How can Pakistan counter India’s ABM system?

[Vijyes Yechury]

I didn't say they don't exist. I asked that u provide a source that shows the specific ability of Indian armed forces having such a capability. This means having the ability to cover Indian land mass with these jammers.

But nice attempt trying to get away with that by providing me with this commercial GPS jammer that only has a 16ft jamming radius. This doesn't prove squat about what u had claimed.

If linking a gizmodo article about a GPS jammer somehow means that Indian army has the capability to jam multiple frequencies(GPS, Beidou, etc) over such a large landmass. Then going by ur reasoning I can easily provide unrelated articles about 5th gen jets, which somehow would mean that PAF has 5th gen jets.

India hasn't disclosed such abilities yet. But here are some examples of how iran, North Korea etc used GPS jammers and anti jamming guidance development by USA -

bit(.)ly/2zcskcX

North korean GPS jammer -

bbc(.)in/2iueKaG

 

[khanmubashir]

1.Pakistan would develop , multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles (MIRVs)& maneuverable warheads through SHAHEEN3 BM & also future BM


2.Pakistan would develop submarine launched cruise missile i.e Babur cruise missile & CJ-10k in their future chinese Type 39B submarine ,which would give them sea based nuke deterrence & would ensure the survivability of its nuclear deterrent



3.Pakistan would produce more number of ballistic missiles & has increased production of nuclear fissile material like plutonium used for nuke bombs,so that it
would overwhelm india ABM shield ,by firing more missiles towards india


4.Pakistan would use of decoys (e.g., lightweight mylar balloons which, until re-entry, will travel on an identical trajectory with the heavier warheads), use of ablative materials or reflective coatings which limit the damage of directed energy weapons, launches of numerous harmless missiles early in an attack which might cause the defender reveal his defenses and expend valuable resources

5.Pakistan could acquire anti satellite weapon or jammers from chinato confuse india’s satellites,which also play a key role in India’s anti ballistic missile shield


6.Pakistan would rely more on cruise missiles like stealthy RAAD & babur for nuke deterrent they are harder to detect due to their lower radar cross-signature, low-level navigation,and use of waypoints to circumvent more secure and heavily defended areas.


7.Pakistan would seek help from from Beijing for high-altitude and anti-ballistic missile (ABM) defenses through HQ-9/ FD2000 deal


8.Pakistan would target india’s BMD Radar through long range anti radiation missile like brazilian MER-1 anti radiation missile

9.Pakistan could pursue hypersonic missile technology if they are ready to afford it.

10.Last but not least Pakistan could 1st strike ,as it fears if india 1st strike then their majority nuke detterent might be destroyed & rest if survive would be destroyed by india’s ABM shield

PLEASE NOTE
this are all my personal assumption ,well anyone having any better ideas apart from this can post
REGARDS

No
First abm r still unreliable even half of us ABM test failed that's without deploying counter measure from agressor missile so Indian ABM won't be a big issue and USA is thousands of km away from any hostile nuclear power but we r next door so kl chain won't be able to process before the missiles reach target in most cases and yes Pak is upgrading it's capabilities

 

[Vijyes Yechury]

No
First abm r still unreliable even half of us ABM test failed that's without deploying counter measure from agressor missile so Indian ABM won't be a big issue and USA is thousands of km away from any hostile nuclear power but we r next door so kl chain won't be able to process before the missiles reach target in most cases and yes Pak is upgrading it's capabilities

You are just taking things in linear manner. After 1990s, there has been a massive change in supercomputing. Things have grown faster by tens of thousands of times. Calculations have fastened up so much that the rate of interception and seeker quality is bound to go up several folds. The 50% failure of US was prior to 2000 when the supercomputing started saturating. After 2000, interception rate has increased well.

Just look at iron dome of Israel. It intercepts 95% of the rockets with a single hit kill. It even calculates the path of the rocket and intercepts only those that are likely to fall on populated areas. This is because the missiles of Iron dome are much more expensive compared to the rockets.

Iron dome may sound simple to you, but considering that the rockets can fly a maximum for 15-20 seconds, at speed of 300m/s or mach 0.9. It has to be intercepted within first 7-8 seconds or less of flight before it crosses the iron dome barrier. So, Iron dome is capable of intercepting it in such short duration of time. This is what makes Iron dome significant in terms if interception technology.

 

[khanmubashir]

You are just taking things in linear manner. After 1990s, there has been a massive change in supercomputing. Things have grown faster by tens of thousands of times. Calculations have fastened up so much that the rate of interception and seeker quality is bound to go up several folds. The 50% failure of US was prior to 2000 when the supercomputing started saturating. After 2000, interception rate has increased well.

Just look at iron dome of Israel. It intercepts 95% of the rockets with a single hit kill. It even calculates the path of the rocket and intercepts only those that are likely to fall on populated areas. This is because the missiles of Iron dome are much more expensive compared to the rockets.

Iron dome may sound simple to you, but considering that the rockets can fly a maximum for 15-20 seconds, at speed of 300m/s or mach 0.9. It has to be intercepted within first 7-8 seconds or less of flight before it crosses the iron dome barrier. So, Iron dome is capable of intercepting it in such short duration of time. This is what makes Iron dome significant in terms if interception technology.

Irondome is used to intercept subsonic home made rocket made of plumber pipes and sill USA ABM have success rate around 60% and there ABM develp budget is around 70 billions that's more than. Entire Indian defense budget and again u don't have American geographic advantage

 

[Cookie Monster]

India hasn't disclosed such abilities yet. But here are some examples of how iran, North Korea etc used GPS jammers and anti jamming guidance development by USA -

bit(.)ly/2zcskcX

North korean GPS jammer -

bbc(.)in/2iueKaG

The first link isn't working. The second link had this to say
"Four years ago, pilots on more than 300 commercial flights detected interference with their systems. Planes have back-ups, though, so no disaster happened."

They couldn't even successfully jam commercial GPS let alone military GPS signals. Thus far no damage has happened other than making it a bit inconvenient for these jets and other commercial GPS users.

Additionally u have again provided me with other country's examples...and I know u r again gonna come back with the excuse that u can't provide me with India's jamming capabilities bcuz those haven't been disclosed.

So ur whole argument about how a nuke war would happen between India/Pak rests on hypotheticals...

Well if we r gonna do hypotheticals then by that reasoning...
Pak has this secret anti jamming capability that hasn't been revealed yet...it would nullify India's Jamming capability...

Quit ur fantasies and come back to the real world. If u r going to analyze something then take into account cold hard facts...nothing else.

 

[Vijyes Yechury]

The first link isn't working. The second link had this to say
"Four years ago, pilots on more than 300 commercial flights detected interference with their systems. Planes have back-ups, though, so no disaster happened."

They couldn't even successfully jam commercial GPS let alone military GPS signals. Thus far no damage has happened other than making it a bit inconvenient for these jets and other commercial GPS users.

Additionally u have again provided me with other country's examples...and I know u r again gonna come back with the excuse that u can't provide me with India's jamming capabilities bcuz those haven't been disclosed.

So ur whole argument about how a nuke war would happen between India/Pak rests on hypotheticals...

Well if we r gonna do hypotheticals then by that reasoning...
Pak has this secret anti jamming capability that hasn't been revealed yet...it would nullify India's Jamming capability...

Quit ur fantasies and come back to the real world. If u r going to analyze something then take into account cold hard facts...nothing else.

See, there is a jamming technology and it is cheap. There is anti jamming technology too, but requires military grade signals from satellites. I don't know if India has either of them, but the ease with which they are made makes me believe that every single country, both India and Pakistan has or capable of having jamming technology. About anti-jamming signals, India has military grade satellite signals. Hence it is likely that India has them too. While pakistan doesn't have satellites and hence incapable of having them.

 

[Cookie Monster]

See, there is a jamming technology and it is cheap. There is anti jamming technology too, but requires military grade signals from satellites. I don't know if India has either of them, but the ease with which they are made makes me believe that every single country, both India and Pakistan has or capable of having jamming technology. About anti-jamming signals, India has military grade satellite signals. Hence it is likely that India has them too. While pakistan doesn't have satellites and hence incapable of having them.

well since u r talking hypotheticals here then hypothetically Pak can have access to China's military version of Beidou system...

If China can help Pakistan with its nuclear program(an actual weapon of mass destruction) then giving access to a positioning system isn't that far fetched.

Like I said analyzing a situation in hypotheticals gets u nowhere bcuz for every one hypothetical Indian capability one can argue a hypothetical counter from Pak and vice versa.

Feel free to debate with me when u have something concrete. I have no interest in debating hypotheticals.

 

[Falcon26]

Most of the area is rural. Unguided ballistic missiles will end up in some field or forest and kill some cows and deers.



First, let me clear the cruise missile part-
Babur is waste not becayse of BMD but because of SAM and BVRAAM. All subsonic cruise missiles are far inferior to an aeroplane which can travel at over 1Mach speed and can maneuver much more than a cruise missile. If a SAM can take out a plane, it can take out Babur with 5 times the ease. India had SAMs like Akash, BARAK-8, QRSAM and also has BVRAAM ASTRA to take out subsonic missiles like a plane takes down another plane.

Now, about Ballistic Missile -

Lets take a scenario- Pakistan launches 100 BM from lahore towards Delhi. India immediately detects the launch and before the missiles reach India, a massive counter attack will be launched.

Next, people will be asked to go inside heavy concrete houses or buildings in the city to reduce damage. And jammers to jam the satellite signals of GPS, Beidou, Glonass and Galileo will be deployed extensively. Since Pakistan doesn't have access to military grade location and guidance system due to lack of satellite constellation, it won't be able to guide its missile in a jamproof manner

Next, the missile won't be intercepted in launch stage as there is too little time. But, India will then try to intercept in exo-atmosphere with theatre defence systems. Few will be destroyed while most will continue.

Finally, point defence BMD systems to attack the incoming missiles at reentry stage will be fired. The probability of success for short range missiles under 500km will be over 75% due to slower speed. But, for MRBM, it is about 50% or less. Generally, a BMD launcher can launch 4-5 missiles. Depending on the number of launchers available, the ratio of ABM to BM can vary. A large number of warheads will be neutralised while some will strike the targets.

Due to precautions taken of getting people inside the house, jamming the guidance and destroying over half the warheads, the damage is significantly reduced. On the other hand, immediate detection of launch and retaliation, Pakistan won't be able to fire a second wave.

Next, it comes down to who can withstand the damage of the first wave strike and still continue. This depends on technology levels to mass produce equipment to cover the losses and most importantly, food supply (India is food grain surplus and area under other crops like sugarcane, cotton, banana etc can be diverted into food grain production). So on....

You have gone full Bollywood...never go full Bollywood

 

[Vijyes Yechury]

You have gone full Bollywood...never go full Bollywood

I just explained the various stages. Some of this was practiced in USA civilian drills for nuclear eventuality and nuclear warhead stoppage. All these are real life techniques used.

 

[LeGenD]

India hasn't disclosed such abilities yet. But here are some examples of how iran, North Korea etc used GPS jammers and anti jamming guidance development by USA -

bit(.)ly/2zcskcX

North korean GPS jammer -

bbc(.)in/2iueKaG

Both Iraq and Libya possessed GPS jamming and spoofing equipment. Need I say more? These tools can be useful in certain situations but their effectiveness is utterly questionable in a war-like scenario, particularly against military-grade assets with relevant safeguards and alternative sources of guidance.

Irondome is used to intercept subsonic home made rocket made of plumber pipes and sill USA ABM have success rate around 60% and there ABM develp budget is around 70 billions that's more than. Entire Indian defense budget and again u don't have American geographic advantage

PAC-3 system have 100% intercept record in the battlefield (or very close). THAAD is not battle-tested yet but it has performed remarkably in various tests; same with MEADS, SM-2, SM-3 and SM-6. GMD is also maturing in its role over time and not only has the capability to intercept ICBM class targets in the outer space but distinguish them from decoys at present.

Progress is remarkable in this spectrum of defense.

 

[Sucha Kuggu]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_jamming_and_deception

 

[Vijyes Yechury]

Both Iraq and Libya possessed GPS jamming and spoofing equipment. Need I say more? These tools can be useful in certain situations but their effectiveness is utterly questionable in a war-like scenario, particularly against military-grade assets with relevant safeguards and alternative sources of guidance.

Exactly my point. Military grade signals need military grade satellites to give them. These signals are wideband, need high power and are encrypted to avoid others from accessing it or hacking into it. Does Pakistan have satellites? That is the point I wanted to convey.

Thanks

 

[war&peace]

best one is pray for mercy from us and give us back our land

We won't give you land but paper rolled tightly just brace yourself.

 

[Sanwal Abbasi]

A nuclear expert from Moscow says despite heavy investments in developing anti-ballistic missile systems, India may not be able to fully defend itself in a conflict from strikes by Pakistani missiles.​

“Even in 10 years and with the huge budgets that India plans to spend on the development of nuclear weapons and capabilities, it is difficult to imagine it will be able to defend its territory from possible strikes from Pakistan in case of conflict,” said Petr Topychkanov, a senior researcher at the Carnegie Moscow Centre’s Non-Proliferation Programme.
Talking about ‘Non-Proliferation and Strategic Stability in South Asia: A Russian Perspective’ at the Strategic Vision Institute (SIV) which is an Islamabad-based think tank specialising in nuclear issues, Mr Topychkanov said that despite large-scale cooperation between India and Israel for the development of a ballistic missile defence system and Indian efforts for acquiring S-400 defence systems from Russia, “India is very far from developing any system that could effectively defend itself from a Pakistani missile

 

[Vijyes Yechury]

A nuclear expert from Moscow says despite heavy investments in developing anti-ballistic missile systems, India may not be able to fully defend itself in a conflict from strikes by Pakistani missiles.​

“Even in 10 years and with the huge budgets that India plans to spend on the development of nuclear weapons and capabilities, it is difficult to imagine it will be able to defend its territory from possible strikes from Pakistan in case of conflict,” said Petr Topychkanov, a senior researcher at the Carnegie Moscow Centre’s Non-Proliferation Programme.
Talking about ‘Non-Proliferation and Strategic Stability in South Asia: A Russian Perspective’ at the Strategic Vision Institute (SIV) which is an Islamabad-based think tank specialising in nuclear issues, Mr Topychkanov said that despite large-scale cooperation between India and Israel for the development of a ballistic missile defence system and Indian efforts for acquiring S-400 defence systems from Russia, “India is very far from developing any system that could effectively defend itself from a Pakistani missile

No country in the world can defend against all ballistic missiles. If that was possible, then USA would not be shouting at Iranian missile development. USA can defend only a few ballistic missiles mainly due to radars on pacific ocean which very few countries can make. USA is isolated from other countries and hence the long distance over which the ballistic missile has to travel and USA islands in pacific makes it slightly more easier for USA to intercept missiles.

For normal countries without vast oceans isolating them, it is difficult to defend against ballistic missiles. Even USA will not be able to defend missile from Cuba or Mexico for that matter.

S400 is primarily a SAM, not BMD. So, S400 is not enough either. India is only trying to augment air defence as much as it can. The idea is to completely deny cruise missiles and aircrafts while partially defending against ballistic missiles