What's new

Indian Army gets Battle ready on Jaisalmer border with Pakistan.

Since you brought in alcohol, now i understand why its becoming too hard for you to understand what i just wrote.

Indian BMDs will protect Indian cities as a major objective, and as i said as we develop tactical nukes, the need to nuke an Indian city vanishes as tactical nukes give us the opportunity to nuke an invading force inside our own country and thus we can stop the war or atleast save ourselves by nuking any invading force inside Pakistan. Tactical nukes would be delivered by systems which would be fast and give hardly a few mins window/warning, most probably would never give a chance to any Indian BMD to respond. That is why Nasr missle system has been developed, its mobile & its missile is fast which will reach its target in few mins time without the missile ever leaving the atmosphere of the earth, rather its flight path would be very short, straight and to the point, only a mobile BMD system which is travelling with the invading formations / something which is protecting the formations right on the border will have a chance to intercept such systems from our side.

But this means radiation in your own country?? also one tactical nuke launched at Indian Forces can also be considered a nuclear strike and might launch nuke strikes at Pakistan, i mean it is possible.
 
.
Being tested where and with whom ??

Atleast by the Chinese...this one system is very sketchy that the last time it was seen was when it was unveiled in 2008...but this is said to be more like a MBRL but the design of the rocket is more like the S 300 SAM with its ailerons for stabilization but the mod claimed it to be a SRBM of 400 KM range. But I still couldnt find out the weight, warhead capablity, area of neutralization or any tests made with the SY 400 system so was just asking where I can find a video where the system is tested.
 
.
Your example is quite valid. But it is NOT in context. The ratio of Indian and Pakistani economies are NOT 100:1.

Total%20Military%20and%20Nuclear%20Weapons%20Spending%202010-2011%20.png


Tell me, why India is spending MORE on nuclear weapons (as compared to Pakistan) when according to foreign reports, it has less operational warheads?

It was an example, not a trace-out.

The money is spent on developing infrastructure for existing warheads, not build warheads anew. This
is also accounts as under development cost for "nuclear weapons". We spend more money on tech for
launching and defending nukes (like insensitive munitions) from attack, these things take money. But India can afford
to spend more on these than pakistan can. Is it any wonder while pakistan has larger no. of nukes,
your nuke-delivery tech is 20 years behind us?
 
.
It was an example, not a trace-out.

The money is spent on developing infrastructure for existing warheads, not build warheads anew. This
is also accounts as under development cost for "nuclear weapons". We spend more money on tech for
launching and defending nukes (like insensitive munitions) from attack, these things take money. But India can afford
to spend more on these than pakistan can. Is it any wonder while pakistan has larger no. of nukes,
your nuke-delivery tech is 20 years behind us?

My answer will turn this thread into a troll fest and measuring contest. This thread is better suited for this discussion:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...k-swelling-nuclear-arsenal-counter-india.html
 
.
Your example is quite valid. But it is NOT in context. The ratio of Indian and Pakistani economies are NOT 100:1.

Total%20Military%20and%20Nuclear%20Weapons%20Spending%202010-2011%20.png


Tell me, why India is spending MORE on nuclear weapons (as compared to Pakistan) when according to foreign reports, it has less operational warheads?

Its just an assumption. They assumed that since Pakistan is spending roughly 10% of its defence budget on Nukes, India must be too.

Reading the report always helps.

In South Asia, an unprecedented nuclear build-up is underway and gaining momentum spurred by Pakistan’s break-neck effort to double its already sizable arsenal over the next decade (rising from 125 weapons today to 250-350 over the next 5-10 years). India is playing serious catch-up with new land-based rockets and a new strategic submarine in its mix of delivery systems after a decade of sluggish growth (its current small arsenal of 25 weapons will increase to 100 over the next 5-10 years).

Pakistan has the fastest growing nuclear weapons program in the world, according to U.S. officials cited by a leading American nuclear expert, David Albright.[SUP]25[/SUP] With 120-130 thousand people directly involved in its nuclear weapons production and nuclear-armed missile program, [SUP]26[/SUP] Pakistan is completing construction on two new plutonium reactors (less than 100 miles from the scene of fighting between the Army and the Taliban) and building other infrastructure.[SUP]27[/SUP]

Pakistan does not officially reveal the cost of its secret nuclear program. In 2009, a credible assessment by an investigative journalist with expertise in the subject provided information on which we can calculate the overall nuclear program budget (weapons and missile delivery systems) to be approximately $781 million – $300 million for the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission and $481 million for the strategic missile delivery system. [SUP]28[/SUP] This sum represents 10 percent of Pakistan’s annual defense budget ($7.9 billion)[SUP]29.[/SUP] Independently, an American expert on the Pakistani nuclear program suggested that Pakistan spends up to 10 percent of its defense budget on nuclear forces.[SUP]30[/SUP]

This report assumes that the current budget pressure on the Pakistani program is containing cost growth in 2011; core and full costs are estimated at $800 million and $2 billion, respectively. The health and environmental consequences of Pakistan’s recent expansion of its infrastructure constitute a significant cost which can be expected to grow rapidly as new plutonium factories come on line. Furthermore, core spending on the nuclear program is likely to grow significantly for the rest of the decade as Pakistan undertakes a rapid build-up, perhaps by two- or three-fold, of its arsenal.[SUP]31[/SUP]

India’s nuclear program is largely keyed to China’s and to a lesser extent to Pakistan’s, and both of India’s nuclear rivals are expanding their arsenals sufficiently to stimulate India’s program. India has always minimized the role of nuclear weapons in its national security strategy, and consequently was slow to acquire an arsenal and restrained in the size of the arsenal it built. The impetus to expand the arsenal is stronger today, however. India’s modernization program already has considerable momentum yielding as much as a four-fold increase in the Indian arsenal over the next decade.

India, like Pakistan, keeps its nuclear budget under wraps. Very few details are publicly known about the program, and its cost is rarely discussed in public. One published estimate contends that the Indian program, very conservatively estimated, costs 0.5 percent of annual GDP.[SUP]32[/SUP]

Using $1.538 trillion dollars as the GDP of India, this would mean that India spends about $7.7 billion on nuclear weapons at purchasing power parity exchange rates. This would represent 22 percent of India’s overall defense budget, a proportion that exceeds Pakistan’s ratio of nuclear to overall spending by a factor of two, and China’s ratio by a factor of four.

This report assumes that India’s nuclear spending does not exceed 10 percent of its overall military spending, a fraction in line with current Pakistani allocations. India’s nuclear budget would thus be about $3.8 for core costs, which is about 60 percent of China’s nuclear budget. We estimate the full cost to be $4.9 bill

http://www.globalzero.org/files/scott/Global%20Zero%20Cost%20Study%2C%20June%202011.pdf
 
.
But this means radiation in your own country?? also one tactical nuke launched at Indian Forces can also be considered a nuclear strike and might launch nuke strikes at Pakistan, i mean it is possible.

This topic has been discussed in details. Refer to these threads:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...ix-tactical-multi-tube-ballistic-missile.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-strategic-forces/105899-making-india-think-twice.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...325-hatf-ix-nasr-missile-tested-pakistan.html

Its just an assumption. They assumed that since Pakistan is spending roughly 10% of its defence budget on Nukes, India must be too.

Reading the report always helps.

My bad. I do agree that nukes are costly, but IMO they are not a SERIOUS drain on our economy. The budget for them is a part of budget for the Pakistan's Armed Forces.
 
.
Indian BMDs will protect Indian cities as a major objective, and as i said as we develop tactical nukes, the need to nuke an Indian city vanishes as tactical nukes give us the opportunity to nuke an invading force inside our own country and thus we can stop the war or atleast save ourselves by nuking any invading force inside Pakistan.

As I said earlier, such attacks do more damage to yourself than to your opponent. Nuclear warheads lose their relevence when used as a battlefield weapon, they are for threatening the opponent that you'll strike his heartland with the explosion + radiation.

Now look if you nuke yourself, it'll be counterproductive. All the equipment/hardware we would use in a ColdStart-like assault will be NBC-proof, the only damage you cause will be the explosive effect of the bomb, which however is no better than a conventional explosive of a higher gradiant. They might well prevent your own forces from going near the invaders to stop them, that is bad, real bad.

Tactical nukes would be delivered by systems which would be fast and give hardly a few mins window/warning, most probably would never give a chance to any Indian BMD to respond.

In case of war/CS, India's spy satellites, Long-range ground radars, Aerostats, AWACS will be keeping a hard look on all battlefield formations of Pakistan (remember NASR-like missiles are basically short-range and are TEL-launched, they need to be brought close enough to the invading force if to be effective, but bringing them close will lessen their chances of springing a surprise as all radars will have them in their sights, the IA knows exactly where they are and when to respond).

That is why Nasr missle system has been developed, its mobile & its missile is fast which will reach its target in few mins time without the missile ever leaving the atmosphere of the earth, rather its flight path would be very short, straight and to the point, only a mobile BMD system which is travelling with the invading formations / something which is protecting the formations right on the border will have a chance to intercept such systems from our side.

QR-SAMs are one thing, but them there's these systems India is likely to acquire -

Iron Dome | Wikipedia.org

David's Sling | Wikipedia.org

The Iron Dome is even capable of taking out 155mm artillery shells fired towards the said mobile all-wheather air defense system. Agree these systems cannot take out every single missile launched but they do considerably reduce the probability, plus dont forget any NASR platform is always under constant threat of air attack.
 
.
As I said earlier, such attacks do more damage to yourself than to your opponent. Nuclear warheads lose their relevence when used as a battlefield weapon, they are for threatening the opponent that you'll strike his heartland with the explosion + radiation.

Now look if you nuke yourself, it'll be counterproductive. All the equipment/hardware we would use in a ColdStart-like assault will be NBC-proof, the only damage you cause will be the explosive effect of the bomb, which however is no better than a conventional explosive of a higher gradiant. They might well prevent your own forces from going near the invaders to stop them, that is bad, real bad.

From what I learned, Nasr was developed for TWO purposes.
1. To give the message, that Pakistan has developed battlefield nukes, and is willing to lower the nuclear threshold...so that any "limited conflict under the nuclear umbrella" doesn't takes place.
2. To minimize the visual signature of the delivery vehicle. If Nasr is mass-produced and is inducted as a heavy MBRL, there will be a lot of confusion as to which vehicle is carrying nuclear Nasrs.


In case of war/CS, India's spy satellites, Long-range ground radars, Aerostats, AWACS will be keeping a hard look on all battlefield formations of Pakistan (remember NASR-like missiles are basically short-range and are TEL-launched, they need to be brought close enough to the invading force if to be effective, but bringing them close will lessen their chances of springing a surprise as all radars will have them in their sights, the IA knows exactly where they are and when to respond).
It should be kept in mind that the same warhead can be delivered by Abdali SRBM (180 km range) and Ghaznavi SRBM (290 km range). So there isn't any issue of range.
QR-SAMs are one thing, but them there's these systems India is likely to acquire -

Iron Dome | Wikipedia.org

David's Sling | Wikipedia.org

The Iron Dome is even capable of taking out 155mm artillery shells fired towards the said mobile all-wheather air defense system. Agree these systems cannot take out every single missile launched but they do considerably reduce the probability, plus dont forget any NASR platform is always under constant threat of air attack.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian...aisalmer-border-pakistan-5.html#ixzz23PDowxAC

Nasr is not purely Ballistic. Unlike Artillery shells, it is a Quasi-Ballistic missile and is maneuverable to some extent.
 
.
Since you brought in alcohol, now i understand why its becoming too hard for you to understand what i just wrote.

Indian BMDs will protect Indian cities as a major objective, and as i said as we develop tactical nukes, the need to nuke an Indian city vanishes as tactical nukes give us the opportunity to nuke an invading force inside our own country and thus we can stop the war or atleast save ourselves by nuking any invading force inside Pakistan. Tactical nukes would be delivered by systems which would be fast and give hardly a few mins window/warning, most probably would never give a chance to any Indian BMD to respond. That is why Nasr missle system has been developed, its mobile & its missile is fast which will reach its target in few mins time without the missile ever leaving the atmosphere of the earth, rather its flight path would be very short, straight and to the point, only a mobile BMD system which is travelling with the invading formations / something which is protecting the formations right on the border will have a chance to intercept such systems from our side.



Since you brought in alcohol, now i understand why its becoming too hard for you to understand what i just wrote.

Indian BMDs will protect Indian cities as a major objective, and as i said as we develop tactical nukes, the need to nuke an Indian city vanishes as tactical nukes give us the opportunity to nuke an invading force inside our own country and thus we can stop the war or atleast save ourselves by nuking any invading force inside Pakistan. Tactical nukes would be delivered by systems which would be fast and give hardly a few mins window/warning, most probably would never give a chance to any Indian BMD to respond. That is why Nasr missle system has been developed, its mobile & its missile is fast which will reach its target in few mins time without the missile ever leaving the atmosphere of the earth, rather its flight path would be very short, straight and to the point, only a mobile BMD system which is travelling with the invading formations / something which is protecting the formations right on the border will have a chance to intercept such systems from our side.

The argument is based on what is the threshold for launch. Is crossing the border the threshold? Is violation of air space over major Pak cities the threshold? What does one do if radar installations are knocked off, but , there is no major ground invasion? Is this crossing the threshold.

The threshold also will depend on what is the stated objective of the oponent. Is it making hostilities unbearable?

Also, the Indian nuclear policy is quite clear. Retaliation is definite. So the question is what is the threshold? If the Indian political objective is purely to make a case and military objective is an airfield destruction, will this be crossing the threshold. Here Indian objective is met, but has it crossed the fine line? The Indian BMD is for a worst case scenario where an opponent is foolish enough to launch a BM on an Indian city.

Indian agression, anyways, seems implausible for now. Indian policy now seems to be, what Pakistani policy was for Kashmir. Death by a thousand cuts, both by attrition and economic. Stand back, enjoy the show, let the Americans be the 'victors' , while, once in a while holding army games near the border and talking about how great the Indian BMD is and how the latest fighters are invincible.
 
.
The argument is based on what is the threshold for launch. Is crossing the border the threshold? Is violation of air space over major Pak cities the threshold? What does one do if radar installations are knocked off, but , there is no major ground invasion? Is this crossing the threshold.

The threshold also will depend on what is the stated objective of the oponent. Is it making hostilities unbearable?

Also, the Indian nuclear policy is quite clear. Retaliation is definite. So the question is what is the threshold? If the Indian political objective is purely to make a case and military objective is an airfield destruction, will this be crossing the threshold. Here Indian objective is met, but has it crossed the fine line? The Indian BMD is for a worst case scenario where an opponent is foolish enough to launch a BM on an Indian city.

Indian agression, anyways, seems implausible for now. Indian policy now seems to be, what Pakistani policy was for Kashmir. Death by a thousand cuts, both by attrition and economic. Stand back, enjoy the show, let the Americans be the 'victors' , while, once in a while holding army games near the border and talking about how great the Indian BMD is and how the latest fighters are invincible.

The occupation of a major chunk of Pakistan's mainland is the threshold. The imminent verge of defeat in the conventional conflict is the threshold.

The thresholds you mentioned are quite low, rather very very low. Only insane leadership will respond to these scenarios with nuclear weapons.
 
.
Few years ago, IAF made new forward air base in Rajstan near the border to reduce response time, & now army.....
good decision.

Now where are the indians trolls who say .....our opponent is china....not Pakistan.....na g na hum to china se mukabla krain gae........hipocracy at its best......China se mukabla krain gae........????
 
.
Now where are the indians trolls who say .....our opponent is china....not Pakistan.....na g na hum to china se mukabla krain gae........hipocracy at its best......China se mukabla krain gae........????

we cant let our guards down with Pakistan and always have to be prepared for them as they have alwasy been our nemy. China on the other hand is a bigger challeneg for India and thus we are preparing ourselves keeping them in mind. It's foolish of you to say that since India is preparing for China it will not be cautious against Pakistan.
 
.
Atleast by the Chinese...this one system is very sketchy that the last time it was seen was when it was unveiled in 2008...but this is said to be more like a MBRL but the design of the rocket is more like the S 300 SAM with its ailerons for stabilization but the mod claimed it to be a SRBM of 400 KM range. But I still couldnt find out the weight, warhead capablity, area of neutralization or any tests made with the SY 400 system so was just asking where I can find a video where the system is tested.

Do you have a video of Chinese CIWS Type-730 while in testing phase ?? Any video of testing the new CIWS in the shape of FL-2000/3000 system, but still both systems are currently online and installed on the newer chinese frigates / ships. I can quote similarly many Chinese weapon systems which are in service or available for export which have no videos available while in testing phase.

If the Chinese are showing it in defence shows and saying its available for export, then it means they have tested it enough to have confidence to make it available for export.

And also the capabilities of lot of Chinese weapon systems are unknown, its not just the SY-400. Even Jane has added the item to its list.

SY-400 (China) - Jane's Strategic Weapon Systems

But this means radiation in your own country?? also one tactical nuke launched at Indian Forces can also be considered a nuclear strike and might launch nuke strikes at Pakistan, i mean it is possible.

So ?? Atleast we will not be overrun or major part of Pakistan would be in Indian hands, better to have a nukes country side then to see it in enemy hands.

And if India launches a nuke strike in retaliation to pakistan doing a nuke strike on invading forces on its own country, then their bad, as we used nukes against an invading force on our own land and not on Indian land, for that India does a nuke strike, then i believe MAD will come into effect and both countries will get ruined.
 
.
Tell me, why India is spending MORE on nuclear weapons (as compared to Pakistan) when according to foreign reports, it has less operational warheads?
Pakistan is investing more on the number of warheads, most of which are reported to be gun type.
There are no compelling evidence to suggest that Pakistan has successfully miniaturized the warheads enough to fit them on to her ballistic or cruise missiles. For the time it appears that it won't be feasible to mate these gun type nukes to the missile and they remain to be air dropped.

India on the other hand seems to be investing more on the R&D part, possibly on thermo nukes and MIRVs. It is yet not clear how far they have managed to wade through, in absence of any dual-use tech support from any of the P5s.
 
.
So after Cold Start, Surgical Strikes, Hot Pursuits...... it's back to basics......Battle ready.

Isn't that what most armies are meant to be....monitor....be on guard....attack...repulse...... counter attack......carry out offensive ...etc. etc....all in a days work.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom