Nasr VS Parhaar | First Detailed Analysis.

[kaykay]

Nasr on 29th May 2012... 4 cannisters:

An it probably weighed a ton!... TNW are a different ball game..

I dont think so because we have 17KT warheads weighted 180 KG, so I am guessing our sub kitolton device will also weight less.
PS: I dont confirm it, but I confirm that we have17KT warheads weighted 180 KG.

 

[The Deterrent]

I dont think so because we have 17KT warheads weighted 180 KG, so I am guessing our sub kitolton device will also weight less.
PS: I dont confirm it, but I confirm that we have17KT warheads weighted 180 KG.

The whole warhead package weighs a lot more than the weight of primary nuclear device (high explosive lenses and the core) in case of smaller nuclear weapons. And please, half-baked claims from BR and self made non-realistic warhead diagrams don't count as credible sources.

 

[MilSpec]

@Aeronaut... great job on the comparison sheet, looking forward for the paper... on a different note, thanks for reminding many of us that this is still a defense forum.... hopefully others will follow suit by more threads like these in comparison/review/discussion of armament related hardware..... keep up the good work!!!

 

[kaykay]

The whole warhead package weighs a lot more than the weight of primary nuclear device (high explosive lenses and the core) in case of smaller nuclear weapons. And please, half-baked claims from BR and self made non-realistic warhead diagrams don't count as credible sources.

okay we dont have capability, still we are testing a tactical missile?? Regarding claims, our officials will never disclose the true nos. And types of warheads but we can only guess according to the analysis available in public domain.

 

[ares]

@AhaseebA

As of now, Nasr is ahead in testing as it has been fired in volleys and poor climatic conditions.
Parhaar has not been fired in volleys yet and its first test date had to be moved, for clear day conditions.

Prahaar is a 'spin off' of AAD(basically a SSM version of the ABM), which not only ensures that Prahaar has high supersonic speed(mach 4.5), is highly maneuverable,maneuverable enough to intercept a incoming missile, in addition most of it component have already been tested more than a half a dozen times in AAD interceptions.

 

[The Deterrent]

okay we dont have capability, still we are testing a tactical missile?? Regarding claims, our officials will never disclose the true nos. And types of warheads but we can only guess according to the analysis available in public domain.

Yes, no doubt India has the capability to develop a mature tactical platform.
I don't agree with the second part, DRDO's officials disclose a lot of things about their weapons systems, even months before they are actually tested. If Prahaar was nuclear capable, it would've been out in the media, presented as a response to Pakistan's TNWs, for consumption of local masses. The term "different warheads" in Prahaar's case refers to multiple types of conventional munitions e.g. unitary HE, Fuel air explosive, blast fragmentation (for radar sites), bunker-buster and cluster bomblets.

 

[HariPrasad]

These things don't matter much. Both missiles will be eventually fired in volleys.



As I said, there shouldn't be any comparison of Nasr and Prahaar. Nasr is primarily a nuclear delivery system, and it does not matters if its accuracy is 2m or 20m.

I told the same to aeronaut. He discovered Rant out of it. And yes Prahar is not a nuclear delivery system as it is not intended to be a nuclear delivery system and not because it lacks any capability to deliver Nuclear payload. It is technically more than capable to do all what nasr can do.

 

[kṣamā]

Nasr is smaller i.e a lighter missile than prahar, which weighs 1.3 tons and carries 200 Kg warhead..there is no way NASR can carry a half a ton warhead.

My thoughts exactly. A simple back of the envelop calculation prove this wrong. Let me put this in a simple words, for every "x" amt of payload requires "1.4x" fuel to be launched. The added fuel is also adds up weight hence again 1.4 times the total wt (Payload + Fuel). This will require a bit of high school/ college math to solve. This just solves the "Launch" part of the puzzle. For maneuvering and speed we need a lot more fuel.

Now for a 500Kg payload we would require 500*1.4kg fuel. And a quite some more for speed and maneuver. Also I have not yed considered the guidance and the metal framework weight. Now its open for everyone to discuss.

 

[Yogi]

As I said, there shouldn't be any comparison of Nasr and Prahaar. Nasr is primarily a nuclear delivery system, and it does not matters if its accuracy is 2m or 20m.

But don't u think that the probability of Actually using nukes on Nasr on any small scale war is quite low, as it would escalate the situation beyond control n would invite a much larger retaliation from India whereas Prahaar could prove pretty handy in normal course of war with a decent conventional payload, higher accuracy n much better range.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

But don't u think that the probability of Actually using nukes on Nasr on any small scale war is quite low, as it would escalate the situation beyond control n would invite a much larger retaliation from India whereas Prahaar could prove pretty handy in normal course of war with a decent conventional payload, higher accuracy n much better range.

Lol.. we wont nuke india.. but indian troops on our soil.. unless indian govt is stupid enough to go nuclear.. you will also get a massive nuclear retaliation... and entire south asia would be a quiet neighbourhood for the next 1000 years.

 

[The Deterrent]

But don't u think that the probability of Actually using nukes on Nasr on any small scale war is quite low, as it would escalate the situation beyond control n would invite a much larger retaliation from India whereas Prahaar could prove pretty handy in normal course of war with a decent conventional payload, higher accuracy n much better range.

"it would escalate the situation beyond control"
That is precisely the purpose of its development according to some, as it provides deterrence at the lower levels.

Of course it would prove handy as you rightly said. Pakistan is also developing a conventional platform to be used in higher numbers in a tactical role, with similar range capabilities.

 

[acid rain]

Based on the comparison, Prahaar comes on top and seems to be a better platform than Nasr(this version).
Is there a planned upgrade for Nasr in pipeline. Another comparison point could be price per unit and numbers to be deployed.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Yes, no doubt India has the capability to develop a mature tactical platform.
I don't agree with the second part, DRDO's officials disclose a lot of things about their weapons systems, even months before they are actually tested. If Prahaar was nuclear capable, it would've been out in the media, presented as a response to Pakistan's TNWs, for consumption of local masses. The term "different warheads" in Prahaar's case refers to multiple types of conventional munitions e.g. unitary HE, Fuel air explosive, blast fragmentation (for radar sites), bunker-buster and cluster bomblets.

@AhaseebA;
You do need to calibrate that response a little further; Prahaar is at the outset designed to carry warheads of different kinds, but that does not preclude the mounting of Nuclear Warheads.
You do need to understand that India has not predicated the use of TNWs as part of its Nuclear Warfare Doctrines. It is primarily based on Strategic Nuclear Weapons; but does that rule out both the possibility and capability to use TNWs?

All that is clearly reflected in the design parameters of Prahaar; it is a precision missile therefore. Its precision ability is also therefore different, (read-superior) to Nasr. It needs to be; to comply with its primary doctrinal requirement.

Most of all remember; that Nasr is intended to be a 'defensive weapon'. Though a weapon of last defence. Its use is as a "Hara-Kiri" weapon. And its use will result in exponentially increasing the Nuclear Stakes in the conflict by a "factor of infinity".
As a WMD- But here WMD stands for Weapon of Mighty Desperation. Because its use will simply lead to the letting loose of a Nuclear Holocaust. Do also remember that, in the "first use" of the Nasr; there will be "Blue Casualties" ie casualties of own troops . As well as the devastation of part of one's own country/territory. Remember that also.

You need to factor those points in while discussing the Prahaar and Nasr and attempting to draw up any comparison between them.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Lol.. we wont nuke india.. but indian troops on our soil.. unless indian govt is stupid enough to go nuclear.. you will also get a massive nuclear retaliation... and entire south asia would be a quiet neighbourhood for the next 1000 years.

LOLLLLLL. That sure is a lot of Bluster and Blather !!!!!

 

[Yogi]

Lol.. we wont nuke india.. but indian troops on our soil.. unless indian govt is stupid enough to go nuclear.. you will also get a massive nuclear retaliation... and entire south asia would be a quiet neighbourhood for the next 1000 years.

As per India's No First Use Policy, even if Nukes r used in enemy territory against Indian troops, it would be considered as a Nuclear Attack n will be matched by unproportional retaliation.

For the bold part, i have my doubts about Pakistan's second strike capabilities but u can dream on.

Besides i have Clearly mentioned in my post that i m talking about a Limited Conflict or a Small Scale War n i hope that Pakistani Generals would be a bit saner than some PDF fanboys who r just dying to press the N buttons.