Pakistan test its first cruise missile "BABUR"

[pshamim]

Mysterious,

Your post is after the fact. It says that Pakistan is about to test when the test had already taken place and news already posted in the thread.

Please make sure when posting if the news is latest and no one else has posted it. Thanks.

 

[mysterious]

Thats why I made it CLEAR that the newspiece I'm posting was published before the test had taken place. The thing is, after that test took place, there was no word on the 'cold launch' part which the pre-test report hinted at. Therefore, I was just putting my curiousity about this out there for people to ponder up on and post their views.

 

[hovercraft]

the informations shown on wikipedia and other web sites are shown dimensions of babur that is 7m, and babur is not looking 7m long, and if you see wing span, and diameter of babur which is shown in these sites is too similar with tomahawk,

babur,
length 7m, dia .520m, wing span 2.67m

tomahawk
length 20ft, dia 21inch, wing span 8' 7"

these are to much same charactiristics but tomahawk has range of 1800km+ and babur range is 500km. this thing is looking unreal.

i think actualy babur's length is not 7m or 20/21 feet, it is looking 4 to 5 meters in his pictures.
and i attached a pic of tomahawk compare it.
think on it.

 

[gf0012-aust]

i think actualy babur's length is not 7m or 20/21 feet, it is looking 4 to 5 meters in his pictures.

why the heck would the manufacturer state that the missile is not the correct length???

you can't judge length without any reference to scale - thats ridiculous

and i attached a pic of tomahawk compare it.
think on it.

what? there's nothing to think about. again, you can't judge length without any reference to scale - thats ridiculous

a picture comparison is absolutely meaningless unless they are scaled or side by side.

 

[hovercraft]

why the heck would the manufacturer state that the missile is not the correct length???

you can't judge length without any reference to scale - thats ridiculous



what? there's nothing to think about. again, you can't judge length without any reference to scale - thats ridiculous

a picture comparison is absolutely meaningless unless they are scaled or side by side.

http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/showphoto.php/photo/13236/cat/3860

see this pic, is it looking 21 feet or 7 m long?
Don't you have idea that what is length of 7m long object. Goverment of pakistan never issued actual dimensions of babur cruise missile, i said that these are dimensions of tomahawk, which has range of 1800km+, but babur's range is 500km, if both missiles are in same dimensions and same design then why babur's range is less then 1/3 of tomahawk?
in these and also in previous pictures babur is not looking 7m long, (in appearence) and i too said this, babur is not LOOKING 7m long, and if both missiles are in same size then why babur's range is less then 1/3?
i am civil engineer i am able guess the dimensions very well. see how many people standing in front of missile, take humen width in your mind and thier distance from missile and camera distance from both.
Just needs commen sense.

 

[gf0012-aust]

see this pic, is it looking 21 feet or 7 m long?

It looks like 21ft - approx 1/3rd of a cricket pitch.

Don't you have idea that what is length of 7m long object.

Yes I do, see above.

Goverment of pakistan never issued actual dimensions of babur cruise missile,

Where did the PakMilitary data come from then?

i said that these are dimensions of tomahawk, which has range of 1800km+, but babur's range is 500km, if both missiles are in same dimensions and same design then why babur's range is less then 1/3 of tomahawk?

in these and also in previous pictures babur is not looking 7m long, (in appearence) and i too said this, babur is not LOOKING 7m long, and if both missiles are in same size then why babur's range is less then 1/3?

Are you being serious? since when did one countries missile dimensions become a reference point of capability/comparison for another countries missile? What does that tell you about the design of the missile if the absolute range figures are so glaringly different? You do realise that the Tomohawk range varies between models as well - so assuming that Tomahwak is a reference point then it doesn't necessarily mean that its based on the longest range version.

Physical dimesions have very little credibility as an absolute comparison model - the fact that there are range differences means that there are some blatant generational and/or engineering differences within.

i am civil engineer i am able guess the dimensions very well. see how many people standing in front of missile, take humen width in your mind and thier distance from missile and camera distance from both.
Just needs commen sense.

then I'm really questioning that you're a civil engineer if you are struggling to see that that missile in the PakDef "family photo" is not close to 21ft long. There are some fundamental clues in the "family photo" shot that give you a reference spot. The fact that you made prev excessive claims about guidance also seems to point out that you're unaware of what and how missiles are directed to target.

Read what Mysterious said to you earlier.

 

[hovercraft]

ok then see a little mathematical prove, of what i think.

 

[gf0012-aust]

ok then see a little mathematical prove, of what i think.

but your basic dimension assumptions are possibly flawed.

there is a military research officer to the immediate left of the launcher.

lets assume that he's 1.65m (all the RO's in the front row look reasonably tall)

you could top and tail 3.5-4 of those staff researchers and meet the approx length of the missile (incl booster)

also, the ladder at the back is a giveaway. typical spacing between rungs is .3-.4m. The launch vehicle is approx 2 vehicle widths (std military width for a medium bridge dual carriage) away. so there is a depth of field "loss"

the bottom line is that either PakMilitary have no idea of the dimensions (is that likely?) and made them up, or someone is lying about the absolute dimensions of the missile.

that latter is unlikely as the job of a military photoanalyst is to measure the dimensions of the missile against known variables, ie they will already know the dimensions of the launch vehicle and can therefore make a judgement against the weapons system. if a foreign MPA established that the dimensions were different, then you'd see traffic on the net somewhere in one of the generic sites.

there is no way that the missile is just 5m.

if it is then you might as well start a conspiracy theory - as PakMil fostering a lie about absolute weapons dimensions makes no sense at all.

the end result is that its irrelevant and academic to your argument about absolute range,

missile range is determined by engine type, engine efficiency, burn rate, on board storage, efficiency of the booster and the efficiency of the missile as the fuel load degrades, efficiency of the missiles engines at degrading weight rates. - Its got nothing to do with comparative dimensions to a current model Tomahawk (which has double the range of earlier models anyway)

Addit: One other thing. AFAIK Pakistan still builds carriaged weapons to the NATO max height requirement of under 5.5m. Assuming that this is the case, and that the max height of the trailered system is 5m - then you can see that its damn close to 7m.

 

[hovercraft]

Why you are seeing people in this case, or depth of field, consider if distance of missile from camera is 5m and its length is looking short, then in same ratio its width too looks short.
And if we know displacement of any two points in the picture, then this thing is count as scale. With this scale we are able to measure distance between any two points of same depth within the picture. No need to see distance from the camera or objects, which are present in front or in back.
And for extra precautions I take approximate angle too, because camera axis is not perpendicular to missile and depth is not same in start point and end point.

"Missile range is determined by engine type, engine efficiency, burn rate, on board storage, efficiency of the booster and the efficiency of the missile as the fuel load degrades, efficiency of the missiles engines at degrading weight rates. - It’s got nothing to do with comparative dimensions to a current model Tomahawk (which has double the range of earlier models anyway)"

Yes these things count, but they don’t make difference of 1800 - 500 = 1300km.
Actually missile is around 5m/16.5feet long, so it has low space for fuel and has short range.
And if you want to analysis the picture, then try again. I think many times on it, and I said this very carefully, and I am surprising to see that you are hesitating now too, even it is not enough important that Babur’s length is 7m or 5m.
The informations shows on net or web sites are not accurate all time, it is not wise thing to believe on these informations with closed eyes.
I showed my thoughts and calculations with a prove, believe or not.
As you wish.


Admin Edit: Resized. Doubling the text size doesn't add momentum to the debate Please also learn to edit text properly when quoting other posters comments

 

[gf0012-aust]

This is the final comment on this as it's become a pointless exercise.

Why you are seeing people in this case, or depth of field, consider if distance of missile from camera is 5m and its length is looking short, then in same ratio its width too looks short.

so you want to do a tactical capability analysis based on the way that it looks? you can't be serious?

And if we know displacement of any two points in the picture, then this thing is count as scale. With this scale we are able to measure distance between any two points of same depth within the picture. No need to see distance from the camera or objects, which are present in front or in back.

And for extra precautions I take approximate angle too, because camera axis is not perpendicular to missile and depth is not same in start point and end point.

Yes, and the basic reference point is the ladder - as it is the easiest thing to judge on scale. Now unless Pakistani soldiers have 1m strides, then the rungs will be between 30cm and 45cm gaps. The industry std is 30-35cm for a ladder

Yes these things count, but they don’t make difference of 1800 - 500 = 1300km.

Oh for goodness sake, of course it makes a difference - its a technology generation and capability issue. It's also what technology is being used. Thats basic rocket and missile science

Actually missile is around 5m/16.5feet long, so it has low space for fuel and has short range.

its interesting then that similar sized missiles have a greater range - its got nothing to do with the absolute dimensions - its got everything to do with the technology used within those dimensions.

And if you want to analysis the picture, then try again. I think many times on it, and I said this very carefully, and I am surprising to see that you are hesitating now too, even it is not enough important that Babur’s length is 7m or 5m.

Of course its important - length and weight impact upon logistics and usability issues.

The informations shows on net or web sites are not accurate all time, it is not wise thing to believe on these informations with closed eyes.

The issue is not closed eyes, but using logic. eg the basic measurable reference point which is on the vehicle and can be estimated - ie the steps on the ladder.

I showed my thoughts and calculations with a prove, believe or not.
As you wish.

and your logic is flawed. you don't understand the basic concepts that range is determined by available technology within a dimension and are arguing a case on "look and feel issues" - that's not analysis at all.