New BVR missile deployed by PAF??

[MohammedA]

http://www.dawn.com/2003/12/18/top10.htm

PAF adds new bombs to its arsenal


By Arshad Sharif

ISLAMABAD, Dec 17: Pakistan Air Force has integrated the H-4 out-of-sight target bombs in its arsenal of fighter aircraft, official sources said. The incorporation of H-4 bombs have added to the capability of the PAF to hit out-of-sight targets from a distance of up to 120 kilometres to evade enemy radars during air strikes. A lighter version of the bomb, H-2 model, can hit the out-of-sight targets from a range of up to 60 kilometres.

"It is a step towards adding the Beyond Visual Range (BVR) missiles to our arsenal for defensive purposes and to address the strategic imbalance in the region," sources said.

The indigenously produced H-4 bombs is an achievement of the National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM), which works in close collaboration with Pakistan Missile Organizationand the Air Weapons Complex.

"Three successful tests of H-4, with the latest conducted this year, produced satisfactory results leading to addition of arsenal in the fighter jets," the sources said.

The H-4 bombs have been made through indigenous efforts by modifying the technological design of South African T-Darter BVR missiles. Till the induction of JF-17 Thunder in 2006, with a provision for BVRs, the H-2 and H-4 bombs could be carried by Mirage fighter jets. The H-4 infrared device is said to be comparable to that of the AA11, AA12 and Python 4 in the Indian arsenal.

Moreover, the sources said, fighter aircraft in PAF's arsenal have the "provision" to be fitted with precision-guided munitions and BVR missiles. When asked about advantages of BVR in Indian arsenal, PAF spokesperson Air Commodore Sarfaraz said: "We are aggressively trying to utilize whatever equipment we have to its optimum operational limits through professional training and by pursuing high standards of maintenance."

Mr Sarfaraz said: "We are aware of our technological needs and are vigorously trying to meet those requirements either through procurements or indigenous developments."

The European and the US suppliers were currently not willing to share the technology with Pakistan. However, contacts were being established with China, defence sources said, adding that JF-17 Thunder (to be inducted in 2006), F-16s and the Mirage aircraft in Pakistan's fleet all had the provision to be fitted with BVRs once the technology and the missiles would be acquired.

[zeeshan]

assalam o alaukum,

what a retard who ever wrote this report....what is he trying to say? that its a BVR bomb? is it AAM or a standoff weapon? if its derived from Darter T then its defenietly a radar guided AAM not infrared homing and cant have a range of 160km. are we talking about a standoff missile which Pakistan bought from South Africa? what are we talking about here?

[Noman]

This reporter has obviously mixed up three different projects here. But the important thing is that the H-2 and the H-4 are finally coming 'out of the closet'.

H2 is the Raptor 1.
H4 is the MUPSOW.

You can scope them out on

http://www.armada.ch/99-3/001.htm

And yes, we have both!

[Sultan]

O thank God Pakdef is back online.... this story broke on Pakistanidefence and as anybody who has read the pulitzer winning article written by the eminent Arshad Sharif will be as confused as I am right now as to what exactly is the H4 and H2!!!!

Noman as you seem to be the only one who knows what he's talking about then are u absolutely sure its the Raptor and the Mupsow and not a BVR??

Also, that retard Sharif goes on to call it indigenous... whats he on about if its the Mupsow and raptor??? Did Denel give us a ToT???

[SyedA]

Noman

its neither Raptor nor MUPSOW. We already have MUPSOW. This one is a BVR missile most likely a variant of Darter.

[Noman]

Noman

its neither Raptor nor MUPSOW. We already have MUPSOW. This one is a BVR missile most likely a variant of Darter.

H2 and H4 were the 'NESCOM' internal designations for the Raptor and the Mup (during project development anyway).
As I said, the reporter has mixed up THREE different projects.

As you said, we already have the MUPSOW, but both these projects have never been officially acknowledged, until now, sort of. This looks like a start, and PROBABLY (my guess), by know PAF's requirements may well have been met, or about to be, and they are setting stage for a public test of the weapons, in front of Foreign Military Attaches to drum up export orders.

The public test was supposed to happen a few years back, but was cancelled due to border tensions at that time.

The tests went ahead, but not publicly, hence previous reports of BVR UFO's being sighted .

[Sultan]

Interesting stuff Chursy er I mean Noman....

you mentioned that the reporter mixed up three different projects.

Now if what you state is correct than the H4 is the Mupsow, the H2 is the raptor but what is this third project you have repeatedly mentioned??

Am I to assume its a BVR AAM.. if so which one ... SD 10? or T Darter?

[Muhammad Hasan]

The H-4 bombs have been made through indigenous efforts by modifying the technological design of South African T-Darter BVR missiles. Till the induction of JF-17 Thunder in 2006, with a provision for BVRs, the H-2 and H-4 bombs could be carried by Mirage fighter jets. The H-4 infrared device is said to be comparable to that of the AA11, AA12 and Python 4 in the Indian arsenal.

Now this is the most disturbing of all. If it is an Air-To-Surface munition, than what does it has to do with T-DARTER`s technology. And how does an Air-To-Surface munition be compared to the IR device of an AAM ???

A reporters mistake ???

[SyedA]

For the last time, it was an AAM......

[H Khan]

What AC Sarfaraz is clearly alluding to is a AAM not a AGM or similar. MUSPOW and RAPTOR were sold to Pakistan by RSA Kentron company in September of 1995. Next year, 1996, KSA company called Aerosud/Marvol sold three or four Cheetah C & D to PAC/PAF as a test bed for future joint-venture programs between two countries.

The Air-to-Air missile and Air-to-Ground projects at NESCOM are prefixed has "H" that as "Hawa" air. H-2 and H-3 are MUSPOW and RAPTOR respectively and H-2 and H-4 are AAM. It has been said that PAF bought Kentron U-Darter because it is a very improved copy/version of Matra R-550 Magic and no one from outside would be able to differentiate between these two different AAM since they look similar in appearance. I can say with certainty that H-4 is BVRAAM.

[SSAAD]

What AC Sarfaraz is clearly alluding to is a AAM not a AGM or similar. MUSPOW and RAPTOR were sold to Pakistan by RSA Kentron company in September of 1995. Next year, 1996, KSA company called Aerosud/Marvol sold three or four Cheetah C & D to PAC/PAF as a test bed for future joint-venture programs between two countries.

The Air-to-Air missile and Air-to-Ground projects at NESCOM are prefixed has "H" that as "Hawa" air. H-2 and H-3 are MUSPOW and RAPTOR respectively and H-2 and H-4 are AAM. It has been said that PAF bought Kentron U-Darter because it is a very improved copy/version of Matra R-550 Magic and no one from outside would be able to differentiate between these two different AAM since they look similar in appearance. I can say with certainty that H-4 is BVRAAM.

I tend to disagree here and agree with Noman!

The munitions talked about are standoff weaponry.

If these had been BVR missiles, then can someone explain the following statement?: "defence sources said, adding that JF-17 Thunder (to be inducted in 2006), F-16s and the Mirage aircraft in Pakistan's fleet all had the provision to be fitted with BVRs once the technology and the missiles would be acquired."

Is it not clear by the statement of the above source that we currently do not have the BVR missiles?

Curse these reporters for further confusing an already confused Pakistan watchers' community!!
;-)

[H Khan]

Except that the reporter used the word "bomb" no where one can deduce the word AGM. Pakistan has done extensive work on making dumb bombs into PGM but as far as I know they have not yet reviled any plans on manufacturering AGM.

[yasser]

I take it we now have superiority in air to air weapons over India!?

Y

[omar]

I take it we now have superiority in air to air weapons over India!?

Y

Way too early to be making statements like that.

[SSAAD]

I take it we now have superiority in air to air weapons over India!?

Y

I am not convinced that this is an AAM. I think our parity will come with SD-10.

Just so I understand the argument about the AAM, are members saying that the munitions being talked about include an SRAAM and a MRAAM/BVRAAM?

What is the dilio with Pakistan looking for an BVRAAM (actually indiginously producing) beyond SD-10? Surely Pakistan cannot come up with a BVRAAM on its own when Chinese have been working on it for the last 10 years and that too with input from the Israelis off and on.

[Murad]

I take it we now have superiority in air to air weapons over India!?

Y

Yasser, on what basis do you say that? India has a very large number of aircraft with a wide variety BVRAAM, plus a large number of aircraft with high-of boresight SRAAMs. Only when we have SD-10, T-Darter / derivative, and a better SRAAM than AIM-9L/M/P on a significant number of aircraft can we achieve parity with them.

[Sultan]

I am not convinced that this is an AAM. I think our parity will come with SD-10.

Just so I understand the argument about the AAM, are members saying that the munitions being talked about include an SRAAM and a MRAAM/BVRAAM?

What is the dilio with Pakistan looking for an BVRAAM (actually indiginously producing) beyond SD-10? Surely Pakistan cannot come up with a BVRAAM on its own when Chinese have been working on it for the last 10 years and that too with input from the Israelis off and on.

The AAM in question is alleged to have been based on the Darter series. Im guessing we bought the designs and with technical assistance from Kentron NESCOM produced the H series. SD10 probably ddnt fit the bill or for marketing purposes Pakistan prefers to offer an alternative indigenous ('evolved' from S. African which in turn 'evolved' from Western ech.) weapons suite to that being marketed by China to promote the JF17 thunder for those states that are not too keen on chinese tech. e.g. Gulf states, S. America etc.

Out of all the explanations provided I think that a combo of Noman's and H Khan's is the most feasible. Afterall why stop cooperation with Kentron on just a specific munition i.e. AGM etc. when they have an entire inventory to fulfill the PAF's badly needed requirement for SRAAM/BVRAAM, LGBs and SOWs?? More to the point I assume that all the above mentioned munitions have been acquired with a ToT of some sort ad heav S. African assistance...... based upon Nomans assesment whereby the long running raptor and mupsow projects are to be demonstrated to defenceattahes for potential export orders.

[zeeshan]

http://www.nescom.gov.pk/

check out the chairman is Dr. Samar Mubarakmand from Ghauri project.

[RMS Azam]

H-4 is supposed to be a BVR AAM based on the T-Darter but I doubt the range of 120 km. It was tested on Mirages earlier this year, if you remember. I think Pakistan will also go for the SD10.

[FarazA]

H-4 is supposed to be a BVR AAM based on the T-Darter but I doubt the range of 120 km. It was tested on Mirages earlier this year, if you remember. I think Pakistan will also go for the SD10.

I don't think that 120km for a AAM is that long, it is only about 60miles right? but for a Bomb I think even 60Km is pretty long range.

[uazim]

http://www.nescom.gov.pk/

check out the chairman is Dr. Samar Mubarakmand from Ghauri project.

From Shaheen project.

[Sultan]

In regards to the issue of why Pakistan is simultaneouly pursuing the H4 and the SD10 I doubt that the PAF actually does require both AAMs but rather it could be down to different companies competing to secure the contract for the BVR AAM programme? We all know that the H4 has been developed by a NESCOM subsidiary (whoever that is?) and Im guessing that the SD10 is being developed and marketed jointly by a rival Pakistani company in collusion with their Chinese counterparts (irrespective of the fact that both Pakistani companies are state run) .

[Behjat]

Salaam,

As they say, there's three kinds of people in the world. The kind that canb count and the kind that can't.

Interesting stuff Chursy er I mean Noman....

you mentioned that the reporter mixed up three different projects.

Now if what you state is correct than the H4 is the Mupsow, the H2 is the raptor but what is this third project you have repeatedly mentioned??

Am I to assume its a BVR AAM.. if so which one ... SD 10? or T Darter?

[majithia]

http://www.nescom.gov.pk/

check out the chairman is Dr. Samar Mubarakmand from Ghauri project.

Last year, I had the privilege to explore couple of positions at NESCOM in electronics and computer group but due to paucity of time did not translate into a job offer.

[Noman]

Ok...there have been a lot of comments, so first let me first try to bat some of the bouncers ...


SyedA wrote...

Noman

its neither Raptor nor MUPSOW. We already have MUPSOW. This one is a BVR missile most likely a variant of Darter.

and


I quote from the article...

"Till the induction of JF-17 Thunder in 2006, with a provision for BVRs, the H-2 and H-4 bombs could be carried by Mirage fighter jets."

The reporter has mentioned three distinct systems here, clearly differentiating between the BVR (which may be the future AAM) and the H's (which are current ASM's), and, he is correct here.



For the last time, it was an AAM......


Can't really argue with "last time"'s ....so ....time will tell.



Sultan wrote...

Now if what you state is correct than the H4 is the Mupsow, the H2 is the raptor but what is this third project you have repeatedly mentioned??


Read the quote from the article....hope things are less blurry now ? You should really lay off the hard stuff you know!



HKhan wrote...
H-2 and H-3 are MUSPOW and RAPTOR respectively and H-2 and H-4 are AAM.


So....whats the difference between the H-2 and ... the H-2 ?????? is it a AAM variant of the MUPSOW?
Can we blame an unenlightened reporter, when mistakes are also made in this forum of experts ??



Behjat wrote...
As they say, there's three kinds of people in the world. The kind that canb count and the kind that can't.


Yup, and we know who they are, don't we

---------

Now lets dissect the article itself....


Basically this article tries to discuss three projects which PAF has inducted and/or is planning to induct. 2 BVR ASM's and an AAM. To be absolutely clear the term BVR can be used for both ASM's and AAM's, although in this article BVR may NOT necessarily be for the AAM, more on that ahead.

Paragraph 1 - Pakistan Air Force has integrated.....

The thing to note here is the following "The incorporation of H-4 bombs have added to the capability of the PAF to hit out-of-sight targets from a distance of up to 120 kilometres to evade enemy radars during air strikes."


Air strikes are carried out against surface targets. Lending support to our ASM argument.

Para 2 - It is a step...

It mentions Beyond Visual Range, but doesn't specify AAM. Linked with the first para, this para is also essentially correct, when applied to long range ASM's

Para 3 - The indigenously produced H-4 bombs...

Support ASM argument theory.

Para 4 - Three successful tests...

Tells us the stuff's been tested thrice, but nothing more.

PAra 5 - The H-4 bombs have been made...

This is where all the confusion starts. I would read this paragraph with corrections as

"The H-2 and H-4 bombs have been made through indigenous efforts by using technological design provided by South African. The H-2 and H-4 bombs can be carried by the Mirage fighter jets.The T-Darter BVR missiles will be inducted with JF-17 Thunder in 2006, which will have a provision for BVRs. The T-Darters infrared seeker is said to be comparable to that of the AA11, AA12 and Python 4 in the Indian arsenal."

Also...if you further analyse this, an AAM with an IR seeker would most probably be a WVR missile, and NOT a BVR! Although this does not agree with what I said for the first para.


As for the rest of the article, its 230AM an I am too tired to further dissect it further <Yawn>. Maybe later.