Pakistan successfully tests Hatf (Vengeance) III - Ghaznavi SRBM.

genmirajborgza786 said:

but sir' still 2,000 km is too less, I mean Andaman & Nicobar is about 3,000 km away, at least a solid 3,500 to 4,000 km range would the best one IMHO

Click to expand...

Oscar said:

What is there in those Islands that threatens you which you need to hit?

Click to expand...

Armstrong said:

Yaraaa I read somewhere that a battlefield nuke like the Nasr can obliterate anything and everything within a 1 mile radius of where it lands; can this missile (Hatf-III) be used to do half that with a completely conventional warhead ?

And if you answer in the affirmative (or even otherwise), can our formations be armed with this to use as long-range artillery to knock out the opposing formation's command and control center (subject to identification) and thereby leaving the enemy formations rudderless for some period of time ?

Click to expand...

Oscar said:

What is there in those Islands that threatens you which you need to hit?

Click to expand...

Bilal. said:

They and north east can host mobile Agni Vs targeting Pakistan from stand off distance.

Click to expand...

Zarvan said:

Sir we didn't do nuclear tests for more than 16 years Sir although it was ready in 1984 but we tested it in 1998 Sir we are a Muslim country and the moment we start testing long range missiles you would see really different kind of reaction shown to us by USA and Europe than if tested by India so when Pakistan would decide the situation is right they would test them the work was done for long now they are just waiting for right moment you want to live in denial your choice

Click to expand...

HariPrasad said:

Hi @Deterrent Can't it be increased by lowering Payload?

Click to expand...

Armstrong said:

Yaraaa I read somewhere that a battlefield nuke like the Nasr can obliterate anything and everything within a 1 mile radius of where it lands; can this missile (Hatf-III) be used to do half that with a completely conventional warhead ?

And if you answer in the affirmative (or even otherwise), can our formations be armed with this to use as long-range artillery to knock out the opposing formation's command and control center (subject to identification) and thereby leaving the enemy formations rudderless for some period of time ?

Click to expand...

Oscar said:

Just compare warhead size in terms of TnT power. I.e in tons of TnT.
See if they have the same effect. You will have your answer.
TNT equivalent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Click to expand...

Thorough Pro said:

Nothing will happen, assets so far away will not pose any threat to Pakistan, and thus do not require our attention.




You took my example word by word, ignoring the underlying message. When you hit the face/head, you hit the nerve center, the decision center, that taken out, body is useless. Coming back to your comment, countries need extended range missiles for enemy countries on the farther side of the globe US vs Russia, etc. Some countries do it to enhance their stature, but for that you need to have strong economy and not dependant on others.




Who said? extending the range is child's play once you have mastered the more critical challenges like propulsion system, navigation system, target acquisition system, command and control system, monitoring and tracking system. Range is a simple phenomenon of adding more fuel, however increasing the weight and size would also affect manouverability, platform stability, and aerodynamics.




Why do we need an SLV project? How many satellites have we launched or plan to launch in the next 10 years? Before developing the launching system, doesn't it make sense to first focus on development of the satellite itself?

Wrong example, it would be like putting (wasting) more fuel in a vessel that is intended to go one way only.

Click to expand...

acetophenol said:

I would like to disagree with you on a few points bro,
1. India can launch Missiles from southern parts of India say Kanyakumari or parts of Kerala and target you and be a threat to you guys,and these places are beyond Shaheen IIs range (2500 km).Pls correct me if I am wrong.
2. If you want to self sufficient in space,slv and satelite developments must go in tandem.

Click to expand...

The Deterrent said:

Negative, it was NOT ready in 1984. Back then, the hydrodynamic testing of the first workable implosion design was done, which does not means that the weapon was ready (compact enough to be deliverable).
However, we did acquire the capability later on. But full-scale 'hot' testing was not conducted because it was considered unnecessary, since the 'cold' (hydrodynamic) test validates the warhead design to a great extent (besides Pakistani designs were modifications to workable Chinese versions).

Coming to the ICBM part, if a country cannot even test its weapon out of the fear of the superpowers, I'm not sure how will they acquire the guts of even thinking of using that weapon against them. Trust me, if the strategic forces had any sort of plans like these, the missile would have been tested as soon as it was ready. Flight testing alone taken 4-5 years before the missiles are actually inducted.

Click to expand...

HRK said:

@The Deterrent .... a serious question

Don't you people think repeated test of short-range missiles like Nasar & Ghaznavi is a glimpse of Pakistan's 'operational War doctrine' which gives the impression of Pakistan's 'intention to keep war theater limited' (geographically) & in fact Pakistan has 'increased its Nuclear threshold' by adopting the 'strategy to respond in the limited area (only in the war theater)' which 'may increase the strategic risk' as the other side have a clear doctrine to respond by 'any mean & any place of her choice' ...... ???

Click to expand...

acetophenol said:

I would like to disagree with you on a few points bro,
1. India can launch Missiles from southern parts of India say Kanyakumari or parts of Kerala and target you and be a threat to you guys,and these places are beyond Shaheen IIs range (2500 km).Pls correct me if I am wrong.
2. If you want to self sufficient in space,slv and satelite developments must go in tandem.

Click to expand...

Thorough Pro said:

Whole of Pakistan is in indian missiles range, but do you know all of our launch sites? Can you stop our missile launches even from the sites that you know of? are you going to carpet bomb every inch of Pakistan to destroy all our known and unknown launch sites? The answer to all of the above is no. It is simply not possible, so if India can not achieve that, why should we bother about some sites in the farther regions of india? Any major conflict between the two countries will be a major catastrophe for both sides, hence a small portion of your country out of direct reach of our missiles does not make any big difference. Going back to my example, Does it matter if I kill you by smashing your head and leaving the whole body intact, or kill you by slashing thousand small cuts all over your body?

Self sufficiency in space would make sense when we achieve self sufficiency in basic things and prove basic necessities to all our citizens. If you commute only once in a three years, then hiring a cab makes more sense than buying a car.

Click to expand...

Informant said:

Hitting multiple targets within 2000kms wont leave an India recognizable by any means. When your financial industry, IT industry, etc etc are within range then the whole outer fringes become useless. India can target us with extreme ease.

So the remnants of a nuke warfare ( if there is anything to remain ) wont be anything resembling a nation. Just radioactive earth.

Click to expand...

The Deterrent said:

Negative, it was NOT ready in 1984. Back then, the hydrodynamic testing of the first workable implosion design was done, which does not means that the weapon was ready (compact enough to be deliverable).
However, we did acquire the capability later on. But full-scale 'hot' testing was not conducted because it was considered unnecessary, since the 'cold' (hydrodynamic) test validates the warhead design to a great extent (besides Pakistani designs were modifications to workable Chinese versions).

Coming to the ICBM part, if a country cannot even test its weapon out of the fear of the superpowers, I'm not sure how will they acquire the guts of even thinking of using that weapon against them. Trust me, if the strategic forces had any sort of plans like these, the missile would have been tested as soon as it was ready. Flight testing alone taken 4-5 years before the missiles are actually inducted.


It can be, but not as easily as it seems. You cannot just produce a low-weight warhead and mate it to the missile and hope for it to perform correctly. A LOT of parameters change, which require modifications in the design of the missile, thereby producing a new version of the missile.

Click to expand...

acetophenol said:

I wasn't talking about the destruction and implications of use of nukes by either of the countries,and I am well aware of the consequences of use of nukes. My point is that,we can target and point in Pakistan from southern parts of India,and these parts are well outside the range of your missiles. That definitely calls for longer range Pak missiles,which I am sure are under development.
And about self sufficiency in space and poverty,its outright stupid to think that world's 6th largest populated country cannot attain multiple targets at the same time. If you wait for eradication of poverty to attain self sufficiency in space,then you'll wait forever.

Click to expand...