Pakistan has cost effective solutions to India’s ballistic missile defence system

[GumNaam]

I would take that news with a grain of salt. It could be true with various factors playing into it(e.g. mountainous terrain), which doesn't necessarily mean that S400 sucks against Tomahawk(or other analogous missiles). If the news isn't true...well then in that case we don't really know its capabilities.

I don't think Russians would spend billions to develop S400 only for it to be a sitting duck against Tomahawks. The nation's acquiring it like China, Turkey, India aren't fools either to acquire a system, which fails against Tomahawks.

I dunno man, that false sense of security has its market value...countries will pay billions to have that false sense of security.

 

[Cookie Monster]

I dunno man, that false sense of security has its market value...people will pay billions to have that false sense of security.

Even if we assume that some of the top militaries of the world were fooled into acquiring it thinking that it's a "good/effective" system...still doesn't explain why Russia itself developed/manufactured/deployed it.

If it was that ineffective then surely the country that made it would know that...so why do u think they would deploy such an "ineffective" system to protect themselves from the very threat(Tomahawks of US and NATO) that it can't take on?

Idk about u...but from a tactical/strategical point of view...it's never good to underestimate ur enemy and overestimating urself. In fact the opposite should be done. Pak should consider S400 as a potent threat bcuz it is...and be over prepared rather than underprepared.

 

[GumNaam]

Even if we assume that some of the top militaries of the world were fooled into acquiring it thinking that it's a "good/effective" system...still doesn't explain why Russia itself developed/manufactured/deployed it.

If it was that ineffective then surely the country that made it would know that...so why do u think they would deploy such an "ineffective" system to protect themselves from the very threat(Tomahawks of US and NATO) that it can't take on?

Idk about u...but from a tactical/strategical point of view...it's never good to underestimate ur enemy and overestimating urself. In fact the opposite should be done. Pak should consider S400 as a potent threat bcuz it is...and be over prepared rather than underprepared.

Russia has the ultimate deterrent i.e. 2nd largest nuclear stockpile in the world. She knows damn well that no one would dare attack her but to be able to market its weapons, it FIRST has to prove that "I'm not only the seller, I'm also a buyer". You have to remember, unlike other countries, Russia only has 3 thinks it can export, oil, gas and WEAPONS! So it has make its weapons marketable.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Russia has the ultimate deterrent i.e. 2nd largest nuclear stockpile in the world. She knows damn well that no one would dare attack her but to be able to market its weapons, it FIRST has to prove that "I'm not only the seller, I'm also a buyer". You have to remember, unlike other countries, Russia only has 3 thinks it can export, oil, gas and WEAPONS! So it has make its weapons marketable.

Seems like a big assumption to think that...
1) Russia spent billions and developed/inducted a failed SAM system with the hopes it can export it. Huge risk to think a failed product will successfully sell...
...and therefore most likely the chances are high that ur money developing it will be sunk.

Instead of doing the whole charade of spending loads of money to develop a failed product and then induct it to keep up appearances...
2) why not use that money to develop a potent system? Especially when Russia already has a big defense industry/infrastructure in place...
...at least that way if only Russia inducts it and gets no export orders...it still has a potent system for defense.
...if it does get export orders then that's just icing on the cake. It yields profit and being a potent system makes a brand name of sorts, which brings the customers back in the future.

So again, why would Russia go with the first convoluted/risky approach when it can safely go with the second one?

 

[GumNaam]

Seems like a big assumption to think that...
1) Russia spent billions and developed/inducted a failed SAM system with the hopes it can export it. Huge risk to think a failed product will successfully sell...
...and therefore most likely the chances are high that ur money developing it will be sunk.

Instead of doing the whole charade of spending loads of money to develop a failed product and then induct it to keep up appearances...
2) why not use that money to develop a potent system? Especially when Russia already has a big defense industry/infrastructure in place...
...at least that way if only Russia inducts it and gets no export orders...it still has a potent system for defense.
...if it does get export orders then that's just icing on the cake. It yields profit and being a potent system makes a brand name of sorts, which brings the customers back in the future.

So again, why would Russia go with the first convoluted/risky approach when it can safely go with the second one?

Bro, I'm not gonna get into the theoretics of anything. The buck stops at the fact u.s./nato bombed Syria many times over after Russia deployed the s400 batteries and 2 years later, their batteries have no kills to show for, either planes or tomahawks.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Bro, I'm not gonna get into the theoretics of anything. The buck stops at the fact u.s./nato bombed Syria many times over after Russia deployed the s400 batteries and 2 years later, their batteries have no kills to show for, either planes or tomahawks.

U can believe what u like...I'm gonna trust the judgement of some of the major militaries in the world(Russia/China/Turkey/India).

 

[GumNaam]

U can believe what u like...I'm gonna trust the judgement of some of the major militaries in the world(Russia/China/Turkey/India).

 

[PAR 5]

The S400 is first very effective against Cruise Missiles (as it as designed to defeat air superiority of USA/ NATO air assets) as these are the weapons of choice by the USA (Tomahawks) for any wide area attack with precision. Secondarily its effective against guided or unguided land based surface to surface missiles. Like the Patriot, but far more effective. Lastly, its also very effective against anything flying with wings and a man in the cockpit. So that does not leave any choice for any conventional adversary to dominate the air against such a system. I am yet to hear about any missile or aircraft dodging the S400 bullet. If there is, please correct me anytime.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

You had zeronloss in 1071 as well. You had zero loss in surgical strike as well.



Paper tiger teared apart real tiger into two in 1971.

why is that indians take pride in enemys disadvantage while cry like a whore when china has hold of chicken neck coridore? if india was so powerful then y could they split pak back in 65??? thats because therr was no independence movement which india could not rely on to take advantage. u guys are nothing but hyenas who take advantage of weak and poor.

 

[Dash]

Probably may happen when the economy zooms and the defense budget becomes huge.

I will still say its not gonna happen. There are many factors to PAC3. Its too political to be real. Russia will not want S400 with PAC3 like wise USofA.

 

[HariPrasad]

india was so powerful then y could they split pak back in 65???

We vacatted Lahore in 1965.

 

[Maarkhoor]

We vacatted Lahore in 1965.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

We vacatted Lahore in 1965.

is this jerkoff matarial found in indian army mess for officers consumption??? the only thing indian military achived was *** beating and quick retreat

 

[LeGenD]

I would take that news with a grain of salt. It could be true with various factors playing into it(e.g. mountainous terrain), which doesn't necessarily mean that S400 sucks against Tomahawk(or other analogous missiles). If the news isn't true...well then in that case we don't really know its capabilities.

I don't think Russians would spend billions to develop S400 only for it to be a sitting duck against Tomahawks. The nation's acquiring it like China, Turkey, India aren't fools either to acquire a system, which fails against Tomahawks.

Tomahawk cruise missile is a continuously evolving platform in the face of evolving threats; latest variant is Block IV (IOC in 2004)

Tomahawk Block IV passes over the terrain at very low altitudes, can change course on the fly (in the face of obstacles on the surface), and is equipped with components, making persistent radar tracking exceedingly difficult in its case. Additionally, US have thousands of Tomahawk Block IV in its inventory; USN can overwhelm any defense system with sheer numbers, if necessary.

Furthermore, whenever US forces strike at targets in a heavily defended space, USAF is out there to divert attention of regional defenses in the process. They have technological superiority, and lot of operational exposure, on their side.

Pakistan does not have such numbers, and parity in technology.

 

[The Deterrent]

CM-401 Hypersonic Land-attack/Anti-Ship Quasi Ballistic Missile
Can launch from ground/ship and hit large ships/ground targets 290km out.

M-20A/B Hypersonic Land-Attack/Anti-Ship Quasi Ballistic Missile
Land launched, can strike 290km away.

HD-1 Supersonic Land-attack/Anti-Ship Cruise Missile
Can launch from ground/ship and hit large ships/ground targets 290km out.