Armed forces lose sleep over delivery systems

[sudhir007]

Armed forces lose sleep over delivery systems - India - The Times of India

NEW DELHI: Instead of being all aflutter over the raging controversy on whether India has a credible thermonuclear or hydrogen bomb, the armed
forces are more worried about the delivery systems — the yet-to-be-fully proven Agni missiles and the still-to-be-developed SLBMs (submarine-launched ballistic missiles).
‘‘Nuclear weapons are not war-fighting weapons. But without reliable and secure ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missiles) and SLBMs, it’s difficult to even brandish a credible deterrent,’’ a top military officer said on Tuesday.

‘‘Even a small stockpile of nuclear warheads, whether they are 25 kiloton fission bombs or the much-larger thermonuclear ones, is enough to deter an adversary only if you have tried and tested delivery systems and command and control structures for an effective second-strike,’’ he added.

This comes in the backdrop of two successive failures of the Agni-II missile, with a strike range over 2,000-km, on May 19 and November 23. There have also been reports in recent days that Pakistan now has a nuclear arsenal of 70-90 warheads compared to India’s 60-80.

India has no ICBM or SLBM at present. While China has always been far ahead in the strategic missile arena, even Pakistan has now nudged ahead of India in this as well, as reported by TOI earlier.

Be that as it may, DRDO seems quite confident of India’s nuclear and missile arsenal. After former Atomic Energy Commission chairman Anil Kakodkar, it was DRDO chief V K Saraswat’s turn on Tuesday to reject doubts raised by nuclear scientists like K Santhanam and P K Iyengar about the credibility of India’s nuclear deterrence.

Santhanam, associated with the Pokhran-II tests, has maintained the 45-kiloton thermonuclear device tested in 1998 was actually ‘‘a fizzle’’ and not the success it has been proclaimed to be. Saraswat, however, said, ‘‘In terms of deterrence, India has the capability which it needs to have. Any deterrence is the function of what is the threat against which you are creating it and in that particular aspect, we are totally self-sufficient,’’ said Saraswat.

 

[Conqueror]

There are some of patriotic Indians who would disagree with what you are saying, but generally and internationally, this is known that Indian Missiles are behind dependable benchmarks.

 

[DeathGod]

There are some of patriotic Indians who would disagree with what you are saying, but generally and internationally, this is known that Indian Missiles are behind dependable benchmarks.

India's main delivery mechanism for nuclear deterence is by Air power( much like the US in late 1940's and a few decade afterwards ) . Now although there is a problem in this because aircrafts can be shot down but I think with the size of IAF and the number of nuclear devices that India has I think its credible enough. Though I have no doubt that Agni should be tested a 1000 times more.

 

[shchinese]

India's main delivery mechanism for nuclear deterence is by Air power( much like the US in 1942 ) . Now although there is a problem in this because aircrafts can be shot down but I think with the size of IAF and the number of nuclear devices that India has I think its credible enough. Though I have no doubt that Agni should be tested a 1000 times more.

The US tested/dropped any nuke in 1942?

trust me, you even don't have the least knowledge to discuss in such topic. why don't just stop posting and dreaming of the 1000 agni tests?

 

[DeathGod]

The US tested/dropped any nuke in 1942?

trust me, you even don't have the least knowledge to discuss in such topic. why don't just stop posting and dreaming of the 1000 agni tests?

Hello

The text was just meant to represent that US's policy for a very long time had been deterence through the use of AIRCRAFTS( from conveyors to other bombers like peacemaker, dont make me dig into the info regarding a seperate strategic command for nukes made by US based on their bombers ). Is it that hard to understand? The date given by me is just an indicative year when the premilinary delivery mechanism would have been devised.

 

[shchinese]

Hello

The text was just meant to represent that US's policy for a very long time had been deterence through the use of AIRCRAFTS( from conveyors to other bombers like peacemaker, dont make me dig into the info regarding a seperate strategic command for nukes made by US based on their bombers ). Is it that hard to understand? The date given by me is just an indicative year when the premilinary delivery mechanism would have been devised.

the topic of this thread is about delivery systems, the context of this thread is about how to carry nuke.

the biggest problem I have with indians are you guys never admit your own mistakes. no matter how tiny it is, you lie. you lack the courage to admit the mistake -- that makes indian and Chinese so different.

 

[DeathGod]

the topic of this thread is about delivery systems, the context of this thread is about how to carry nuke.

the biggest problem I have with indians are you guys never admit your own mistakes. no matter how tiny it is, you lie. you lack the courage to admit the mistake -- that makes indian and Chinese so different.

hahahaha I edited my post after you pointed some misunderstanding language and thanked you for it.It would help if you dont say things as if you know every Indian, Generalizing is bad for the state of mind.

 

[shchinese]

seriously man in how many threads does this shchinese goes to spread verbal diarrhea??somebody ban him

is this post personal attack against other members??

reported.

 

[faithfulguy]

India's main delivery mechanism for nuclear deterence is by Air power( much like the US in late 1940's and a few decade afterwards ) . Now although there is a problem in this because aircrafts can be shot down but I think with the size of IAF and the number of nuclear devices that India has I think its credible enough. Though I have no doubt that Agni should be tested a 1000 times more.

I hope the Indian politicians and scientists do no think like you do. Otherwise, India is doom to fall behind Pakistan and Iran forever.

The US had B29, B47 and then B52 as the delivery system to deliver their bombs deep into soviet union. The soviets came up with interceptors to shoot them down. Where is the Indian air force equavelent of B52? Does India has a fleet of strategic heavy bombers ready to penetrate the enemy airspace?

The reality today is that the anti aircraft system such as s-300 series can easily defeat B52. That is why the only credible long range bombing fleet in the world is B2 spirit. In another word, only the has strategic bombers. India, like China and Russia, has zero strategic air fleet.

 

[faithfulguy]

By reading the article, i sense that military and political officials in India always compare the strength of India against that of China. No wonder a lot of Indian poster on here are so anti-Chinese.

 

[rajeev]

I hope the Indian politicians and scientists do no think like you do. Otherwise, India is doom to fall behind Pakistan and Iran forever.

The US had B29, B47 and then B52 as the delivery system to deliver their bombs deep into soviet union. The soviets came up with interceptors to shoot them down. Where is the Indian air force equavelent of B52? Does India has a fleet of strategic heavy bombers ready to penetrate the enemy airspace?

The reality today is that the anti aircraft system such as s-300 series can easily defeat B52. That is why the only credible long range bombing fleet in the world is B2 spirit. In another word, only the has strategic bombers. India, like China and Russia, has zero strategic air fleet.

You must kidding right? How can you compare US with India? US's defense budget is 600 b$, whereas India's is 30 b$. US goals are to dominate the world and have an ability to have war with two to three countries at the same time, whereas India's objective to defend its boundary and project its power in its immediate surrounding. I am sure when China if it will ever start surveillance on India, India will start looking for counter measure. But so far, even with some border skirmishes there is peace between India and China.
Pakistan will never be peaceful with India and it is only a matter of time when next coup will happen and to find a reason they will start a war with India or send another bunch of terrorists to India.

 

[faithfulguy]

You must kidding right? How can you compare US with India? US's defense budget is 600 b$, whereas India's is 30 b$. US goals are to dominate the world and have an ability to have war with two to three countries at the same time, whereas India's objective to defend its boundary and project its power in its immediate surrounding. I am sure when China if it will ever start surveillance on India, India will start looking for counter measure. But so far, even with some border skirmishes there is peace between India and China.
Pakistan will never be peaceful with India and it is only a matter of time when next coup will happen and to find a reason they will start a war with India or send another bunch of terrorists to India.

As many of the posters from India like to compare with other countries, I believe that eventually, they would like to be compare with the US. US does not look to dominate others, it only seek peace and maintain peace even when multiple militants are causing trouble.

I think Pakistan will be peaceful with India if India allow people in the dispute kashmir to have self determination. Otherwise, India is occupying that area by force, no different than how China now occupy Tibet. India in this case is not a true democracy, or only as democratic as China is.

 

[DeathGod]

--- crap----

The US had B29, B47 and then B52 as the delivery system to deliver their bombs deep into soviet union. The soviets came up with interceptors to shoot them down. Where is the Indian air force equavelent of B52? Does India has a fleet of strategic heavy bombers ready to penetrate the enemy airspace?

The reality today is that the anti aircraft system such as s-300 series can easily defeat B52. That is why the only credible long range bombing fleet in the world is B2 spirit. In another word, only the has strategic bombers. India, like China and Russia, has zero strategic air fleet.

Well all you said is correct without a measure of doubt however you overlooked a very important point( maybe you couldnt help & brag about the US or wanted to belittle ones thinking).

The main enemies of India ( for which the nuclear deterence is required ) are Pakistan and China. US needed those long range bombers not to have a mere deterence but utterly destroy USSR. India on the other hand has no such plans. She just wants to have a minimal nuclear deterence. The IAF's Mirage 2000(to the best of my knowledge) & Su-30 MKI can carry tactical nukes and their numbers in IAF suggests that they will be more than capable of fulfilling this role.

I am posting a piece published in Outlook". Its an old one but gives an insight into the IAF's role in nuclear detterence.

"The IAF has identified three fighters—Mirage 2000, the Jaguar and the recently acquired Sukhoi 30—if India ever needs to carry out a nuclear attack. In fact, pilots who fly the Mirage 2000 have been trained to toss dummy nuclear warheads just as they begin a steep climb into the skies in order to escape the aftermath. "We would narrow down the choice to a hit squad of either Mirage 2000s or Su-30s," says one defence official.



Furthermore, I have conceded earlier also that India needs to keep on building missiles and more importantly test them dozens of times before we can have two reliable sources for nuclear detterence( aint talking about arihant just yet because its very far fetched).

 

[faithfulguy]

Well all you said is correct without a measure of doubt however you overlooked a very important point( maybe you couldnt help & brag about the US or wanted to belittle ones thinking).

The main enemies of India ( for which the nuclear deterence is required ) are Pakistan and China. US needed those long range bombers not to have a mere deterence but utterly destroy USSR. India on the other hand has no such plans. She just wants to have a minimal nuclear deterence. The IAF's Mirage 2000(to the best of my knowledge) & Su-30 MKI can carry tactical nukes and their numbers in IAF suggests that they will be more than capable of fulfilling this role.

I am posting a piece published in Outlook". Its an old one but gives an insight into the IAF's role in nuclear detterence.

"The IAF has identified three fighters—Mirage 2000, the Jaguar and the recently acquired Sukhoi 30—if India ever needs to carry out a nuclear attack. In fact, pilots who fly the Mirage 2000 have been trained to toss dummy nuclear warheads just as they begin a steep climb into the skies in order to escape the aftermath. "We would narrow down the choice to a hit squad of either Mirage 2000s or Su-30s," says one defence official.



Furthermore, I have conceded earlier also that India needs to keep on building missiles and more importantly test them dozens of times before we can have two reliable sources for nuclear detterence( aint talking about arihant just yet because its very far fetched).

I guess if India is strategically looking to use Mirage 2000 as its main delivery system, the title of this thread more than appropriate. Soon, Pakistan and Iran would be far ahead of India. These countries would be able to blanket India with nukes as India scramble its Mirage 2000.

 

[rajeev]

As many of the posters from India like to compare with other countries, I believe that eventually, they would like to be compare with the US. US does not look to dominate others, it only seek peace and maintain peace even when multiple militants are causing trouble.

Yes, Indians compare themselves with Pakistan and to a lesser extent with China because those are only two countries that have warred with India. Like you would not find Indians comparing to US, UK, Germany, Japan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Burma or Bhutan because Indians don't see a threat emanating from these countries.

Now regarding your comment that US does not look to dominate others, history shows otherwise. US invades whichever countries it decides! It attacked Iraq for no good reason, similarly for Vietnam, similarly proxy war with Russia on Afghanistan, etc. So if go by history, your conclusion does not look obvious.

I think Pakistan will be peaceful with India if India allow people in the dispute kashmir to have self determination. Otherwise, India is occupying that area by force, no different than how China now occupy Tibet. India in this case is not a true democracy, or only as democratic as China is.

You have no idea what democracy is! India allows free and fair elections that available for any one to contest and become a minister. There are some separatists in Kashmir and there was a news just few days how they were agents of Pakistan and trying to create a momentum. For some reason, this separatists found that they have cannot win any election, so some sort to violence and others sort to protest - which is allowed freely in the country. Ofcourse, now if some protestors want to stone the cops what do you expect any cop would do? Just get a clue from Copenhagen climate change activists!

Now you reason, just because Pakistan wants Kashmir, they have the right to promote terror, have paid agents to act as separatists. When some separatists want to seek peace with the state, they are shot.

China is no comparison to India. In India, separatists still protest, people can assemble peacefully and shout whatever heck they want. In China, they are killed. Just writing an article against the regime will entitle you a 15 year prison sentence. It is not just Tibetans, it is Ulghers, Tinemann square protesters. I can confidently say such things don't happen in India.