NASR surface to air version and integrate it with mobile radars like TP-77
 

Counter-Errorist

THINK TANK
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
1,102
Reactions
2,852 149 0
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Both are mobile systems ,If they can be used together then whynot ??? I dont know any technical aspects of these equipment but if Pak could turn it into a Short range SAM system
SAMs and SSMs have very different requirements and hence characteristics.

SAMs need to be very high speed, hence lighter and carry a small warhead, mostly just to eject projectiles that are designed to split the aircraft in half when in close proximity. Their trajectory is defined to intercept fast moving targets in the shortest amount of time and space possible. Accordingly, their sensors include infra-red sensors, coupled with radars and some communication with ground and air based radars.

SSMs don't necessarily have to be high speed, rather they're designed for endurance and hence range. Their trajectories generally vary with the type of missile - some are designed to fly high and drop down at very fast velocity (ballistic), others fly low (even if slow) to stay under the radar. A lot of their time is spent cruising horizontally to reach their target with reduced fuel consumption. Their primary sensors include GPS, inertial navigation, terrain mappers, and target imaging.
 

Mechanic

MEMBER
Joined
Jun 14, 2020
Messages
163
Reactions
308 2 0
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
SAMs and SSMs have very different requirements and hence characteristics.

SAMs need to be very high speed, hence lighter and carry a small warhead, mostly just to eject projectiles that are designed to split the aircraft in half when in close proximity. Their trajectory is defined to intercept fast moving targets in the shortest amount of time and space possible. Accordingly, their sensors include infra-red sensors, coupled with radars and some communication with ground and air based radars.

SSMs don't necessarily have to be high speed, rather they're designed for endurance and hence range. Their trajectories generally vary with the type of missile - some are designed to fly high and drop down at very fast velocity (ballistic), others fly low (even if slow) to stay under the radar. A lot of their time is spent cruising horizontally to reach their target with reduced fuel consumption. Their primary sensors include GPS, inertial navigation, terrain mappers, and target imaging.
Thanks , Very informative ,So what would be the future of NASR in your opinion since Sir Khafee said there was leak of NASR2&3 on Pdf by a guy sometime back
 

Counter-Errorist

THINK TANK
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
1,102
Reactions
2,852 149 0
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Thanks , Very informative ,So what would be the future of NASR in your opinion since Sir Khafee said there was leak of NASR2&3 on Pdf by a guy sometime back
A little bit of history on Nasr.

In 2001, the attack on India's parliament happened. Blaming ISI, India decided to retaliate. The Sundarji doctrine used at that time required their holding corps to prevent any strikes from Pakistan, while sending over strike corps deep into our territory. But Indian Army was a sleeping lumbering elephant. It took them 3 weeks to gather up their strike corps for an attack. We, in the meantime, were prepared and by the 3rd week, yawning and still waiting. Musharraf, in the meantime, went on a diplomatic offensive and effectively emanated a message of sincere condolences from Pakistan. Internationally, India was under pressure to avoid any offensive, and by then, had lost critical time and justification for any aggression.

India then developed the cold start doctrine with the idea being that it could quickly launch an offensive onto us before we could muster our forces and diplomatic support. Essentially India's version of a limited Blitzkrieg. They would aim for minimal but high impact gains by launching an offensive thrust in combination with heavy armor, troops and air support. With this approach, they figured they could swiftly cause us significant damage but with minimal gains - not enough to justify a nuclear response from our end. Nasr was one of our key components to counter this new threat.

Nasr is a low-yield nuclear delivery platform. Low-yield and nuclear being key words. The genius is how we deploy them. Our nuclear missiles are traditionally handled by Army Strategic Forces Command. Nasr, on the other hand, is meant to be deployed by battlefield commanders. Meaning, a single field commander can now decide to launch a limited nuclear strike on Indian advancing forces inside Pakistani territory. The low-yield nature of the blast will limit the radiation fallout and effectively stop any Indian advance. India then gets to grimly decide what to do next. A single limited nuclear attack on attackers within the defender's territory won't be enough to justify escalation to a full-scale nuclear response. India would enrage but can only count its dead from a distance.

So in effect, Nasr nullifies India's cold start doctrine.

Now, why do we need better Nasrs?

India is looking to counter the Nasr - it's always a cat and mouse game. India has deployed mobile Quick Response SAMs (QRSAM) to be used by advancing strike corps which are meant to take down Nasrs. In addition, India can always procure anti-missile systems such as the Israeli Iron Dome to protect against Nasr. New versions of Nasrs will likely be designed to evade these systems and ensure success of a missile hit. In addition, there are always parameters of a missile that can be improved upon such as range, payload, size, launchers, etc.

Now I hope you'll see why it makes no sense to SAMify the Nasr missile. It's designed for a very specific purpose. SAMifying it would essentially mean it's a completely new missile from ground up.
 

Armchair

MEMBER
Joined
Sep 21, 2019
Messages
457
Reactions
1,577 56 0
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Bangladesh
Both are mobile systems ,If they can be used together then whynot ??? I dont know any technical aspects of these equipment but if Pak could turn it into a Short range SAM system wouldnt it be better , Since Pak has already achieve the goal that NASR was made for

It is possible to use the basic technologies in the Nasr to build an LRSAM - or so I believe. SSMs and SAMs are both high speed - supersonic in flight profiles. You'd need better control systems (larger fins or thrust vectoring) and you would need a small warhead (perhaps as little as 60 kg). The last element is to put a small radar in the nose. After that, its merely a mater of getting the FCS right.

Pakistan has pretty advanced datalinking systems in place. a LRSAM would be able to be integrated into the highly sophisticated national C4ISR.

Imagine you are an Indian AF pilot, entering Pakistani airspace. You find yourself being attacked from multiple vectors by PAF fighters, while at the same time, see a ground launched LRSAM headed your way. Your systems are jammed by EW. What would you do?
 

Mechanic

MEMBER
Joined
Jun 14, 2020
Messages
163
Reactions
308 2 0
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
It is possible to use the basic technologies in the Nasr to build an LRSAM - or so I believe. SSMs and SAMs are both high speed - supersonic in flight profiles. You'd need better control systems (larger fins or thrust vectoring) and you would need a small warhead (perhaps as little as 60 kg). The last element is to put a small radar in the nose. After that, its merely a mater of getting the FCS right.

Pakistan has pretty advanced datalinking systems in place. a LRSAM would be able to be integrated into the highly sophisticated national C4ISR.

Imagine you are an Indian AF pilot, entering Pakistani airspace. You find yourself being attacked from multiple vectors by PAF fighters, while at the same time, see a ground launched LRSAM headed your way. Your systems are jammed by EW. What would you do?
Roll over and die ?? .Well i would love to see Pak developing its own highly capable and effective LRSAM either by taking NASR as the base design or something new
 

Mechanic

MEMBER
Joined
Jun 14, 2020
Messages
163
Reactions
308 2 0
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
A little bit of history on Nasr.

In 2001, the attack on India's parliament happened. Blaming ISI, India decided to retaliate. The Sundarji doctrine used at that time required their holding corps to prevent any strikes from Pakistan, while sending over strike corps deep into our territory. But Indian Army was a sleeping lumbering elephant. It took them 3 weeks to gather up their strike corps for an attack. We, in the meantime, were prepared and by the 3rd week, yawning and still waiting. Musharraf, in the meantime, went on a diplomatic offensive and effectively emanated a message of sincere condolences from Pakistan. Internationally, India was under pressure to avoid any offensive, and by then, had lost critical time and justification for any aggression.

India then developed the cold start doctrine with the idea being that it could quickly launch an offensive onto us before we could muster our forces and diplomatic support. Essentially India's version of a limited Blitzkrieg. They would aim for minimal but high impact gains by launching an offensive thrust in combination with heavy armor, troops and air support. With this approach, they figured they could swiftly cause us significant damage but with minimal gains - not enough to justify a nuclear response from our end. Nasr was one of our key components to counter this new threat.

Nasr is a low-yield nuclear delivery platform. Low-yield and nuclear being key words. The genius is how we deploy them. Our nuclear missiles are traditionally handled by Army Strategic Forces Command. Nasr, on the other hand, is meant to be deployed by battlefield commanders. Meaning, a single field commander can now decide to launch a limited nuclear strike on Indian advancing forces inside Pakistani territory. The low-yield nature of the blast will limit the radiation fallout and effectively stop any Indian advance. India then gets to grimly decide what to do next. A single limited nuclear attack on attackers within the defender's territory won't be enough to justify escalation to a full-scale nuclear response. India would enrage but can only count its dead from a distance.

So in effect, Nasr nullifies India's cold start doctrine.

Now, why do we need better Nasrs?

India is looking to counter the Nasr - it's always a cat and mouse game. India has deployed mobile Quick Response SAMs (QRSAM) to be used by advancing strike corps which are meant to take down Nasrs. In addition, India can always procure anti-missile systems such as the Israeli Iron Dome to protect against Nasr. New versions of Nasrs will likely be designed to evade these systems and ensure success of a missile hit. In addition, there are always parameters of a missile that can be improved upon such as range, payload, size, launchers, etc.

Now I hope you'll see why it makes no sense to SAMify the Nasr missile. It's designed for a very specific purpose. SAMifying it would essentially mean it's a completely new missile from ground up.
Makes sense. Again thanks , it was very informative for me
 

Armchair

MEMBER
Joined
Sep 21, 2019
Messages
457
Reactions
1,577 56 0
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Bangladesh
Roll over and die ?? .Well i would love to see Pak developing its own highly capable and effective LRSAM either by taking NASR as the base design or something new

Well, here is what I think they would do -

1. jettison fuel tanks and any heavy strike munition
2. Turn around and return back as fast as possible.

If they wanted to fight, they are facing a very difficult problem -
1. To face PAF fighters, they have to keep their speed and energy state high.
2. However, to evade the SAM, they have to maneuver hard and lose their energy state.

Firstly, I'd have to maneuver to avoid the SAM, losing energy and opportune position, then in a weakened position, I'd have to engage the PAF pilots who are now closing in for the kill from multiple vectors.
 

Mechanic

MEMBER
Joined
Jun 14, 2020
Messages
163
Reactions
308 2 0
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Well, here is what I think they would do -

1. jettison fuel tanks and any heavy strike munition
2. Turn around and return back as fast as possible.

If they wanted to fight, they are facing a very difficult problem -
1. To face PAF fighters, they have to keep their speed and energy state high.
2. However, to evade the SAM, they have to maneuver hard and lose their energy state.

Firstly, I'd have to maneuver to avoid the SAM, losing energy and opportune position, then in a weakened position, I'd have to engage the PAF pilots who are now closing in for the kill from multiple vectors.
Wouldnt this be the same case for PAF fighters when S400 arrives
 
Top