Indian second strike capability,under gunned and underwhelming

[Safriz]

When first Ghauri missile was launched the official announcement said the warhead weighing just 700 Kg , and that was for a strategic ballistic missile made for city sized targets.
That was in 1998 , some 19 years ago. That's proof enough of miniaturization of Pakistan's strategic warheads.
On the other hand all Indian ballistic missiles are made for a ton or more weight of warhead.
Meaning India still hasn't miniaturised weapons.

 

[Peshwa]

When first Ghauri missile was launched the official announcement said the warhead weighing just 700 Kg , and that was for a strategic ballistic missile made for city sized targets.
That was in 1998 , some 19 years ago. That's proof enough of miniaturization of Pakistan's strategic warheads.
On the other hand all Indian ballistic missiles are made for a ton or more weight of warhead.
Meaning India still hasn't miniaturised weapons.

I suppose time remains static for India and is fluid for Pakistan? Is that what we are to take from this?
Or maybe I dont see the connect. So youre saying that in 19 years, India made no improvements to its systems? is that right?

 

[Ultima Thule]

ISPR made NO mention that multiple warheads were tested

Just in wet dream and your LA LA land Its is tested with MIRVED warheads ask @Dazzler For it and show only one pictures US, RUSSIAN, CHINESE, FRENCH ICBM that delivering MIRVED warheads, not launching of an ICBM if you have butthurt use this

on your butts its pain killer

ISPR never said MIRV was tested.
Happy?

Just in wet dream and your LA LA land Its is tested with MIRVED warheads ask @Dazzler For it and show only one pictures US, RUSSIAN, CHINESE, FRENCH ICBM that delivering MIRVED warheads, not launching of an ICBMif you have butthurt use this

on your butts its pain killer

 

[aryadravida_exmuslim]

Just in wet dream and your LA LA land Its is tested with MIRVED warheads ask @Dazzler For it and show only one pictures US, RUSSIAN, CHINESE, FRENCH ICBM that delivering MIRVED warheads for not launching of an ICBM

Just in wet dream and your LA LA land Its is tested with MIRVED warheads ask @Dazzler For it and show only one pictures US, RUSSIAN, CHINESE, FRENCH ICBM that delivering MIRVED warheads for not launching of an ICBM

It's dumb to attempt MIRV while there's much dynamic data to be collected.
IF they did try it, that means they wasted time waiting for MIRV preparation instead of going ahead with the much important dynamic testing, (which is what they actually did).
The data won't be pure either. You need uncontaminated data about your missile.

Fine. Benefit of doubt, it's possible they tried MRV. But not MIRV. They didn't claim it either, so I'm safe in my assumption.

It was the smart thing to do.

 

[Ultima Thule]

Cannot fire Babur.

Can easily be modified for launching Babur-3 if you butthurt use this on your butts

Its a pain killer

It's dumb to attempt MIRV while there's much dynamic data to be collected.
IF they did try it, that means they wasted time waiting for MIRV preparation instead of going ahead with the much important dynamic testing, (which is what they actually did).
The data won't be pure either. You need uncontaminated data about your missile.

Fine. Benefit of doubt, it's possible they tried MRV. But not MIRV. They didn't claim it either, so I'm safe in my assumption.

It was the smart thing to do.

 

[Safriz]

I suppose time remains static for India and is fluid for Pakistan? Is that what we are to take from this?
Or maybe I dont see the connect. So youre saying that in 19 years, India made no improvements to its systems? is that right?

India had been spending time , money and effort in a different direction of missile development. Look at the thread below and you cam guess what I mean.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/is-indian-ballistic-missile-program-overly-complicated.481957/

On the other hand Pakistan kept steering system and rocket stages same or similar to what we built in early 2000 S. Unlike Indian missiles who use six different types of steering susyema, Pakistani missiles use just one box standard, good old jet vanes.
Instead Pakistan has Beeb spending those years on upgrading warheads and RV.
Even older Shaheen-2 has 1050 Kg of the who RV bus including warhead, so warhead is much lighter than an ton, supposedly in the realms of 600-700 Kg , may be less.
We don't have much data on Shaheen-1A , Shaheem-3 and Ababeel , but these three use the same warhead which is 40% smaller than what's being used on Shaheen-2, while all these missiles use the same old legacy rocket stages.
So there you go. India's and Pakistani development of nuclear arsenal had Been in different directions.
You can weave a whole missile with carbon fibre thread , we still use steel. But our warheads and RV are far sophisticated as that's where all our effort had gone.

 

[Peshwa]

India had been spending time , money and effort in a different direction of missile development. Look at the thread below and you cam guess what I mean.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/is-indian-ballistic-missile-program-overly-complicated.481957/

On the other hand Pakistan kept steering system and rocket stages same or similar to what we built in early 2000 S. Unlike Indian missiles who use six different types of steering susyema, Pakistani missiles use just one box standard, good old jet vanes.
Instead Pakistan has Beeb spending those years on upgrading warheads and RV.
Even older Shaheen-2 has 1050 Kg of the who RV bus including warhead, so warhead is much lighter than an ton, supposedly in the realms of 600-700 Kg , may be less.
We don't have much data on Shaheen-1A , Shaheem-3 and Ababeel , but these three use the same warhead which is 40% smaller than what's being used on Shaheen-2, while all these missiles use the same old legacy rocket stages.
So there you go. India's and Pakistani development of nuclear arsenal had Been in different directions.
You can weave a whole missile with carbon fibre thread , we still use steel. But our warheads and RV are far sophisticated as that's where all our effort had gone.

I'm here purely to learn, so not going to counter with pretentious BS as I am certainly not knowledgeable on this subject beyond the basics. So this is all news to me, and I would love to read more about it.
But I'm having a hard time figuring out where you got these doctrinal and developmental information on Indian missile program from? The thread you quoted here seems to be your comments based on analysis of photography but does not provide any references to substantiate.

You may very well be right in your assessment and you probably have the technical knowledge for this, but can you at least shed light on where you're picking up the information on Indian missiles from? Some references would help the reader.

 

[Storm Force]

India nuclear submarine programme is in its infancy.

You CRAWL first
Then Stand UP
Then walk
THE YOU RUN & SPRINT

Arihant is the first of FIVE SLBM ..........................

COME BACK in 2030 when the 5th is inducted THIS WILL CARRY 12 SLBM each each warhead 3/4 MISSLES MIRV.ed.. ie 36/48 100 tonne warheads each ...........


give it time

20 years ago india sent one rocket with one satalite

LAST MONTH they SENT ONE ROCKET CARYINHG 104 satalites
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-38977803

 

[Safriz]

India nuclear submarine programme is in its infancy.

You CRAWL first
Then Stand UP
Then walk
THE YOU RUN & SPRINT

Arihant is the first of FIVE SLBM ..........................

COME BACK in 2030 when the 5th is inducted THIS WILL CARRY 12 SLBM each each warhead 3/4 MISSLES MIRV.ed.. ie 36/48 100 tonne warheads each ...........


give it time

20 years ago india sent one rocket with one satalite

LAST MONTH they SENT ONE ROCKET CARYINHG 104 satalites
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-38977803

Arihant is said to have been built at a cost of $2.9 billion. “But that is not the unit cost of the submarine. The material cost apart, it includes the money spent on setting up facilities such as the submarine reactor complex in Kalpakkam, the Defence Machinery and Design Establishment in Hyderabad and the Ship Building Centre in Vizag. However, to amortise the amount, India should be building a series of nuclear submarines,” a source said ( From The Hindu)

 

[Storm Force]

Arihant is said to have been built at a cost of $2.9 billion. “But that is not the unit cost of the submarine. The material cost apart, it includes the money spent on setting up facilities such as the submarine reactor complex in Kalpakkam, the Defence Machinery and Design Establishment in Hyderabad and the Ship Building Centre in Vizag. However, to amortise the amount, India should be building a series of nuclear submarines,” a source said ( From The Hindu)

That is the plan the infrastructure technology and template is now in place to build five.nuclear subs by 2025/2030
Possibly even eight

 

[AKD]

When first Ghauri missile was launched the official announcement said the warhead weighing just 700 Kg , and that was for a strategic ballistic missile made for city sized targets.
That was in 1998 , some 19 years ago. That's proof enough of miniaturization of Pakistan's strategic warheads.
On the other hand all Indian ballistic missiles are made for a ton or more weight of warhead.
Meaning India still hasn't miniaturised weapons.

 

[Penguin]

About K-4 , K-15 and Arihant submarine, it's a bit baffling.
Taking reference from the website most Indians consider reliable source the lightest and smallest diameter Indian nuclear warhead may be the one on Agni-1 which has a blast yield of 40-50 kt. That's the one most probably used on K-15.
https://missilethreat.csis.org/missile/agni-1/
On the higher side ,the Agni-4 and Agni-5 warheads are 1-1.3 meters wide and 3 metes long. That's the warhead most probably used on K-4 and has a blast yield of 150 KT.

So an Arihant submarine armed with four K-4 will have a total destructive power of about 600 KT or four warheads of 150 KT each.
The same for an Arihant armed with twelve K-15
With twelve warheads of 50 KT each.
That's a very under gunned second strike capability of just 600 KT?
Neither K-4 or K-15 are MIRV capable as too narrow.

4 tubes on Arihant
= 12 × K15 SLBM (750–1900 km: 466–1181 mi range; 405-1026 nm) or
= 4 × K-4 SLBM (3500 km; 2175 mi; 1890 nm)
= "just" 600 kiloton

Please note:
LittleBoy (Hiroshima) 15 kiloton
FatMan (Nagasaki) 20 kiloton

So, "just" 600 kiloton is 30 Nagasaki's or 40 Hiroshima's.... (= mind boggling)

In December 2014, the work on a second nuclear reactor began and the second boat, INS Aridhaman is being prepared for sea trials. This submarine has eight launch tubes in its hump. She can carry up to 24 K-15 Sagarika missiles, or 8 of the K-4 missiles. i.e. 1200 kiloton. She is expected to commission late 2018.

Three to six nuclear ballistic submarines are planned to be built. The first four vessels are expected to be commissioned by 2023. After the lead ship, the next three ships in the class will be larger and have 8 missile launch tubes, to carry up to 8 K4 and a more powerful pressurized water reactor than INS Arihant. A yet larger follow on class to the Arihant class is also planned: these new boats will be capable of carrying 12 to 16 ballistic missiles. i.e. (at least) 1800 or 2400 kiloton

So

No. 1: Arihant > 600 kiloton (now)
No. 2: Aridhama > 1200 kiloton (late 2018)
No. 3: 1200 kiloton (by 2023)
No. 4: 1200 kiloton (by 2023)
No. 5: 1800-2400 kiloton (beyond 2023)
No. 6: 1800-2400 kiloton (beyond 2023)

Totals:
Now: 600 kiloton
By 2019: 1800 kiloton
By 2023: 4200 kiloton
By 2030: 7800 - 9000 kiloton

That's 390-450 Nagasaki's or 520-600 Hiroshima's ... (= insane)

 

[Roybot]

Just in wet dream and your LA LA land Its is tested with MIRVED warheads ask @Dazzler For it and show only one pictures US, RUSSIAN, CHINESE, FRENCH ICBM that delivering MIRVED warheads, not launching of an ICBM if you have butthurt use this View attachment 382389on your butts its pain killer

Just in wet dream and your LA LA land Its is tested with MIRVED warheads ask @Dazzler For it and show only one pictures US, RUSSIAN, CHINESE, FRENCH ICBM that delivering MIRVED warheads, not launching of an ICBMif you have butthurt use this View attachment 382389on your butts its pain killer

 

[aryadravida_exmuslim]

Biblical.

 

[Lil Mathew]

On the higher side ,the Agni-4 and Agni-5 warheads are 1-1.3 meters wide and 3 metes long. That's the warhead most probably used on K-4 and has a blast yield of 150 KT.

Who said you blast yield is only 150KT??

For example 1986 model W86 thermonuclear warhead fits inside mk21.. mk21's diamensions are a cone with base diameter 0.056 meter and a length of 0.180 metre and weight is only 200 to 270 kg. It's yield is 450 kt..
Our Agni 5, warhead cone base diameter is 2 m & length 3metre , can carry 1500 kg but only 150 kt yield??.