how many nukes india have??

[Omega007]

Shut up kiddo and grow up !!!! We fought SEVERAL "conventional" wars with you and on Western front, you guys couldn't pull out ANY major victory (despite your HUGE numerical and sometimes technological superiority..) No one here says "1 Pakistan = 10 Indian" ....This was probably the case when Afghans,Arabs and Turks invaded your lands and RIPPED the natives apart ;-) We are not turks..We are the same people you know.. (Eastern side of Indus river) ...So please stop posting this BSing.. We don't want to defeat hindus..We don't hate you..Please stop hating us,Muslims, too !!!!

My post was just the reply to your post,where did you find hatred in that??Look at your own post,you were talking about nuking us in case of an war and told me hate monger!!I don't hate Pakistanis and as a matter of fact I don't even care.
By the way,we never had any 'HUGE' superiority over you.Just read some of the articles by rtd Maj.Agha Humayun Amin.Infact in 1965 you had superiority over us in armor and artillery in terms of both number and quality.You had 360-400 Pattons with a fire control system and nvgs.Only tank that could match Pattons with us was the 200 or so Centurion MkVIIs.
You had 203mm and 155mm artillery guns,we had 105mm and 122mm guns.
Now who was better equipped??
And our army was not 1.3 million strong back then.
And regarding any major victory on western front,then read about Shimla treaty where India returned 5600 square mile of captured Pakistani terittory!!Read carefully,5600 sq miles-equivalent area of Bangladesh.

 

[tvsram1992]

i doubt any one on this forum know the answer to the question.

we need minimum 200

The no. of nukes with India are no. of thanks received by me . As it keeps on increasing , no problem

If i become Pm, then every house in country will be given one..........

Then every one would die of radiation . If we could have 126 rafale, i would go for 252 warheads .
Which could be configured readily whether to be carried by Agni 2/3/5 or Rafale

 

[LiberalAtheist]

we have over 100 nukes for sure with the capability to make hundreds of more nuclear warheads we have enough reactor grade plutonium to do so

A report by David Albright, published by the Institute for Science and International Security in 2000, estimated that India at end of 1999 had 310 kilograms of weapon grade plutonium, enough for 65 nuclear weapons. He also estimated that India had 4,200 kg of reactor grade plutonium which is enough to build 1,000 nuclear weapons.[10][11] By the end of 2004, he estimates India had 445 kilograms of weapon grade plutonium which is enough for around 85 nuclear weapons considering 5 kg of plutonium required for each weapon.[12]

i can't remember the source but i was reading on Janes defense that Indian nuclear weapons designers had developed light FBF warheads that weigh less than 500kg yielding 250kt as opposed to the original 1,000kg warhead with this we only need to use 5kg of plutonium the rest being tritium (too boost the fusion process) and lithium deuteride both of which boost the yield of the warhead considerably not only this India has also developed advanced delivery systems like the Agni 3 which is a IRBM whose RV has a CEP of less than 40m meaning Indian nuclear weapons designers need to use less plutonium as a 250kt would deliver more than desired results earlier missiles like the Pershing had a higher CEP and required higher yielding warheads to deliver the desired amount of destruction

i believe we have the ability to develop warheads that can go over 1 MT but the thermonuclear test in 98 was partially unsuccessful we know for sure that we can deliver 250kt warheads easily but anything else above is not guaranteed unless we conduct another nuclear test

i believe we should conduct several nuclear tests again using fission, FBF, and fusion warheads and even sub kiloton warheads to test on missiles like BrahMos,Prahaar, and artillery shells and rockets like Pinaka, 105mm Indian field gun shells, as it would clear up any confusion