What's new

INDIA 's Nuclear military capability-A FULL Analysis..

Yeah, that's US hypocrisy for you (to counter China), but let's not get hung up on that. India deserved nukes, being the second most populous nation, and becoming a global power. That being said, I think both can and should avoid getting involved in a nuclear arms race. Conventional is fine, but not nuclear. Now with both powers being in the SCO, and Pakistan as well, there needs to be a trilateral nuclear de-escalation.

It's a idealist approach but not the realist as Pakistan won't accept India superiority.

Also you say China nuke program is USA centric but if war happen don't you think they will use it.
 
I think you are referring to cold fusion. The work is on process to master it once done then it will be a game changer for sure i guarantee you.

Yes,

Where do we stand in this area? How much time would it take to realize this technology.

Necessity of Neutron Bomb for India​
What is a neutron Bomb?
I call Neutrino bomb as a Poverty Bomb. It is a radiation bomb which was developed in cold war Era.
It can be used to eradicate poverty because if used it will eliminate the people but will not do heavy damage to the Infrastructure surrounding the explosion. it is a process in which the neutrino is allowed to escape the process without getting consumed by the constitute particles. If a Neutrino bomb is being exploded well above the surface the will produce a large blast and emit thermal as well as ionization radiation till 500m. If the neutron bomb is 1kt the n it can produce 4.6 PSI out to a radius of 600m which can damage civilian building and most modern day tanks. Neutron bomb were designed to yield less energy mostly in heat and blast as compared to traditional high yield nuclear bombs.they were designed to take out tanks in area. They were also designed to be used in anti-tanks roles.Neutron bomb in comparison to identical yield fission bomb can emit 10 times the radiation as compared to fission bombs. In a fission bomb the energy released will constitute 5% radiation which constitutes gamma rays and neutrons but in neutron it can go up to 40 % . Neutron bombs are designed to keep infrastructure intact while killing all the people around the explosion but still a 1kt neutron bomb can cause damages to civilian buildings and because it emits more radiation than heat still it can cause third degree burns but also can cause radiation on buildings and particles such as zinc, metals and much more
So to put in short
'It can cause severe damage, while negating severe damage'.

Uses in cold war?
The Neutron bomb was a hot topic during cold war time and also the nucleation of the region.
There were many more neutron bomb made by USA such as W63,W64,W65,W66,W70(mod 0),W70(mod 3).
which were phased in a dramatically manner. It was the True bomb which was used in as strategic ballistic nuclear missile.
the claims which we hear today from Pakistan that we have strategic nuclear missiles and blah blah are nothing but traditional Atom bombs which if used which will result in MAD on pakistani soil annihilating flora and fauna in the region and also the infrastructure. the neutrino bomb W70 (mod 3) were used in strategical ballistic missiles in order to use it on tanks and approaching Russian troops. the conventional land superiority between Nato and Russia gave idea to strategical ballistic missiles by not inflicting severe damages to infrastructure or the surrounding and environment because neutron gets consumed by the air and it depends on distance of the air so no impact on environment and infrastructure but the people which come in direct contact will suffer the burns and great amount of radiation which will result in death and people which are protected by some shield will reduce the radiation level by ten times but still they will suffer the radiation and will fall sick which will result in death after 2 days. It was also used in ABM missiles which were used to hunt down approaching BM in endo atmospheric level. The only country which tests neutron bomb is Russia it has undertaken many tests since 2014. Neutron bomb is regarded as the measure component to be used in ABM missiles, In India we are trying to use Titanium or other alloys in our missiles in BMD in endo atmospheric level.

Why India should choose it?
India has always been a country which has taken NFU policy. in my opinion we should change it and that too for the good.
We should tell the world that we are moving to neutron bombs which are sub kiloton in strength and can be used as our atom bombs which will not inflict major infrastructure or environmental damages like Hiroshima, Nagasaki.
Also India has showed from Shakti 2,3,4 that India is capable of miniaturization and also capable of making sub kiloton bombs which can be 0.5 or less yield bombs. Also as we have whole community under our belt no one will be really concerned about this strategy and once we become NSG or MTCR we can gain the authority. we have already achieved many capabilities which are necessary for the bomb and even if we need help because we have Russia which is the only country which has such capability in use currently.
We can equip our sukhois which have Bramhos with neutron bombs which can be deadliest combination.
This can be used in our ABM. we have two stage BMD system. One is endo atmospheric and other is exo atmospheric which is stated as AAD+PDV, we can use this neutron capability to strengthen our BMD even more.


Yes why not, even i have heard that India is looking to boost it to 700 kt level which UK has done to its Orange Herald.

It depends on mode of transport if we the carrier is land based Based a high yield nuclear bomb can be used air based then low yield in SLBM we can have yield upto MT.

I think you are referring to cold fusion. The work is on process to master it once done then it will be a game changer for sure i guarantee you.

Ye, but that requires a specialized enhanced quality Boron, and special materials which can constitute the process, India is on the way of having its enhanced Boron facility and can become a leader in that too, so yes we are on the way of that just be tuned.

thanks my friend do look the updated news which i posted.

Also @HariPrasad , @PARIKRAMA ,@MilSpec ,@drunken-monke ,@GURU DUTT ,@gslv mk3 ,@Capt.Popeye ,@Pulsar ,@Nilgiri ,@Optimus prime IA, @Chanakya's_Chant ,@rezangahir ,@jackhammer2 ,@Fireurimagination ,@Skull and Bones ,@ito ,@third eye ,@Stephen Cohen ,@unbiasedopinion ,@black_jack ,@[Bregs]

Thank you very much for this excellent post.
 
Where do we stand in this area? How much time would it take to realize this technology.
We have just resumed the research.
We have lost many years.
The research on this technology was started by BARC which was halted due to external pressure.
Now this is being started again our Indian scientists are collaborating with american scientists.
The concept of cold fusion today has evolved from 90s so just there needs to be a push globally and we can see it that its there.
I will update you when I will here something about.
 
Too many nukes, I don't want to die.

I hope for each warhead there are 100 special forces in special high security multistory underground hardened facilities.

I don't want to be evaporated alive.

@locker bhai thermo nukes being fusion based, are radiation free naa ??
 
God damn it. Do China and India REALLY need to repeat the entire, trillions of dollars wasting, USSR-US nuclear arms race? Idiots. What if both signed a treaty limiting their nukes BEFORE they each have 20.000? Isn't it more logical to spend that money on other things? I'm all for a strong military, but building thousands of nukes each is useless, as proven by the cold war powers.

Your concern can be addressed in many ways, let me be blunt - its unavoidable for the simple reason that this madness of such high number of nukes was started by US/USSR; consequently China feels they need enough to entirely deter US; further India feels we need enough to deter China and so on. As another poster stated, in the past we could rely on the USSR to keep China in check, that might simply no longer be the case any longer.

For India, there's another angle. We are not only dealing with a sane enemy in China but a one of questionable sanity to our west. If it were up to me to draw up such strategies, my doctrine for Indian response to any nuclear madness by Pak would not only entail destruction of Pak but also of those who provided them with the tech and those who financed their nuke program. This is not just out of spite but a consideration of the power China increasingly holds over Pak. An added insurance if you will.

Another reason for a large number of nukes is advancement in technology, particularly in defense against ballistic missiles. Who knows how many nukes would be sufficient to destroy a country the size of China in two or three decades?

The real problem as I am sure we all know is not in producing them but rather maintaining them safely. All countries do a balancing act according to their needs.
 
Too many nukes, I don't want to die.

I hope for each warhead there are 100 special forces in special high security multistory underground hardened facilities.

I don't want to be evaporated alive.

@locker bhai thermo nukes being fusion based, are radiation free naa ??
NOPE,they are radioacitive but they are mainly used to blow everything in pieces unlike neutron bomb which emits 10 times more radioactive elements like gamma, x rays, alpha, beta. Every Nuclear (h bomb) has 'nuclear fallout'. TN bombs emitts only 5% radiation when explode unlike neutron bomb.
It is also because that design of the bomb contains thick layer of depleted uranium which acts as a deadweight and also contains the initial explosion which transfers the energy to the fusion fuel.
That tampers the radioactive fallout.

Hydrogen(TN)bombs are triggered by fission bombs of at least the size of those that were used by the Americans against Japan hence the radioactive fallout from unconsumed Plutonium will be just as great.
The proportion of casualties caused by radioactivity is quite low most people are either blown to pieces or burnt to death!
 
@locker bro,
a recent article states that a think tank based on US (2 authors) states that Pak in a decade would have 3rd largest N stockpile after Russia and USA.
Report: Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal could become the world’s third-biggest - The Washington Post

It notes India can produce more if it wants but is not doing that.. Also the TTs say its way beyond credible minimum deterrence... the continuous rhetoric of first use seems a bit annoying to even old friends and protector like USA.. Ur views on all this?
As such how many Nukes u estimate for both India and pak as of now?
Also why the world and countries who cries the most abt India's N program dont talk abt Pak;s N program?

BTW i read an article that Pak repsentative (elected parliament) in london said world powers should restrain India and Israel as they are the biggest threat to world peace.. ironic is nt it? read it here
India, Israel hellbent upon threatening world peace: Pakistani Senator | idrw.org

The original article
A Normal Nuclear Pakistan - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Full report
http://carnegieendowment.org/files/NormalNuclearPakistan.pdf

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Pakistan has worked hard and successfully to build diverse nuclear capabilities. It will retain these capabilities for the foreseeable future as a necessary deterrent against perceived existential threats from India. At this juncture, Pakistan’s military leadership in Rawalpindi can choose to accept success in achieving a “strategic” deterrent against India — a nuclear force posture su!cient to prevent limited nuclear exchanges and a major conventional war. Alternatively, it can choose to continue to compete with India in the pursuit of “full spectrum” deterrence, which would entail open-ended nuclear requirements against targets both near and far from Pakistan. "these choices would lead Pakistan to two
starkly di#erent nuclear futures and places in the global nuclear order.

Pakistan is now competing successfully with — and in some respects is outcompeting — India. Pakistan operates four plutonium production reactors; India operates one. Pakistan has the capability to produce perhaps 20 nuclear warheads annually; India appears to be producing about five warheads annually.

But given its larger economy and sizable nuclear infrastructure, India is able to outcompete Pakistan in fssile material and warhead production if it chooses to do so. Pakistan has prepared for this eventuality by investing in a large nuclear weapons production complex. Whether New Delhi chooses to compete more intensely or not, it is a losing proposition for Pakistan to sustain, let alone expand, itscurrent infrastructure to produce greater numbers of nuclear weapons and their means of delivery. Justas the Soviet Union’s large nuclear arsenal was of no help whatsoever for its manifold economic and societal weaknesses, Pakistan’s nuclear weapons do not address its internal challenges.

Pakistan seeks to be viewed as a “normal” state possessing nuclear weapons, as exempli$ed by membership in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). Its diplomats seek a civil-nuclear cooperation agreement similar to the one accorded to India. A commercial pathway to being mainstreamed into the global nuclear order is highly unlikely for Pakistan, which lacks the commercial leverage and support that resulted in a nuclear deal for India. A di#erent path toward mainstreaming is available to Pakistan, via nuclear-weapon-related initiatives. Having succeeded in achieving the requirements of “strategic” deterrence, Pakistan is in a position to consider nuclear initiatives that would clarify its commitment to strengthening nuclear norms, regimes, and practices, and would address widely held perceptions that
its nuclear deterrence practices are a major source of danger in South Asia.

We propose that Pakistan consider $ve nuclear weapon-related initiatives:

• Shift declaratory policy from “full spectrum” to “strategic” deterrence.
• Commit to a recessed deterrence posture and limit production of short-range delivery vehicles and tactical nuclear weapons.
• Lift Pakistan’s veto on Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty negotiations and reduce or stop fissile material production.
• Separate civilian and military nuclear facilities.
• Sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty without waiting for India.

None of these initiatives would impair Pakistan’s successful accomplishment of strategic deterrence against India. "ey would, however, require di!cult and fundamental adjustments to thinking about nuclear weapons and Pakistan’s deeply ingrained habits of transactional bargaining. Precisely because these initiatives would be so di!cult and unusual for Pakistan, they would change perceptions about Pakistan and its place in the global nuclear order. As such, they could facilitate Pakistan’s entrance into the nuclear mainstream, while strengthening nonproliferation norms, bolstering global disarmament hopes, and setting the bar higher for new entrants into the NSG
.
The global nuclear order will not be strengthened by trying to accommodate a Pakistan that is greatly increasing its nuclear capabilities while rejecting the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and Fissile Material Cuto# Treaty. Nor will Pakistan become a normal, nuclear state by competing with India or by harboring groups that could spark a war with India. "e international community is unlikely to accommodate Pakistan’s desire to enter the nuclear mainstream without corresponding steps by Pakistan to align aspects of its nuclear policy and practices closer with international norms. "e steps we propose lend themselves to mainstreaming. More importantly, these steps would advance Pakistan’s
national, social, and economic security interests.


The rport in other pages touch bases and details like

The Pakistani case for mainstreaming rests on three arguments. The first is basic fairness: Pakistan deserves the same treatment and status in the global nuclear order as India. the second is stability: the subcontinent will grow increasingly unstable if India and Pakistan are treated di#erently, with India accorded favored treatment and Pakistan remaining an outlier. Providing Pakistan with the same benefits and standing as India will, in this view, stabilize the nuclear competition on the subcontinent by promoting responsible nuclear stewardship in both states. "e third is normative: the global nuclear
order will remain abnormal as long as Pakistan is excluded.

Few non-Pakistani analysts have found these arguments compelling. Absent market-oriented rationales, the international community is unlikely to accommodate Pakistan’s desires for mainstreaming unless Pakistan is willing to take corresponding steps that more closely align its nuclear policy and practices with international norms. We argue that Pakistan would become more secure by taking such steps than by continuing to compete militarily with a country whose economy is nine times larger. Moreover, if Pakistan were to take steps to strengthen nonproliferation norms — either unilaterally, or in some instances reciprocally — its case for entry into the NSG would be strengthened, with India being obliged to follow Pakistan’s lead. Pakistan would thereby paradoxically gain more leverage over Indian nuclear choices than by continuing a resource-draining nuclear competition. On the other hand, mainstreaming Pakistan into the global nuclear order without compensatory steps to buttress nonproliferation norms could increase nuclear dangers and exacerbate tensions between nuclear haves and have-nots, compounding damages resulting from the civil-nuclear agreement accorded India.


One more excerpt
By staying the present course, Pakistan’s civilian and military leaders will face very hard budgetary decisions going forward. Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal requires large mortgage payments within a baseline security budget ($7 billion) that o!cially consumes 2.8 percent of Pakistan’s GDP, but, as discussed above, is assuredly much higher. According to published government documents, expenditures for atomic energy programs this past year — which may include some, but probably not all, of the activities related to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program — were roughly $650 million.92 With a growing population, major social and education requirements, severe energy shortfalls and rising needs, as well
as requirements to bolster law enforcement and a judiciary that can stabilize Pakistan’s internal security, Islamabad can ill-a#ord nuclear mortgage payments that will balloon in the decades ahead. "ese expenses will crowd out more pressing requirements to improve conventional armaments that military commanders are far more likely to use, whether in North Waziristan or elsewhere

About Nasr
Pakistan could seek reciprocal nondeployment restraints from India, which has not announced plans to induct short-range nuclear systems with ranges comparable to the Nasr. For instance, Pakistan could announce that it would not store Nasr missiles within 100 km of the border during peacetime, but would only agree to nondeployment within that zone on the condition that India reciprocates. "is initiative does not constitute unilateral nuclear disarmament in short-range systems. Pakistan already possesses some short-range, nuclear-capable delivery vehicles; by limiting further production of short-range systems, by accepting a recessed deterrence posture, and by not deploying them, Pakistan would acknowledge the realities that short-range, nuclear-weapon delivery vehicles and tactical nuclear weapons raise extremely di!cult command and control problems, and pose a greater risk of the% or, worse, accidental, inadvertent,
or unauthorized use. Pakistan would still retain some deterrence value from the limited possession and 'ight tests of the Nasr. Pakistan’s willingness to develop these capabilities comprises what "omas C. Schelling has described as “a threat that leaves something to chance.”Even so, many Indian strategists dismiss Pakistan’s threat to use short-range nuclear-weapon delivery systems against advancing Indian tanks on Pakistani territory as lacking credibility. "e US Army realized belatedly that the incorporation of tactical nuclear weapons into any planning and operations for ground combat posed insurmountable challenges.Unless Rawalpindi can figure out solutions that eluded the Pentagon, it, too, will face insurmountable challenges associated with operations involving tactical nuclear weapons.
 
@locker bro,
a recent article states that a think tank based on US (2 authors) states that Pak in a decade would have 3rd largest N stockpile after Russia and USA. It notes India can produce more if it wants but is not doing that.. Also the TTs say its way beyond credible minimum deterrence... the continuous rhetoric of first use seems a bit annoying to even old friends and protector like USA.. Ur views on all this?
I will tell you one thing that a big game is being played by TT especially by US.
You all haven't figured it out but let me tell you that they are creating a hysteria, they want to create a hysteria that
'Pakistan is going berserk, and make a big headlines to the world on nuclear weapons of Pakistan' which will result in panicking of INDIA and INDIA will start producing more nuclear bombs which will make US happy because they will be able to sell INDIA with nuclear fuel, nuclear reactors and nuclear cooperation especially after the breaking of deadlock, even though TTs knows about INDIA's capability and they know that India can produce 'n' number of nuclear bombs but still they are undermining in their reports, because they want to toe the lone which they have been toeing. Even they know that our warheads are more than 130 or whatever they claim but still they will undermine it. And in doing this they will also be able to keep check on pakistan growing nuclear weapons by producing such reports every now and then and in the future they might take over Pakistan nuclear weapons.
As we say 'kill two birds with one stone'
So as I said its better to ignore these tts. I am telling you because I have worked with one alongside.
As such how many Nukes u estimate for both India and pak as of now?
Also why the world and countries who cries the most abt India's N program dont talk abt Pak;s N program?

BTW i read an article that Pak repsentative (elected parliament) in london said world powers should restrain India and Israel as they are the biggest threat to world peace.. ironic is nt it? read it here
India, Israel hellbent upon threatening world peace: Pakistani Senator | idrw.org
Actually limiting one's nuclear weapons after producing sufficient nukes for destroying your enemy is the most absurd thing a country can do.
As we have seen during cold war and even we see today.
US has nuclear weapons in thousands, still they are not restricting their programme, the less we talk about RUSSIA the better because it has got even more.
No one can imagine how many nukes INDIA will have in the future. Also not to forget we will be facing two front war and China we are just being China in nukes but we will catch them I am sure, so no one knows what it can be.
Also Pakistan's TNW are dangerous to them first because they don't know what actually a TNWs. So let me tell you its least of our concern, the actual TNWs were the neutron bombs which they don't have, so their nuclear weapons will make sure MAD onnPakistani soil and nothing else, the more concerned as you can see feombthe article should be Pakistan(because they will make sure they will be victims of their own weapons) and secondly USA as i said such cautious reports will give USA some credibility to take iver theur nukes.

Also don't waste your time in reading such news especially spoken by Pakistanis because it is waste of your time,
No one can pressure us we will continue our programme as it is and will do by HOOK or by CROOK.
We have came a long way. Now its our time to lead in fusion reactors, or in thorium based research.
So enjoy your day and leave everything to the men who are working in stealth.
 
I will tell you one thing that a big game is being played by TT especially by US.
You all haven't figured it out but let me tell you that they are creating a hysteria, they want to create a hysteria that
'Pakistan is going berserk, and make a big headlines to the world on nuclear weapons of Pakistan' which will result in panicking of INDIA and INDIA will start producing more nuclear bombs which will make US happy because they will be able to sell INDIA with nuclear fuel, nuclear reactors and nuclear cooperation especially after the breaking of deadlock, even though TTs knows about INDIA's capability and they know that India can produce 'n' number of nuclear bombs but still they are undermining in their reports, because they want to toe the lone which they have been toeing. Even they know that our warheads are more than 130 or whatever they claim but still they will undermine it. And in doing this they will also be able to keep check on pakistan growing nuclear weapons by producing such reports every now and then and in the future they might take over Pakistan nuclear weapons.
As we say 'kill two birds with one stone'
So as I said its better to ignore these tts. I am telling you because I have worked with one alongside.

Actually limiting one's nuclear weapons after producing sufficient nukes for destroying your enemy is the most absurd thing a country can do.
As we have seen during cold war and even we see today.
US has nuclear weapons in thousands, still they are not restricting their programme, the less we talk about RUSSIA the better because it has got even more.
No one can imagine how many nukes INDIA will have in the future. Also not to forget we will be facing two front war and China we are just being China in nukes but we will catch them I am sure, so no one knows what it can be.
Also Pakistan's TNW are dangerous to them first because they don't know what actually a TNWs. So let me tell you its least of our concern, the actual TNWs were the neutron bombs which they don't have, so their nuclear weapons will make sure MAD onnPakistani soil and nothing else, the more concerned as you can see feombthe article should be Pakistan(because they will make sure they will be victims of their own weapons) and secondly USA as i said such cautious reports will give USA some credibility to take iver theur nukes.

Also don't waste your time in reading such news especially spoken by Pakistanis because it is waste of your time,
No one can pressure us we will continue our programme as it is and will do by HOOK or by CROOK.
We have came a long way. Now its our time to lead in fusion reactors, or in thorium based research.
So enjoy your day and leave everything to the men who are working in stealth.

Pl tell us whether our H bomb failed in Pokhran? Where do we stand in H bomb making capability?
 
Pl tell us whether our H bomb failed in Pokhran? Where do we stand in H bomb making capability?
As I said in my previous posts that the yield was sufficient for us to provide TN(H) bomb and we have progressed since.
The yield is low but in coming years the yield will be increased on par with P5 nations.
So just wait and watch.
 
As I said in my previous posts that the yield was sufficient for us to provide TN(H) bomb and we have progressed since.
The yield is low but in coming years the yield will be increased on par with P5 nations.
So just wait and watch.

Thanks.

What is the present capabilty. it said since a long that we have a capability to make 200 KT bomb. Pramod Mahajan hinted it. Have we progressed sine than? Have we entered in MW league with big nations like US , Russia and France?
 
Thanks.

What is the present capabilty. it said since a long that we have a capability to make 200 KT bomb. Pramod Mahajan hinted it. Have we progressed sine than? Have we entered in MW league with big nations like US , Russia and France?
Yep we have moved since then.
The 200KT capability is of fusion boosted fission bomb and it was a long way before, our capabilities have increased a lot since then
Sorry I can't indulge in revealing that have we reached 1MT or not but I assure you that our h bombs and capabilities will be on par with P5.
 
Yep we have moved since then.
The 200KT capability is of fusion boosted fission bomb and it was a long way before, our capabilities have increased a lot since then
Sorry I can't indulge in revealing that have we reached 1MT or not but I assure you that our h bombs and capabilities will be on par with P5.


Thanks.

I know it will be at par with p5 in future but what about the present? Currently is it at par with P5? Without testing how much shall be the realiability of our big Bomb?
 
Thanks.

I know it will be at par with p5 in future but what about the present? Currently is it at par with P5? Without testing how much shall be the realiability of our big Bomb?
As I said my friend I can't disclose everything but at presently we have achieved half the yield our TN bombs, so find out how much is the yield of TN of P5 nations, then you will get the answer but 4 to 5 years down the road you might get a surprise.
 
So it is atleast 2.5 MT. Am i right. At least 1 MT. But how reliable is it without test?

Unfortunately my sister did not opt for P. Hd. in institute of Plazma research else I woud have a great information in this field.

Too many nukes, I don't want to die.

I hope for each warhead there are 100 special forces in special high security multistory underground hardened facilities.

I don't want to be evaporated alive.

@locker bhai thermo nukes being fusion based, are radiation free naa ??


Presently not. Thermo nuclear is a 2 stage device in which a primary device (A fusion bomb ) is ignited to give tremendous energy required to start fusion (Secondary device). Primary device is a fission and it has the radiation. Secondary device is a fusion and do not emit any radiation. So in all and all a Hydrogen bomb emit around 10% of radiation (From primary devise.) of comparative yield fission bomb.
 
Back
Top Bottom