Pakistan and the Nasr Missile :: Searching for a Method in the Madness

[AUSTERLITZ]

I believe I just said that in the first reply. Airbursts are not only "cleaner", but they are also more devastating to buildings and vehicles because the shockwave hits close targets directly and adds up after reflecting from ground. Why do you think Tsar-Bomba didn't irradiate a continent?

Pakistan Wants 'Battlefield' Nukes, against Indian Troops | Page 17

Airbursts are not some new technology.Even the tiny fission bombs at hiroshima and nagasaki were airbursts,thousands and thousands have been crippled or died in those places from residual radiation even after so many years.Airbursts do not eliminate radioactive fallout,only decrease level.Try it on a agricultural belt riverine area with the canal system providing most of pakistan's vital water supply and poison it?
As for tsar bomba -One it was tested on the northern tip of siberia,away from any habitation.Secondly the 2nd and 3rd stage of the bomb had lead neutron reflectors instead of uranium ones which eliminated over 95% of the radioactive fallout.This technology is used in the neutron bomb,an advanced weapon which was developed during cold war.Neither india,pakistan or china have deployed or developed it.The bomb even with this tech was not used to a higher yield because then fallout would recah populated areas,which were hundreds of kilometres away.

Thanks for this elaborate reply.Only one more question , where will the IBGs be drawn from - the pivot corps or strike corps??

The integral mobile formations of each pivot corps will be used as core.Added will be support assets from strike corps and GHQ reserve.Most of it is still in testing and half implementation stage.

 

[Donald Trump]

The concept of force multipliers goes above your head it seems. Allow me to educate you:

1. Nasr doesn't need to completely destroy intruding forces, it just needs to soften them up enough to let the Pak Fauj wipe them out. In all your assumptions, you are thinking there are no Pakistani ground forces on the ground. Mind you, the ratio of Indian army to Pakistani army is 2:1, which is not a huge advantage. Fighting the 6th largest military in the world while under fire from tactical nukes is no kids play.

2. Cold Start's objective is to make fast thrusts and capture territory. If the Indians fear the Nasr, and spread their forces to lessen its impact, they are effectively eroding their numerical advantage on the ground, since a smaller number of tanks, soldiers will be directly facing the Pak Fauj. In essence, by spreading their forces out over a very large area, they are literally negating the objective they set out to achieve. That is to gain territory through fast mobilization and overwhelming numbers.

Either way, its a win-win situation for Pakistan.

Silly arguments! That's because you know squat how such operations are conducted, least of all how tactical nukes will be employed and how ICGs operate. You are arguing with someone who fortunately does know his beans. Armchair civilians like you who profess to be 'experts' need to stay away from indulging in something they know nothing about.

Thanks! Have a nice day!

 

[The Deterrent]

Airbursts are not some new technology.Even the tiny fission bombs at hiroshima and nagasaki were airbursts,thousands and thousands have been crippled or died in those places from residual radiation even after so many years.Airbursts do not eliminate radioactive fallout,only decrease level.Try it on a agricultural belt riverine area with the canal system providing most of pakistan's vital water supply and poison it?

No, that is not true. The half-lives of Pu and U238 (used in Hiroshima/Nagasaki) are too small to affect through fallout. The only long-term radiation-related complications were found in exposed women who later gave births to affected children.

Past investigations suggested that the maximum cumulative dose at the hypocenter from immediately after the bombing until today is 0.8 Gy in Hiroshima and 0.3-0.4 Gy in Nagasaki. When the distance is 0.5 km or 1.0 km from the hypocenter, the estimates are about 1/10 and 1/100 of the value at the hypocenter, respectively. The induced radioactivity decayed very quickly with time. In fact, nearly 80% of the above-mentioned doses were released within a day, about 10% between days 2 and 5, and the remaining 10% from day 6 afterward

.
More information here:
Frequently Asked Questions - Radiation Effects Research Foundation
The Straight Dope: If nuclear fallout lasts thousands of years, how did Hiroshima and Nagasaki recover so quickly?

In short, any modern day nuclear air-burst would be as clean as it gets in terms of residual radiation from fallout.

As for tsar bomba -One it was tested on the northern tip of siberia,away from any habitation.Secondly the 2nd and 3rd stage of the bomb had lead neutron reflectors instead of uranium ones which eliminated over 95% of the radioactive fallout.This technology is used in the neutron bomb,an advanced weapon which was developed during cold war.Neither india,pakistan or china have deployed or developed it.The bomb even with this tech was not used to a higher yield because then fallout would recah populated areas,which were hundreds of kilometres away.

That is true, the fallout was minimum because of the lead tampers.

 

[skysthelimit]

Food for thought: What if the intention is to vaporize the bargaining chip instead of the armored columns?

You realise you are talking about vaporising Pakistani people, right?

 

[The Deterrent]

You realise you are talking about vaporising Pakistani people, right?

That depends on the conflict zone. If it is southern Punjab or Sindh, it will be less densely populated and people would have evacuated the area with the beginning of the conflict. So, in such an area, where after a rigorous battle PA has been defeated and IA has established a stronghold, Nasr would have maximum utility. Sub-kiloton blasts detonated right above enemy stronghold won't produce relatively higher Pakistani collateral damage.
If it is a densely populated area such as Lahore, then conventional warfare has to be the answer unless the captured area has been evacuated.

But then, it is just food for thought.

 

[Argon Prime]

That depends on the conflict zone. If it is southern Punjab or Sindh, it will be less densely populated and people would have evacuated the area with the beginning of the conflict. So, in such an area, where after a rigorous battle PA has been defeated and IA has established a stronghold, Nasr would have maximum utility. Sub-kiloton blasts detonated right above enemy stronghold won't produce relatively higher Pakistani collateral damage.
If it is a densely populated area such as Lahore, then conventional warfare has to be the answer unless the captured area has been evacuated.

But then, it is just food for thought.

Why not use some heavy air bursting or cargo munitions or napalms instead??At least that way,there won't be any chance of retaliatory nuclear strikes by Indian SFC,which in turn will result in Pakistan following suit and then nuclear winter??Don't you think use of conventional explosives would be a better choice instead of using sub kiloton nukes,which are costlier to produce and maintain too compared to the formerly mentioned types??

 

[The Deterrent]

Why not use some heavy air bursting or cargo munitions or napalms instead??At least that way,there won't be any chance of retaliatory nuclear strikes by Indian SFC,which in turn will result in Pakistan following suit and then nuclear winter??Don't you think use of conventional explosives would be a better choice instead of using sub kiloton nukes,which are costlier to produce and maintain too compared to the formerly mentioned types??

The scenario being discussed here is in the aftermath of Pakistani military being run over in a specific area by an Indian IBG. In that case, most probably PAF won't have enough air superiority in the region to conduct air-strikes. Otherwise conventional weapons are the obvious choice.

 

[HariPrasad]

Nasr is for any advancing indian ground forces within indian territory.

Only an idiot will use its tactical weapon on its own soil. Thr whole article is based on non bookish assumptions.

And pakistan is that idiot. They have said it repeatedly that they will use Nasr against Indian troops in Pakistan.

 

[Argon Prime]

The scenario being discussed here is in the aftermath of Pakistani military being run over in a specific area by an Indian IBG. In that case, most probably PAF won't have enough air superiority in the region to conduct air-strikes. Otherwise conventional weapons are the obvious choice.

Hmm,I see.How about MBRLs??

 

[The Deterrent]

Hmm,I see.How about MBRLs??

Please try to understand that Nuclear weapons are last-resort weapons. Pakistan's military is a responsible one specifically regarding nuclear weapons, and will not resort to use of tactical nukes unless absolutely necessary. A significant amount of thought and decision-making will be put in place before using tactical nukes. Contrary to popular belief, they are not operated with hair triggers.

 

[Argon Prime]

Please try to understand that Nuclear weapons are last-resort weapons. Pakistan's military is a responsible one specifically regarding nuclear weapons, and will not resort to use of tactical nukes unless absolutely necessary. A significant amount of thought and decision-making will be put in place before using tactical nukes. Contrary to popular belief, they are not operated with hair triggers.

I hope so,nukes are no joke,even the tactical ones.