11 Feb '13: Pakistan conducts test fires of two Hatf-IX Nasr BRBMs

[The Deterrent]

Babur being by the fact that it is a cruise missile, will always be limited by its range, dimensions and size of warhead it can carry.
At present it can carry 300 Kg Warhead ..yield of such a warhead will only be slight better than a Tactical nuclear weapons... giving only few kilotons..unsuitable for large cities.

Yes, that is why I always refer to it by limited second-strike capability. Moreover the chances of its interception are probably higher than BMs.
I don't think it would matter if it destroys half a city or full.

 

[notorious_eagle]

So what stops India to find and destroy the 'rain of fire' type missiles's launcher with its cruise missiles before it launches the first drop!

Nothing stops India from doing that. But its a shoot and scoot type strategy. The vehicle will launch its load, and than scoot from the area of action. IA would first have to find the vehicle, keep a lock on it and than mobilize a response. It is definitely possible to take out this vehicle, but i would argue that the advantage is on the side of the Nasr due to its mobility and fast reaction time. NATO had a hard time detecting and engaging Iraqi Scud Missile launchers during Desert Storm, and IA does not even come close to the level of fire power, sophistication and the level of reccon level that NATO possessed.

 

[Cheetah786]

See you have no NFU policy. You will be the one who will use Nukes first.Indians are going o die in millions anyway.

I a mtelling you that even if you fire nukes on us and kill millions of Indians BUT we don't fire back with nukes, your country will go down the drain.

So either you use nukes or not, your country will loose the most.

Win Win for India.

I was reading posts on Indian defense forum where they claim if Pakistan's nukes were to fall on India people can simply run under ground to the subways and nothing will happen you are here claiming few million dead which one is it .

 

[ares]

It works like this, as soon as the order goes out to fire a tactical nuke, expect the Command and Control Centre to issue the order to start assembling our strategic nukes. If we see the Indians mating their strategic nukes, expect the PA planners to have their fingers on the nuke triggers. If we see Indian nukes on our radar screens, expect the PA to launch our nukes immediately. Thus, its your call, do you want to loose an entire division or your entire country as PA can now mount more than one hundred nukes.

But the thing is..in very new future a sizable portion of Indian warheads will be on SLBMs..already assembled and ready to fire at moments notice.

SLBMs launched off the coast of Pakistan..will have two to five minutes fly time to their targets.You will not see the Indian response coming until it has already hit its intended target.

So question is. can you risk loosing your entire nuclear strike capability..even before you have exhausted your conventional response capability...just so that you can fire a small nuclear warning shot.

 

[JonAsad]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=572167639478610

 

[Windjammer]

Here you go guys, first image of today's test of NASR Missiles.

 

[Rocky25]

Similarly Pakistan is not bound to any no first use policy. Put cold start in cold and avoid flying nukes.

Pakistan does not have any no-first use policy! So what will you do if the Cold start actually worked and Indian army is inside 30 KM within the time Pakistan could stop inside Pakistani heavily populated territory? Still the so called 'Tactical' nukes would be used?

 

[The Deterrent]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=572167639478610

Video Grabs:
Looks like there were four missiles in the launcher, but only two were fired.

 

[Armstrong]

So what stops India to find and destroy the 'rain of fire' type missiles's launcher with its cruise missiles before it launches the first drop!

Nothing does; thats what a bloody deterrence is for !

You guys still don't get it do you ? Pakistan will never take out Mumbai nor will India take out Lahore for the probable response to any of that is more devastating than any of us can care to imagine. For every Mumbai that burns dozens of our cities will burn & for every Lahore that burns dozens of your cities will burn; so the use of the Strategic Nuke is pretty much out of the question but it serves a deterrent which is that our city centers are safe just as your city centers are safe from any Nuclear Strike.

But when it comes to the Tactical Nukes, the deterrent has just been devolved to a whole different level. It is ludicrous to assume that Pakistan lobbing a tactical nuke against an advancing Indian Armour Column is going to invite a disproportionate response from the Indian side in taking out Lahore & vice versa were the Indians doing that again. It is even more moronic to assume that somehow India would take out our launch sites, our mobile launchers, our air bases with their nuclear armed aircrafts, our surface ships armed with Baburs & our future prospected submarines armed with Baburs, all in a preemptive strike without Pakistan mustering even a half arsed response. One nuke is all that it takes to kill millions of Indians & one nuke is one too many. Even the United States doesn't know where all our Nuclear Facilities are never mind our much more mobile assets & we're assuming that India, which is No United States, has the capability of taking out Pakistan's Second Strike without us even catching a whiff of it.
What is more surprising is the assumption as if Pakistan would lob our tactical nukes onto Indian Divisions without having even a single Strategic Nuke armed & ready for firing just in case.

So my friend with the advent of the Tactical Nuke in the Indo-Pak theater the time for wars is gone; the best we can hope for is a protracted stand-off like the '01s or a sorry excuse for a border skirmish. Our fights are going to be proxy fights from henceforth, media wars & economic leveraging....nothing militarily in the future.
@Hyperion @notorious_eagle

 

[The Deterrent]

Here you go guys, first image of today's test of NASR Missiles.

The best EVER photo of Nasr. Hats off to the photographer, the editor
...and of course the uploader.

 

[Rocky25]

Whole point of using Nasr would be to nullify armored and mechanized divisions that must have been gathered somewhere near Pakistan border. Looking at Nasr's range, 60KM tells us the story that when Nasr would be used, Indian mechanized decisions would be fairly close to Pakistan border. Do you think that will be happening at the time of peace? I think not. If your concern is firing a Nuke would trigger war then bringing mechanized divisions to border would probably not?

So you mean to say that the Nasr will nullify the Indian mechanized division... but not the Pakistani mechanized division facing the Indian one!

Cold start is rapid thrust! So the aim (Read again, it is just the 'aim' not capability) is Indian tanks will first come into the contact of the Pakistani Tanks ASAP! so in this instance the Nasr will be fired?

What if India opens a front in heavily populated areas! Will a Nasr be fired on that instance as well?

 

[KRAIT]

I was reading posts on Indian defense forum where they claim if Pakistan's nukes were to fall on India people can simply run under ground to the subways and nothing will happen you are here claiming few million dead which one is it .

You pick. What seems rational to you. An average Joe on IDF or me ?

 

[IamINDIA]

i agree the missile has been designed to try and avoid amd systems, but one can clearly tell there is a lot of baseless hype.....no way any country can claim that a missile has been designed to defeat all known amd systems. especially Pakistan because it doesn't have any experience with proven amd shield.

 

[Manticore]

its a terminal stage supersonic rocket. not a CM.

Looks like a quasi ballistic missile (also called a semi ballistic missile)

http://www.defence.pk/forums/land-warfare/104441-quasi-ballistic-missiles.html

_________________________MISSILE
A missile is a guided weapon having the ability to control its trajectory. It may or may not be propelled by a rocket.
Many (but not all) guided missiles use rockets as their principal source of propulsion eg sidewinder





______________________BASED ON TRAJECTORY

* A quasi ballistic missile (also called a semi ballistic missile) is a category of missile that has a low trajectory and/or is largely ballistic but can perform maneuvers in flight or make unexpected changes in direction and range.

At a lower trajectory than a ballistic missile, a quasi ballistic missile can maintain higher speed, thus allowing its target less time to react to the attack, at the cost of reduced range.

* A ballistic missile is a missile that follows a sub-orbital ballistic flightpath with the objective of delivering one or more warheads to a predetermined target.

* cruise missilies are terrain hugging missiles which are self-navigating, and can fly on a non-ballistic, extremely low altitude trajectory


_______________________BASED ON RANGE

*tactical ballistic missile : range is less than 300 kilometres
*(BRBM): Range less than 200 km
*(TBM): Range between 300 km and 3500 km
*(SRBM): Range 1000 km or less
*(MRBM): Range between 1000 km and 3500 km
*(IRBM) or long-range ballistic missile (LRBM): Range between 3500 km and 5500 km
*(ICBM): Range greater than 5500 km
*(SLBM): Launched from ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), all current designs have intercontinental range.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
rockets

Once thrown, there is no further correction for the trajectory of that rocket

The term "rocket" has been used ever since the Chinese first built them with black powder 500 years (?) ago even though they relied on the oxygen in the air to burn. In modern day dialogues, the use of the word "rocket" implies that a liquid fueled engine has it's own oxidizer on board, typically LOX. But not always.

Solid fueled boosters are said to use a propellent that contains it's own oxidizer so the inconsistency spreads the confusion. They too are rockets but we call them "boosters". Why? I haven't a clue!




projectile, bullet
Cannon shells are referred to as "projectiles" or "shells" when over a certain diameter and bullets when smaller.


http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/99968-medium-range-ballistic-missiles.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/99878-standoff-missiles.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/103666-guided-missiles-working.html



Pakistani Quasi ballistic missiles and comparison with their contemporaries
_________________________________________________________________


Hatf IX (NASR) - pakistan

Operationalrange range of 60 +km, carries tactical plotonium based nuclear warheads of appropriate yield

Guidancesystem INS , GPS and electro optical guidance seeker for terminal giudance -high accuracy, shoot and scoot attributes.

Platform--SINGLE TEL--2 box tubes launcher/ vehicle

Manouverability-- control surfaces behind the nose and at the tail

Propellant [as in most missiles , read the above qoute before spamming]- solid state rocket

Pakistan Military Review: Hatf IX NASR Multi Tube Ballistic Missile System

 

[Windjammer]

@AhaseebA , a few of these beauties deployed on the battle field and even armed with cluster munitions and the devastation of any aggressor is complete.