# Hatf IX Nasr Missile Tested by Pakistan



## Kompromat

*Pakistan to test fires new ballistic missile Nasr by end of May*







INP 12 hrs ago | Comments (0)

KARACHI - Pakistan will test fire its new missile Nasr by the end of this month and most likely on May 28. *The missile with 180 Kilometers range* has high degree of accuracy.

According to sources, Pakistan army has completed all its preparation to test fire the nuclear-capable, surface-to-surface ballistic missile Nasr on May 28 Monday. The name "Nasr" is an Arabic word meaning "Victory".

Nasr can carry nuclear warheads and can hit the target with high accuracy, it is learnt.
The missile has been developed to add deterrence to Pakistans strategic weapons development programme.

Pakistan to test fires new ballistic missile



* Previous version had a test range of 60 kilometers.

Reactions: Like Like:
31


----------



## Last Hope

And I remember everyone was asking what will Pakistan do with 60KM range nuclear warhead. That was just the beginning phase of development. 

Good news. They are improving the range keeping the size and warhead constant.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Desert Fox

Will it include more than 2 launchers this time?


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

NASRO MINALLAHE WA FATEHON QAREEB!



Desert Fox said:


> Will it include more than 2 launchers this time?



It already has 2 launchers... considering the missiles size tht is very possible probably even right now on the first launcher.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Kompromat

Desert Fox said:


> Will it include more than 2 launchers this time?



Hopefully , one basic principle of this system is to have shoot and scoot capability.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BATMAN

It is perhaps for the newly developed strategic nukes.


----------



## regular

I guess it will be extremely hard for the Anti ballistic systems of India to shoot them down......cuz of their small ranges and very high speed......

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IceCold

regular said:


> I guess it will be extremely hard for the Anti ballistic systems of India to shoot them down......cuz of their small ranges and very high speed......



These are meant for the incoming indian IBG thrusting into Pakistan. Indian ABM systems are meant to protect Indian cities from incoming Pakistani nuclear attack. Different purpose.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## lightoftruth

nuking an ibg thrusting in Pakistan would be suicidal.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## graphican

Desert Fox said:


> Will it include more than 2 launchers this time?



If a launcher can launch 2 missiles, it can surely launch 4 but more than 2 might not be necessary. Given its range and its objective to neutralize enemy mechanized divisions, you may not need to launch more then 2 nuclear tipped missiles in one direction. Also because of its ability to flow low, it may not be intercept-able and you could be sure to hurt enemy to the levels intended.


----------



## graphican

lightoftruth said:


> nuking an ibg thrusting in Pakistan would be suicidal.



Lets not forget that it will neutralize our threats first, but surely it will be harmful for the region. A second thought, Pakistan can launch this missile when enemy is crossing the border to cause our territory as less damage as possible.

Guys..* if * in the upcoming test, we find Nasar had same size, diameter and design but still a 3 times more range than before, that would mean news of extended range of Ghaznavi Missile was also true.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SamranAli

before we go for long range missile its better to improve our short ranges so that a higher accurate platform is developed. That is a good move.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## graphican

BATMAN said:


> It is perhaps for the newly developed strategic nukes.



Is there any news for 2nd generation of strategic nukes? Pakistan already has strategic nukes and even the first 60KM range version was able to carry that.


----------



## graphican

Making a 60KM range missile with high accuracy is many times more difficult than the "short" (~1000KM) range missiles as missile doesn't gain altitude to adjust its direction to pinpoint its target. In that respect Pakistan has done the difficult part first and now it is kind of extending its capabilities which doesn't mean it is kind of slipping towards easy-do. Pakistan originally wanted to develop ultra-short range missile and that is where they produced their first version of 60KM.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dearone4u_22

graphican said:


> Lets not forget that it will neutralize our threats first, but surely it will be harmful for the region. A second thought, Pakistan can launch this missile when enemy is crossing the border to cause our territory as less damage as possible.
> 
> Guys..* if * in the upcoming test, we find Nasar had same size, diameter and design but still a 3 times more range than before, that would mean news of extended range of Ghaznavi Missile was also true.


 
Yup its always nice to have a surface nuclear explosion abt 160 km away from where you leave ...

Nothing like a fresh dose of radiation everytime you step out...

Fukishima incident let the fear of nuclear dust cloud spreading till europe and here you are trying to detonate a nuclear device 160 km away to stop an intruding brigade 

Neither India nor pakistan can use nuclear weapon.... one who uses will also be not spared from nuclear winter ....So stop being childish.... Last thing you want to do sentence yourself a slow painful death of radiation

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RayKalm

> KARACHI - Pakistan will test fire its new missile Nasr by the end of this month and most likely on May 28th. The missile with 180 km range has a high degree of accuracy. According to sources, Pakistan Army has completed all its preparation to test fire the nuclear-capable, surface-to-surface ballistic missile Nasr.
> 
> The name Nasr is an Arabic word meaning Victory.
> 
> Nasr can carry nuclear warheads and can hit the target with high accuracy, it is learnt.



Pakistan to test ballistic missile on 28th | The Nation


----------



## Raphael

If western nations whine about this, then they will enter a new frontier in hypocrisy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Edevelop




----------



## VelocuR

There is too much testing in recent weeks from nuclear missile test (Shaheen 1A, Ghaznavi ) and now Nasr. Both Shaheen 1A and Gaznavi were surprised without announcement but Nasr is in advance of annoucement, huh?

Air-defence is empty, we haven't tried to test it.


----------



## Peaceful Civilian

I already was expecting Nasr 2 version in this month. Nasr is the better tactical missile with high speed could be nightmare for forward bases with minimal possibility of detection and its Nice to see technology is successfully miniaturizing as Nasr 1 . Can't wait for this launch. Best of Luck NDC

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SamranAli

yup i am surprised that why it is announced in advance.


----------



## AUz

dearone4u_22 said:


> Yup its always nice to have a surface nuclear explosion abt 160 km away from where you leave ...
> 
> Nothing like a fresh dose of radiation everytime you step out...
> 
> Fukishima incident let the fear of nuclear dust cloud spreading till europe and here you are trying to detonate a nuclear device 160 km away to stop an intruding brigade
> 
> Neither India nor pakistan can use nuclear weapon.... one who uses will also be not spared from nuclear winter ....So stop being childish.... Last thing you want to do sentence yourself a slow painful death of radiation



All wrong. 

Instead of using "cartoons" in your post to make it look a "heavy-blow" to Pakistani members , learn something before posting.

Nasr WILL be used to strike bulk of Indian forces on Pakistani land. Its nuclear warhead will be very , very small. It won't cause much radiation , but it will definitely take out Indian battle-groups on Pakistani soil.

If you observed the Air Force's High Mark 2010 exercises and then the largest exercise of Pakistan Army , Azam-e-Nau 3 , you'll know that Pakistani military is gearing itself to effectively counter the so called "Cold Start doctrine" of India. Tests of Nasr , Shaheen-1A , Ghaznavi etc etc are part of same link. Pakistan doesn't need long-range Strategic nuclear missiles ...In order to struck-off a full-fledged Indian conventional assault (CSD) , Pakistan needs : Advanced F-16s fully loaded with AIM-120Cs , JF-17 Thunders fully loaded with SD-10Bs , Mirages III/Vs , some serious artillery , thousands of tanks in the deserts of Sindh and plains of Punjab , Nasr , Shaheen-1A , Ghaznavi , Sub-marines , Babur cruise missiles , Ra'ads etc etc .... 

You see , this is what Pakistan Army is deploying/planning to deploy/testing from last 5 years or so best of luck for your Cold-Start ......

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Edevelop

Nasr threaten's India's Army and Air Bases near Pakistani border. 

The range, speed, shoot-scoop capability, and 2+ launchers is something every opponent will always scratch it's heads about.


----------



## ice_man

how many kilograms of conventional weapon can nasr carry?


----------



## Windjammer

ice_man said:


> how many kilograms of conventional weapon can nasr carry?



*Not sure about conventional, but it can carry a sub-Kiloton tactical Nuclear war head.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## King Solomon

It is understandable.. Pakistan's army is trying very hard to match india conventionally. Only way for them to get close to that is to perfect the use of tactical nuclear warheads in battlefield.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Black Widow

nuclear attack on indian troops,ships, carriers will considered as attack on Indian soil and will be replied accordingly.

by the way congratulations.


----------



## Areesh

lightoftruth said:


> nuking an ibg thrusting in Pakistan would be suicidal.



No an IBG invading Pakistani territory would be the real suicidal.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## I M Sikander

Black Widow said:


> nuclear attack on indian troops,ships, carriers will considered as attack on Indian soil and will be replied accordingly.


And we will reply accordingly as well.



ice_man said:


> how many kilograms of conventional weapon can nasr carry?


This missile isn't primarily for conventional usage. It is to be used primarily for with tactical weapons.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## manofwar

How does a Battlefield Range ballistic missile profit anyone??
I mean wouldn't it be better to use cruise missiles, which have better or equal range and cost only a fraction more??
Even MANPADS would better, if you have them in large enough numbers......the newest ones are quite accurate...
Ballistic missiles are to difficult to maintain in my view......it is alright for strtegic and tactical purposes, but taking it to the battlefield seems useless.....
Feel free to Disagree...


----------



## lightoftruth

Areesh said:


> No an IBG invading Pakistani territory would be the real suicidal.


 
although I expect some sense let's c

1. using nukes is not child's play, depends on various conditions major one is wind, doing an nuclear attack u can say its subkt but the gamma radiations will effect both sides specially when range is so low, that is the reason I believe regions close 2 border has less threat of a nuclear fallout than those which are deep inside.

2. using a nuke on an Indian citizen be it in holululu or in Pakistan will bring out an heavy retaliation acc. to Indian nuclear doctrine, Pakistani members says about using multiple missiles on a single target to evade abm shield but by using strategic nuke on ibg ull receive the first major series of nuclear strikes from India.


----------



## killerx

60 to 90 km MLRS are also good option but not acutate as nasar but MLRS have more impact damage and large area can be covered

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TechMan

lightoftruth said:


> although I expect some sense let's c
> 
> 1. using nukes is not child's play, depends on various conditions major one is wind, doing an nuclear attack u can say its subkt but the gamma radiations will effect both sides specially when range is so low, that is the reason I believe regions close 2 border has less threat of a nuclear fallout than those which are deep inside.
> 
> 2. using a nuke on an Indian citizen be it in holululu or in Pakistan will bring out an heavy retaliation acc. to Indian nuclear doctrine, Pakistani members says about using multiple missiles on a single target to evade abm shield but by using strategic nuke on ibg ull receive the first major series of nuclear strikes from India.


 
Pakistan can do what ever it want on its own soil. We are not nuking Indians in India (which of course we will do later when the time is right) but we are defending ourselves from the Indian invasion. So this missile is for defence purpose not offence.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Areesh

lightoftruth said:


> although I expect some sense let's c
> 
> 1. using nukes is not child's play, depends on various conditions major one is wind, doing an nuclear attack u can say its subkt but the gamma radiations will effect both sides specially when range is so low, that is the reason I believe regions close 2 border has less threat of a nuclear fallout than those which are deep inside.
> 
> 2. using a nuke on an Indian citizen be it in holululu or in Pakistan will bring out an heavy retaliation acc. to Indian nuclear doctrine, Pakistani members says about using multiple missiles on a single target to evade abm shield but by using strategic nuke on ibg ull receive the first major series of nuclear strikes from India.



When you will invade Pakistan's territory and try to capture it, this itself is a nonsensical idea. The rest after that is just the continuation of nonsense. How India will react doesn't matter to us. Our nuclear doctrine is not related with India's response in the first place. That's why Pakistan has a policy of first strike about nukes.


----------



## lightoftruth

Areesh said:


> When you will invade Pakistan's territory and try to capture it, this itself is a *nonsensical* idea. The rest after that is just the continuation of nonsense. *How India will react doesn't matter to us.* Our nuclear doctrine is not related with India's response in the first place. That's why Pakistan has a policy of first strike about nukes.


 ....... .. by using this, India will actually be the one doing first major strike but technically it would be second strike.


----------



## tarrar

Good. I think more upgraded missiles are going to be tested in coming months.


----------



## Kinetic

Three fold range increment! Interesting. Let see if there any design changes. 




regular said:


> I guess it will be extremely hard for the Anti ballistic systems of India to shoot them down......cuz of their small ranges and very high speed......


 
That is not true. We will have three solutions against tactical missiles like Nasr. 

1) MRSAM / Barak-8
2) Iron Dome
3) David Sling. 

The MRSAM will have good anti-tactical missile capability.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

regular said:


> I guess it will be extremely hard for the Anti ballistic systems of India to shoot them down......cuz of their small ranges and very high speed......



Actually its the other way around. Its easier to intercept SRBM because they don't attain much velocity during their course. the max speed they can attain is Mach 5.

American PAC -2 has 100% interception success rate in 2003 Iraq operations against Iraqi TBMs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## graphican

Black Widow said:


> nuclear attack on indian troops,ships, carriers will considered as attack on Indian soil and will be replied accordingly.
> 
> by the way congratulations.



If you don't invade, you don't get attacked. Its as simple as that. Also Pakistan has gained miniaturization of its nuclear technology but there is no proof of India having that. So Indian aggression is most likely to be towards the cities killing innocents while Pakistan's attacks are most likely to be on the soldiers and military installations eliminating them tactically and specifically.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## kill_me

Aeronaut said:


> *
> 
> The name "Nasr" is an Arabic word meaning "Victory".
> 
> *


*

I always thought Nasr means "Help"*


----------



## Khan Sahab

It means "Victory"


----------



## HANI

Khan Sahab said:


> It means "Victory"



it means help man


----------



## graphican

dearone4u_22 said:


> Yup its always nice to have a surface nuclear explosion abt 160 km away from where you leave ...
> 
> Nothing like a fresh dose of radiation everytime you step out...
> 
> Fukishima incident let the fear of nuclear dust cloud spreading till europe and here you are trying to detonate a nuclear device 160 km away to stop an intruding brigade
> 
> Neither India nor pakistan can use nuclear weapon.... one who uses will also be not spared from nuclear winter ....So stop being childish.... Last thing you want to do sentence yourself a slow painful death of radiation



In terms of Nuclear Showers and Radiation Cloud, its India who's going to gain the most of it as winds blow from west to east in most parts of the areas bordering India. So either we Nuke India or India Nukes Pakistan, India will have its share of fruit nevertheless. Happy Celebrating!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HANI

~~Help from ALLAH and success is near~~ translation of Arabic Ayat


----------



## Nishan_101

So this was the reason for the huge size of the missile.


----------



## Safriz

Syama Ayas said:


> Actually its the other way around. Its easier to intercept SRBM because they don't attain much velocity during their course. the max speed they can attain is Mach 5.
> 
> American PAC -2 has 100% interception success rate in 2003 Iraq operations against Iraqi TBMs.


 
scuds fall off the sky and their success rate is abyssimal...
Patriots may or may not have hit them...they may have fell down on their own...
plus scuds were medeival missiles comlred to modern day missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OrionHunter

Aeronaut said:


> Hopefully , one basic principle of this system is to have shoot and scoot capability.


Most short and medium range SS missiles have this capability now. The days of fixed platforms and silos are passé except for ICBMs like the Minuteman etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## regular

Black Widow said:


> nuclear attack on indian troops,ships, carriers will considered as attack on Indian soil and will be replied accordingly.by the way congratulations.


Yes!!!! thats what we want.....try to send some troops carrying out illegal aggression against our sovereignty.....


----------



## SEAL

When we tested 60km NASR Indians had a opinion Pakistan will nuke their own forces with this missile, now range is improved yeeehee , even if its fired with DU cluster ammo or HE conventional warhead it will fry Indian IBG in battlefield.


----------



## Safriz

Pakistan doing a lot in ballistic missile field....making all flavors.
but havent heard anything indigenous on air defence?
probably.in that field pakistan is more intent on modifying chinese weaponery to suit own requirements?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## graphican

Safriz said:


> Pakistan doing a lot in ballistic missile field....making all flavors.
> but havent heard anything indigenous on air defence?
> probably.in that field pakistan is more intent on modifying chinese weaponery to suit own requirements?



When it comes to defense, it actually doesn't matter who's designs you are using. All that matters is you have it and you know how to operate it. But that doesn't mean I am undermining our ability to produce missiles or defence technology but a bullet is a bullet regardless of where it is made and its going to hurt enemy regardless of their troll.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ghauri05

this miniaturization is the result of using plutonium instead of uranium. that is why indians are doing 
propaganda against this new 
reactor. 
what is its actual speed does any body know?
Long live pakistan


----------



## Don Jaguar

What is the speed of this missile?


----------



## GORKHALI

AUz said:


> All wrong.
> 
> Instead of using "cartoons" in your post to make it look a "heavy-blow" to Pakistani members , learn something before posting.
> 
> Nasr WILL be used to strike bulk of Indian forces on Pakistani land. Its nuclear warhead will be very , very small. It won't cause much radiation , but it will definitely take out Indian battle-groups on Pakistani soil.
> 
> If you observed the Air Force's High Mark 2010 exercises and then the largest exercise of Pakistan Army , Azam-e-Nau 3 , you'll know that Pakistani military is gearing itself to effectively counter the so called "Cold Start doctrine" of India. Tests of Nasr , Shaheen-1A , Ghaznavi etc etc are part of same link. Pakistan doesn't need long-range Strategic nuclear missiles ...In order to struck-off a full-fledged Indian conventional assault (CSD) , Pakistan needs : Advanced F-16s fully loaded with AIM-120Cs , JF-17 Thunders fully loaded with SD-10Bs , Mirages III/Vs , some serious artillery , thousands of tanks in the deserts of Sindh and plains of Punjab , Nasr , Shaheen-1A , Ghaznavi , Sub-marines , Babur cruise missiles , Ra'ads etc etc ....
> 
> You see , this is what Pakistan Army is deploying/planning to deploy/testing from last 5 years or so best of luck for your Cold-Start ......



Lo bhai fir shuru ho gaye..Let me tell you first that IBG thrusting into enemy territory is to capture some 60-80Km inside Enemy teritoory and provide Logistical support to Main Strike Corps like Mathura based I Corps,X corps and II Corps Rapid.
This doctrine requires reorganizing the Indian Army&#8217;s offensive power away from the three large strike corps into eight smaller division-sized &#8220;integrated battle groups&#8221; (IBGs)that combine mechanized infantry, artillery, and armor with full CAS by IAF and Naval Aviation.The eight battle groups would be prepared to launch multiple strikes into Pakistan along different axes of advance. There is no more Defensive Corps in Indian Army but they all are converted and follows Offensive-defensive-offensive doctrine.
And Please don't bring those R***D missile and D**la Bombs.
Here's a Tip for you - Pakistan is 1,000 miles long, but averages only 300 miles wide. With its length running parallel to India&#8217;s northwest border, Pakistan is extremely vulnerable to flanking movements or a central assault that would spilt the country in two.Pakistani cities as well as transport networks and lines of communication lie close to the international
border, compounding Pakistan&#8217;s lack of defensive depth._(Bolna mat bhai bola nahi)_ 

P.S-Google chacha ko pucho ,what Big bro got in his Inventory.


----------



## Secur

PANDORA said:


> Lo bhai fir shuru ho gaye..Let me tell you first that IBG thrusting into enemy territory is to capture some 60-80Km inside Enemy teritoory and provide Logistical support to Main Strike Corps like Mathura based I Corps,X corps and II Corps Rapid.



The shitty thing is that the success of the very adventure will be catastrophic because we do not care whom we take with us when we are going down  We have shown you our determination and capability to deter the aggressor both in '87 and '02 ... Still have some doubts ?  Thus pray that your top brass possesses such wisdom not to attempt such mis-adventure ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

Pakistani second strike capability, on Nuke Subs, will ensure if nuclear attack comes from the entity to the east, it will ensure the launch of full spectrum strategic missile launch that will remove the said entity from the face of the earth. That is not just talk, it is a promise.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

ice_man said:


> how many kilograms of conventional weapon can nasr carry?


The size/weight of the conventional warhead on the NASR (or NASR-ER) is the more important question here. 

Pakistan has MBRL's with ranges out to 100KM, but a 60KM/180KM missile with significantly more accuracy than a MBRL and a significantly larger conventional warhead (with the ability to penetrate reinforced structures before detonation) would be a much more useful weapon to target static Indian military infrastructure (beyond the range of artillery and MBRL strikes) during a conflict, prior to any 'red lines' being crossed.

A powerful and accurate conventional warhead would also provide Pakistan significant advantages in targeting static Afghan military infrastructure in case of conflict on our Western border, given the mountainous terrain on the border that would make it hard to rapidly deploy large numbers of mechanized and artillery formations, without having to resort to the more expensive and larger Pakistani ballistic missiles.

Some estimates, about the original NASR missile size, that I have read on the site 'Arms Control Wonk' site suggest a diameter of 500-600mm:

_Pakistani Hatf-IX &#8216;Nasr&#8217; seems to be uses PHL03 chassis which has also been used by the Chinese for their WS-2 Multiple Launch Rocket System. The PHL03 carries (2×3)6x WS-2 400 mm rockets.

Now if we compare this with the fact that only two Nasr missiles are carried on the same chassis. My rough estimates put the Nasr missile diameter more in range pf of 500 to 600 mm.

Now i may be wrong, but diameter of 600 mm will also make more sense as both Hatf-IB & Hatf 2A Abdali are of same diameters._
Jeffrey Lewis &bull; Pakistan&#8217;s Nuclear Artillery?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Desert Fox

PANDORA said:


> Lo bhai fir shuru ho gaye..Let me tell you first that IBG thrusting into enemy territory is to capture some 60-80Km inside Enemy teritoory and provide Logistical support to Main Strike Corps like Mathura based I Corps,X corps and II Corps Rapid.
> This doctrine requires reorganizing the Indian Army&#8217;s offensive power away from the three large strike corps into eight smaller division-sized &#8220;integrated battle groups&#8221; (IBGs)that combine mechanized infantry, artillery, and armor with full CAS by IAF and Naval Aviation.The eight battle groups would be prepared to launch multiple strikes into Pakistan along different axes of advance. There is no more Defensive Corps in Indian Army but they all are converted and follows Offensive-defensive-offensive doctrine.
> And Please don't bring those R***D missile and D**la Bombs.
> Here's a Tip for you - Pakistan is 1,000 miles long, but averages only 300 miles wide. With its length running parallel to India&#8217;s northwest border, Pakistan is extremely vulnerable to flanking movements or a central assault that would spilt the country in two.Pakistani cities as well as transport networks and lines of communication lie close to the international
> border, compounding Pakistan&#8217;s lack of defensive depth._(Bolna mat bhai bola nahi)_
> 
> P.S-Google chacha ko pucho ,what Big bro got in his Inventory.



 What a joke of a analysis! Are you zaid hamid version of india? Seriously, i hope your generals think the same as you do; "we will invade Pakistan and split it into two", but how??? By just sending a few tanks and apc's charging towards our border, but why do you think we have Abdalis, Babur's and NASR's for?? BTW, have fun removing thousands of anti-tank and anti-personnel mines from the border while you are making your effort in invading Pakistan .

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Secur

lightoftruth said:


> although I expect some sense let's c
> 
> 2. using a nuke on an Indian citizen be it in holululu or in Pakistan will bring out an heavy retaliation acc. to Indian nuclear doctrine, Pakistani members says about using multiple missiles on a single target to evade abm shield but by using strategic nuke on ibg ull receive the first major series of nuclear strikes from India.



Really ? So you have modified your doctrine to include " an Indian citizen " too ?  Interesting !

The thing to keep in mind is that the other party possesses you-know-what too ... Whilst the use of tactical nukes on Indian invading IBG's that too on Pakistani soil is one thing , using it as a prelude to launch a full-blown strike on Pakistan will result in Mutually Assured Destruction ... So ask yourself , Are you ready to lose a billion people for a couple of IBG's ?  Your understanding of the nuclear doctrine itself is flawed , Nuclear weapons are used as a last resort and somehow losing/thwarting the invading IBG's doesn't count as something which would endanger your existence ...

We are because even the slightest success ( even though the chances are rare owing to the PA preparation to deter the aggression in the first place ) of Cold Start may/can endanger the existence of Pakistan so we will of course be using the " Samson's Option " and getting ready for " use em or lose em " strategy ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## RayKalm

Going Ballistic: Pakistan prepares nuclear-capable missile test &mdash; RT

Russian News reporting on this.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

Safriz said:


> scuds fall off the sky and their success rate is abyssimal...
> Patriots may or may not have hit them...they may have fell down on their own...
> plus scuds were medeival missiles comlred to modern day missiles.



I think you"ve confused PAC-1 performance in 1991 with PAC-2's performance in 2003


----------



## graphican

HANI said:


> ~~Help from ALLAH and success is near~~ translation of Arabic Ayat



&#1573;&#1616;&#1584;&#1614;&#1575; &#1580;&#1614;&#1575;&#1569;&#1614; &#1606;&#1614;&#1589;&#1618;&#1585;&#1615; &#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1614;&#1617;&#1607;&#1616; &#1608;&#1614;&#1575;&#1604;&#1618;&#1601;&#1614;&#1578;&#1618;&#1581;&#1615;
When comes the Help of Allah, and the Victory, 

Nasr Means Help. Alfateh means victory.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lightoftruth

Secur said:


> Really ? So you have modified your doctrine to include " an Indian citizen " too ?  Interesting !
> 
> The thing to keep in mind is that the other party possesses you-know-what too ... Whilst the use of tactical nukes on Indian invading IBG's that too on Pakistani soil is one thing , using it as a prelude to launch a full-blown strike on Pakistan will result in Mutually Assured Destruction ... So ask yourself , Are you ready to lose a billion people for a couple of IBG's ?  *Your understanding of the nuclear doctrine itself is flawed* , Nuclear weapons are used as a last resort ...



if u dont know about Indian nuclear doctrine why bother replying? 

its simply logical that by using this on ibg ur gono loose ur first major strike advantage.


----------



## HZR2011

S-19 said:


> It is understandable.. Pakistan's army is trying very hard to match india conventionally. Only way for them to get close to that is to perfect the use of tactical nuclear warheads in battlefield.


Already 2 indian Synthetic aperture radar satellites are orbiting in Space...


----------



## Splurgenxs

THis falls under the category of rocket artillery?

conventional Rocket artillery have range more than this.


----------



## Windjammer

lightoftruth said:


> if u dont know about Indian nuclear doctrine why bother replying?
> 
> its simply logical that by using this on ibg ur gono loose ur first major strike advantage.



The neutralising of any Indian misadventure on Pakistani soil doesn't necessarily involves a nuclear strike. They intruding party may well find it'self under a rain of cluster munitions, however when push comes to shove then all options may be exercised.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Jango

graphican said:


> &#1573;&#1616;&#1584;&#1614;&#1575; &#1580;&#1614;&#1575;&#1569;&#1614; &#1606;&#1614;&#1589;&#1618;&#1585;&#1615; &#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1614;&#1617;&#1607;&#1616; &#1608;&#1614;&#1575;&#1604;&#1618;&#1601;&#1614;&#1578;&#1618;&#1581;&#1615;
> When comes the Help of Allah, and the Victory,
> 
> Nasr Means Help. Alfateh means victory.



Actually, Al-Nasr, as in the Surha's name means victory, but in the ayat that you mentioned, it means help.


----------



## Windjammer

Splurgenxs said:


> THis falls under the category of rocket artillery?
> 
> conventional Rocket artillery have range more than this.



The Hatf IX, named Nasr (Arabic: &#1606;&#1589;&#1585;&#8206 , is a solid fuelled *battlefield range ballistic missile* (BRBM) system developed by Pakistan. The missile's existence was first reported after a test-firing on 19 April 2011.[1][2] It is referred to by Pakistan's Inter Services Public Relations organization as a "Multi Tube Ballistic Missile" because the launch vehicle carries multiple missiles.
The name "Nasr" is an Arabic word meaning "Victory".


----------



## Hack-Hook

its a little annoying when these journalists emphasis on this missile being nuclear capable ,as a matter of fact every single missile that Pakistan or any other country have is a nuclear capable missile and this is the proof of it
Nuclear artillery - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

when they emphasis on its nuclear capable they have some agenda more than reporting the news , here it was better to report how much more precise this missile is compared to the older generation of the missiles , how much it need less maintenance and how faster they could fire it when the need for that arise.

as a matter of fact as they are making it more precise its a clear sign that they have another plan for it instead putting a nuclear device inside it.


----------



## Desert Fox

Syama Ayas said:


> I think you"ve confused PAC-1 performance in 1991 with PAC-2's performance in 2003



Regardless of what version of the PAC the Americans were using during GW1 and GW2, the facts remains and the main point is that the Iraqis were firing outdated Scuds which are pretty much outdated for even the year of 2003, and Pakistani missiles are no Scud's, though a few might have their origins from Scud variants but they are not Scuds since our scientists and engineers have heavily modified them, increased their range, and upgraded their internal/guidance systems. NASR BRBM however is in no way a Scud and does not originate from the former, therefore what the PAC-1 or PAC-2 scored against a few outdated Iraqi Scuds does not mean it can score the same against maneuverable, fast, and short rage BRBM's like the NASR which is specially meant to dodge ABM systems, same applies to other Pakistan BM's as well.

Its actually amusing and sad at the same time that you indians are under the delusion that while you purchase all of these ABM systems we Pakistanis will just sit back and watch as spectators?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## regular

Desert Fox said:


> Its actually amusing and sad at the same time that you indians are under the delusion that while you purchase all of these ABM systems we Pakistanis will just sit back and watch as spectators?


Sir! these Indians/politicians/generals are buying ABM systems not just to defend their countries but for only kickbacks , using the tax money to fillup their pockets. Its the greed game ........

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## mdcp

India and Pakistan got minimum deterrence , thats more than enough, let spend on welfare of our own people rather than spending on weapons

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

Desert Fox said:


> Regardless of what version of the PAC the Americans were using during GW1 and GW2, the facts remains and the main point is that the Iraqis were firing outdated Scuds which are pretty much outdated for even the year of 2003,



Iraqia were firing other SRBMS in GW2 Abdali and Al_Samoud-2

Al_Samoud-2

As a matter of fact it was more difficult to intercept the Scuds as they would break up during trajectory 

Patriot System Performance: Report Summary




> One can argue that
> these relatively slow missiles which did not break up in flight like the Scuds of Desert Storm, were not stressing targets; however, their short range and the coalition&#8217;s goal of large defended footprints and high-altitude intercepts due to chemical warhead concerns made them somewhat stressing targets for the Patriot and their crews.






> and Pakistani missiles are no Scud's, though a few might have their origins from Scud variants but they are not Scuds since our scientists and engineers have heavily modified them, increased their range, and upgraded their internal/guidance systems. NASR BRBM however is in no way a Scud and does not originate from the former, therefore what the PAC-1 or PAC-2 scored against a few outdated Iraqi Scuds does not mean it can score the same against maneuverable,



I meant from the point of interception of TBMs, i agree that in reality things might be different , but based on PAC-2 performance in combat, the probability of intercept high.



> fast, and short rage BRBM's like the NASR which is *specially meant to dodge ABM systems*, same applies to other Pakistan BM's as well.



The bolded part seems confusing here. Was there such a statement made by anyone related to project or test ?

If so, NASR's ability to dodge ABM seems more of disadvantage than advantage, First with limited trajectory and flight time the possibility of evading seems difficult to begin with, if achieved , the target cannot be reached because if recall Nasr is meant for precision strikes , in course of evading an ABM, Nasr ends up missing the target.

As for other Pakistani other BMs unless they are nuclear, evading an ABM is pointless, a Pakistani BM with conventional warhead on dodgeing an ABM will have the same role as that of a long range artillery i.e accuracy.




> Its actually amusing and sad at the same time that you indians are under the delusion that while you purchase all of these ABM systems we Pakistanis will just sit back and watch as spectators?



It funny some people think India will purchase all ABMs systems to counter BM threat from Pakistan, If India obtains any they"ll be point defence system plus SAMs and ABM deployment and development are expensive. India will only obtain them if really necessary.


----------



## Zarvan

Aeronaut said:


> *Pakistan to test fires new ballistic missile Nasr by end of May*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> INP 12 hrs ago | Comments (0)
> 
> KARACHI - Pakistan will test fire its new missile Nasr by the end of this month and most likely on May 28. *The missile with 180 Kilometers range* has high degree of accuracy.
> 
> According to sources, Pakistan army has completed all its preparation to test fire the nuclear-capable, surface-to-surface ballistic missile Nasr on May 28 Monday. The name "Nasr" is an Arabic word meaning "Victory".
> 
> Nasr can carry nuclear warheads and can hit the target with high accuracy, it is learnt.
> The missile has been developed to add deterrence to Pakistans strategic weapons development programme.
> 
> Pakistan to test fires new ballistic missile
> 
> 
> 
> * Previous version had a test range of 60 kilometers.


Can this missile be used just as a rocket fitted with other lethal things to destroy Enemy Tanks and other things and also have they increased the range of this missile ?

May 19 Lahor: Pakistans new Battlefield Range Ballistic Missile (BRBM) Nasr, developed by the National Development Complex (NDC) will undergo tests by the end of this month. The name Nasr is an Arabic word meaning Victory. Nasr can carry nuclear warheads and can hit the target with high accuracy.
This is the third missile test to be conducted by the Pakistani Armed Forces in a few months time. Last March, it had tested the nuclear capable Short-Range Ballistic Missile (SRBM) Abdali-I. The Hatf-III (Ghaznavi) SRBM was also tested by the Pakistanis early this month.
The Nasr, which uses the solid fuel propellant system, is having an effective operational range of up to 110 miles. The missile, which is also known asHatf-IX, was first tested on 19 April 2011. The missile can be fired from a Transporter Erector Launcher (TEL) and can be armed either with a nuclear warhead or a conventional high-explosive warhead. The short operational range of the missile means that it is more likely to be used as a defence option, rather than as an offensive one. The missile, which the Pakistani experts claim is one of the most accurate SRBMs in the world, is capable of inflicting heavy damage upon attacking armoured brigades and infantry battalions.
The Nasr is the latest missile developed under the Pakistani missile research and development program, which was initiated nearly three decades ago. The program, which initially focussed on the SRBMs, achieved its first major breakthrough in 1997, with the development of the Medium Range Ballistic Missile (MRBM). In 2005, Pakistan developed its first ground-launched cruise missile, the Hatf VII (Babur). The Air Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM), Raad was developed two years later.
The Nasr is just one of the six SRBMs which the Pakistan Armed Forces are operating. The Hatf-I was the first ballistic missile the Pakistani armed forces ever developed. Its successors, the Hatf-II and Hatf-III SRBMs were tested just a few months ago. The Hatf-IV (Shaheen-I) is being upgraded currently, with the addition of Multiple Independently Targetable Re-entry Vehicle (MIRV) capability. Apart from these missiles, the Pakistani troops are also in the possession of a number of Dongfeng 11 (CSS-7) SRBMs, which were purchased from China.
News Gathered by India News
Become a Hosting Provider
Get Domain Reseller Account Free .in domain Rs 115 Reseller Hosting in just Rs 999

Well How the hell this news is all over the place I don't think this has happened before that before the missile test the news is already in the media of future missile test being conducted


----------



## regular

Black Widow said:


> India has no mood to challenge its neighbor sovereignty, don't worry india will not cross the border.


Oh thanks buddy!! I know U guyz cares about us so much.....


----------



## Rig Vedic

regular said:


> Sir! these Indians/politicians/generals are buying ABM systems not just to defend their countries but for only kickbacks , using the tax money to fillup their pockets. Its the greed game ........



No kickbacks on domestic production.


----------



## yyetttt

It's gonna be used on border with India... If time of war comes.. Whatever military camps india has will be destroyed by tactical nukes.


----------



## Major Shaitan Singh

Pakistan will test fire a new nuclear-capable missile by the end of this month, a media report said on Saturday.Geo News reported that the surface-to-surface `Nasr missile has a 180-km range and a high degree of accuracy. The army has completed preparations for it, said sources.

Pakistan April 25 successfully test-fired an intermediate range nuclear-capable missile, less than a week after India tested a 5,000-km range missile.The missile was capable of carrying nuclear and conventional warheads.

In March, Pakistan test-fired a nuclear-capable short-range surface-to-surface ballistic missile. The Hatf-2 missile can travel up to 180 km and deliver nuclear as well as conventional warheads with high accuracy.

Pakistans missile repertory includes Hatf ballistic missiles and its variants, Ghaznavi short-range ballistic missile, Ghauri and Shaheen medium and intermediate range ballistic missiles, Babur cruise missiles and Baktar-Shikan anti-tank guided missile, most of which have been developed with Chinas help.


----------



## lightoftruth

thread exist


----------



## Last Hope

AhaseebA said:


> False News.
> NASR will still have a range of 60km, it was designed to be a short range BRBM.
> 
> Technically too, one cannot just "Triple" the range, without massive changes in the design.



Seems like you have no idea what you are talking about.
Nasr was not designed to be a battle range missile. 
And you still can increase the range with same design, using a more efficient motor, a stronger fuel (solid) and a faster boast with same consumption of fuel.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

Last Hope said:


> Seems like you have no idea what you are talking about.
> Nasr was not designed to be a battle range missile.
> And you still can increase the range with same design, using a more efficient motor, a stronger fuel (solid) and a faster boast with same consumption of fuel.



Then what was it designed to be? Enlighten me please...

Yes you can, but not that much as stated. I guess we should wait for 2-3 days for the verification then...


----------



## mosu

well thats good news for pakistan


----------



## Ajaxpaul

I hope this missile will carry only conventional weapons.

Nuking India 180 kms into Indian territory will invite Retaliatory strikes which Pak cant afford.


----------



## Windjammer

Ajaxpaul said:


> I hope this missile will carry only conventional weapons.
> 
> Nuking India 180 kms into Indian territory will invite Retaliatory strikes which Pak cant afford.



Albeit, the missile will be equipped with both conventional and non conventional war heads, but......are you implying that India CAN afford a nuclear attack. !!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Jungibaaz

Ajaxpaul said:


> I hope this missile will carry only conventional weapons.
> 
> Nuking India 180 kms into Indian territory will invite Retaliatory strikes which Pak cant afford.



NASR is to be used on the battlefield.
If we wanted to take it to the level you are suggesting why not just deploy cruise missiles and larger ballistic missiles?


----------



## Ajaxpaul

Jungibaaz said:


> NASR is to be used on the battlefield.
> If we wanted to take it to the level you are suggesting why not just deploy cruise missiles and larger ballistic missiles?




I was just thinking what would be the implications of a 180 km nuke strike? Will it stop war ? No. Will it cause so massive casuallity that will decide the fate of war ? No.


----------



## laiqs@mi

Ajaxpaul said:


> I was just thinking what would be the implications of a 180 km nuke strike? Will it stop war ? No. Will it cause so massive casuallity that will decide the fate of war ? No.



one thing is for sure .........
the command and control system the scientists and the are not CH**tia. when they were going and announcing that it can carry Nuks then they have some plans behind it.


----------



## Jungibaaz

Ajaxpaul said:


> I was just thinking what would be the implications of a 180 km nuke strike? Will it stop war ? No. Will it cause so massive casuallity that will decide the fate of war ? No.



you aren't getting the point of NASR.
NASR wont be carrying some massive nuke, only a small tactical nuke if that, hell it doesn't have to be nuclear either can be conventional. It is to be used on the battlefield, why would we want to use a massive nuke on our own land, NASR is to stop invading forces in their tracks not to target cities or civilians. 

And as for the consequences, you can expect no less of a response from Pakistan with the use of Prahaar. 
These aren't some large ICBM's with megaton nukes, small nukes or none at all and short-range.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Windjammer

Ajaxpaul said:


> I was just thinking what would be the implications of a 180 km nuke strike? Will it stop war ? No. Will it cause so massive casuallity that will decide the fate of war ? No.



Primarily, it's designed to neutralise any armour thrust towards Pakistan.....if your soverienty is threatened, the fate of the war will be last thing on your mind. !!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## lightoftruth

Ajaxpaul said:


> I was just thinking what would be the implications of a 180 km nuke strike? Will it stop war ? No. Will it cause so massive casuallity that will decide the fate of war ? No.


 cmonnneee can't make them understand .


----------



## Bratva

lightoftruth said:


> cmonnneee can't make them understand .



Then make your Generals understand don't try to PULL CSD on Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## lightoftruth

mafiya said:


> Then make your Generals understand don't try to PULL CSD on Pakistan.


 any link where our general said about CSD on Pakistan even our chief denied such things existence its just another BS u guys are feed of to being scared of India attacking Pakistan.
even by history its a well known fact acknowledged by many that Pakistan started all wars. n in future too expectations of doing misadventure is from Pakistan only.


----------



## The Deterrent

lightoftruth said:


> cmonnneee can't make them understand .



The simple thing is, that NASR is about deterring war at the lowest level.


----------



## tarrar

Oh Hindi shut & sit down. When ever Pakistan tests Missiles India is shitting out of their dippers.

Let's wait & see it is about to be tested in few days.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Desert Fox

What i don't get is how can a tactical nuI<e penetrate enemy Tank armor? Aren't indian tanks built to withstand NBC attacks?


----------



## Windjammer

Desert Fox said:


> What i don't get is how can a tactical nuI<e penetrate enemy Tank armor? Aren't indian tanks built to withstand NBC attacks?



I highly doubt any tank or vehicle can withstand a direct nuclear strike, however NBC protected tanks may be able to operate in an area which has high radiation or presence of chemical or biological agents in the field. Perhaps some other member can shed more light on the issue. !!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Windjammer said:


> I highly doubt any tank or vehicle can withstand a direct nuclear strike, however NBC protected tanks may be able to operate in an area which has high radiation or presence of chemical or biological agents in the field. Perhaps some other member can shed more light on the issue. !!


I doubt a tank/armored vehicle would survive a 'direct strike', but keep in mind that these vehicles will be in motion and will likely be significant in number. The 'blast radius' of a sub-kiloton weapon is not going to be large enough to put a major dent in the mechanized formations being targeted, and I would question the utility of even targeting ground troops with it, on Pakistani soil, when similar damage could be inflicted with certain conventional warheads (Air Blast Bombs, artillery (Towed, SP and MBRL's) without the corresponding long term radiation affects and chances of an Indian nuclear escalation.

I would still argue that the most significant advantage of a system like the NASR lies in utilizing its range, mobility and warhead accuracy and size to attack static Indian military infrastructure targets with conventional warheads. I would therefore argue in favor of shifting research and funding away from 'sub-kiloton nukes' to developing more potent conventional warheads. If the NASR can deliver a 200kg+ warhead to a target 60km to 180km away, and the manufacturing the system in significant numbers is cost effective, then it could play a good supporting role in tandem with Pakistan's artillery systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SHAMK9

missile will be test fired from the west side of the border (Pakistan) but all the fuss would be on the other side of the border (India) like always


----------



## saiyan0321

well lets see if it will happen after all no need to hit a ten pager when the missile hasnt even fired yet but its range is nearly tripled with what looks like not much changes in the body and thats good as better accuracy with longer range can create a very good dent in the enemy formations


----------



## ababeel22

wasnt it scheduled for today?


----------



## eik_pagall

Congratulations !
Pakistan has successfully tested the HATAF 9 NASR missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## air marshal

Pakistan successfully test fired nuclear capable Hatf IX Nasr missile, a short range surface-to-surface multi tube missile. - AFP


----------



## EagleEyes

*Pakistan test fires Hatf IX (NASR)*

RAWALPINDI: Pakistan on Tuesday successfully conducted the test fire of indigenously developed Short Range Surface to Surface Multi Tube Missile Hatf IX (NASR).

NASR, with a range of 60 km, can carry nuclear warheads of appropriate yield, with high accuracy, and possesses shoot & scoot attributes. This quick response system addresses the need to deter evolving threats, especially at shorter ranges.

The test was witnessed by Director General Strategic Plans Division Lieutenant General Khalid Ahmed Kidwai (R), Chairman NESCOM Mr Irfan Burney, Commander Army Strategic Forces Command, Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani, Senior Officers from the Strategic forces and scientists and engineers of strategic organizations.

The Director General Strategic Plans Division, Lieutenant General Khalid Ahmed Kidwai (R), terming the NASR Missile as a weapon of peace, said that the test was a major development which will consolidate Pakistan&#8217;s deterrence capability at all levels of the threat spectrum, thereby ensuring peace in the region.

The successful test has also been warmly appreciated by the President, Prime Minister of Pakistan and Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success.

Pakistan test fires Hatf IX (NASR) - thenews.com.pk

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## KRAIT

Tactical nuclear weapons like these are major threat to India.


----------



## pakistanitarzan

As awesome as it sound. What is the military trying to prove by testing misiles week after weeks? I'm a patriot and it gives me that ego boost whenever I read stuff like that but to be quite honest, it looks like the military leadership is not trying to address the problem which is sinking Pakistan in to deeper trouble everyday.

There are government leadership issues, drone strikes, there is ethnic voilence and there is TTP terrorism in Fata. What we have in our inventory is MORE THAN ENOUGH to deter India. It just does not makes sense that the military leadership is getting ganged banged by US presure on aid, supple routes and the Dr Traitor issue but instead of General Kiyani talking about/addressing the important issues, we test missiles after another. Great!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## OrionHunter

Good! But you could have at least provided some details! I'll do that for you...







The name "Nasr" is an Arabic word meaning "Victory". (Why give *Arabic *names is a mystery!!



) 

Developed by Pakistan's National Development Complex (NDC), the Hatf IX Nasr has a range of 60 km and is carried by the an 8x8 high mobility transporter erector launcher (TEL) as the Pakistan Army's AR-1A / A-100E 300mm Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS).

The Hatf IX was developed to add deterrence value at shorter ranges with high accuracy and shoot and scoot capability. The system appears to have been developed as a low-yield battlefield deterrent targeted at mechanized forces like armed brigades and divisions. The system is probably to respond to India's so called "Cold Start Doctrine".

Cheers!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zarvan

WebMaster said:


> *Pakistan test fires Hatf IX (NASR)*
> 
> RAWALPINDI: Pakistan on Tuesday successfully conducted the test fire of indigenously developed Short Range Surface to Surface Multi Tube Missile Hatf IX (NASR).
> 
> NASR, with a range of 60 km, can carry nuclear warheads of appropriate yield, with high accuracy, and possesses shoot & scoot attributes. This quick response system addresses the need to deter evolving threats, especially at shorter ranges.
> 
> The test was witnessed by Director General Strategic Plans Division Lieutenant General Khalid Ahmed Kidwai (R), Chairman NESCOM Mr Irfan Burney, Commander Army Strategic Forces Command, Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani, Senior Officers from the Strategic forces and scientists and engineers of strategic organizations.
> 
> The Director General Strategic Plans Division, Lieutenant General Khalid Ahmed Kidwai (R), terming the NASR Missile as a weapon of peace, said that the test was a major development which will consolidate Pakistan&#8217;s deterrence capability at all levels of the threat spectrum, thereby ensuring peace in the region.
> 
> The successful test has also been warmly appreciated by the President, Prime Minister of Pakistan and Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success.
> 
> Pakistan test fires Hatf IX (NASR) - thenews.com.pk


But the range was supposed to be 180 KM but the are reporting 60 KM why is that ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## F.O.X

No Change in the Range . That was unexpected.


----------



## Patriot

Guys I have a question - When we test long range missiles the missile initially have a very low speed and then eventually after like 10-20 seconds the missile starts accelerating but NASR has a very very high initial velocity/speed during launch..is it because of the short range?


----------



## Imran Khan

Patriot said:


> Guys I have a question - When we test long range missiles the missile initially have a very low speed and then eventually after like 10-20 seconds the missile starts accelerating but NASR has a very very high initial velocity/speed during launch..is it because of the short range?



i think because of light weight and advanced engine 

Press Release 
No PR130/2012-ISPR Dated: May 29, 2012
Rawalpindi - May 29, 2012: 

Pakistan today successfully conducted the test fire of indigenously developed Short Range Surface to Surface Multi Tube Missile Hatf IX (NASR). NASR, with a range of 60 km, can carry nuclear warheads of appropriate yield, with high accuracy, and possesses shoot & scoot attributes. This quick response system addresses the need to deter evolving threats, specially at shorter ranges.
The test was witnessed by Director General Strategic Plans Division Lieutenant General Khalid Ahmed Kidwai (R), Chairman NESCOM Mr Irfan Burney, Commander Army Strategic Forces Command, Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani, Senior Officers from the Strategic forces and scientists and engineers of strategic organizations.
The Director General Strategic Plans Division, Lieutenant General Khalid Ahmed Kidwai (R), terming the NASR Missile as a weapon of peace, said that the test was a major development which will consolidate Pakistan&#8217;s deterrence capability at all levels of the threat spectrum, thereby ensuring peace in the region.
The successful test has also been warmly appreciated by the President, Prime Minister of Pakistan and Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success. 

:: ISPR :: Inter Services Public Relations - PAKISTAN


----------



## Zarvan

Imran Khan said:


> i think because of light weight and advanced engine
> 
> Press Release
> No PR130/2012-ISPR Dated: May 29, 2012
> Rawalpindi - May 29, 2012:
> 
> Pakistan today successfully conducted the test fire of indigenously developed Short Range Surface to Surface Multi Tube Missile Hatf IX (NASR). NASR, with a range of 60 km, can carry nuclear warheads of appropriate yield, with high accuracy, and possesses shoot & scoot attributes. This quick response system addresses the need to deter evolving threats, specially at shorter ranges.
> The test was witnessed by Director General Strategic Plans Division Lieutenant General Khalid Ahmed Kidwai (R), Chairman NESCOM Mr Irfan Burney, Commander Army Strategic Forces Command, Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani, Senior Officers from the Strategic forces and scientists and engineers of strategic organizations.
> The Director General Strategic Plans Division, Lieutenant General Khalid Ahmed Kidwai (R), terming the NASR Missile as a weapon of peace, said that the test was a major development which will consolidate Pakistan&#8217;s deterrence capability at all levels of the threat spectrum, thereby ensuring peace in the region.
> The successful test has also been warmly appreciated by the President, Prime Minister of Pakistan and Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success.
> 
> :: ISPR :: Inter Services Public Relations - PAKISTAN


The Range was supposed to be 180 KM as reported earlier but what happened or Pakistan never actually increased the range of NASR Missile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Imran Khan

Zarvan said:


> The Range was supposed to be 180 KM as reported earlier but what happened or Pakistan never actually increased the range of NASR Missile



dear sir its mean they test same version in this test .but if news was true then they may working on it or not yet tested it .or may be they rename it that with nasr-1 and test letter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dance

pakistanitarzan said:


> As awesome as it sound. What is the military trying to prove by testing misiles week after weeks? I'm a patriot and it gives me that ego boost whenever I read stuff like that but to be quite honest, it looks like the military leadership is not trying to address the problem which is sinking Pakistan in to deeper trouble everyday.
> 
> There are government leadership issues, drone strikes, there is ethnic voilence and there is TTP terrorism in Fata. What we have in our inventory is MORE THAN ENOUGH to deter India. It just does not makes sense that the military leadership is getting ganged banged by US presure on aid, supple routes and the Dr Traitor issue but instead of General Kiyani talking about/addressing the important issues, we test missiles after another. Great!



Why should the military be responsible for that? 

Like what are they going to do about ethnic violence? 

They are doing operations in FATA. 

The aid, traitor, and supply issues are supposed to be negotiated by the government, its their job to play diplomacy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pakistanitarzan

Dance said:


> Why should the military be responsible for that?
> 
> The things you have mentioned above are supposed to be issues that need to be addressed by the government and the government needs to give solutions for that



Like I said; as much as I love Pak Fauj but the generals are 110% responsible for atleast some of the sufferings of Pakistani People although I agree with you that government is to take most of the blame but consider this fact
(1) USA is humiliating Pakistan by doing drone strikes 6 days in a row and just to make Pakistan look bad cuz Pakistan did not open the routes yet and there is not one single statement by Kiyani yet.
(2) Drone strikes are by permission of the army leadership, not so much to do with government


----------



## Imran Khan

new baby of our missile arsenal still i never look it properly lolz sitting in tube

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dance

pakistanitarzan said:


> Like I said; as much as I love Pak Fauj but the generals are 110% responsible for atleast some of the sufferings of Pakistani People although I agree with you that government is to take most of the blame but consider this fact
> (1) USA is humiliating Pakistan by doing drone strikes 6 days in a row and just to make Pakistan look bad cuz Pakistan did not open the routes yet and there is not one single statement by Kiyani yet.
> (2) Drone strikes are by permission of the army leadership, not so much to do with government



Actually drone strikes are by permission of the government. Remember in a "democracy" the government is supreme over the army.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Peaceful Civilian

What is new in this missile test?? multitube or MIRV?


----------



## yyetttt

Yeah I am wondering along with Zarvan they said it would have increased range..


Btw without increased range this babe is useless, because any indian missile can take out NASR launchpad (it will be close to the border)


----------



## mughaljee

Fellows, 
what is the main difference between this one and, same we conduct last time ?


----------



## Uncle Lord

thas why it is called shoot and scoot


----------



## farhan_9909

nothing change


----------



## Patriot

Range is not the only thing they have to test the missile for - Maybe the test was to verify and confirm other parameters (Accuracy (CEP), Velocity, Guidance System etc..)


----------



## air marshal

May 29, 2012: Pakistan today successfully conducted the test fire of indigenously developed Short Range Surface to Surface Multi Tube Missile Hatf IX (NASR). NASR, with a range of 60 km, can carry nuclear warheads of appropriate yield, with high accuracy, and possesses shoot & scoot attributes. This quick response system addresses the need to deter evolving threats, specially at shorter ranges. 

The test was witnessed by Director General Strategic Plans Division Lieutenant General Khalid Ahmed Kidwai (R), Chairman NESCOM Mr Irfan Burney, Commander Army Strategic Forces Command, Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani, Senior Officers from the Strategic forces and scientists and engineers of strategic organizations. 

The Director General Strategic Plans Division, Lieutenant General Khalid Ahmed Kidwai (R), terming the NASR Missile as a weapon of peace, said that the test was a major development which will consolidate Pakistan&#8217;s deterrence capability at all levels of the threat spectrum, thereby ensuring peace in the region. 

The successful test has also been warmly appreciated by the President, Prime Minister of Pakistan and Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success. 

Source: Inter Services Pubilc Relations


----------



## [--Leo--]

welll congrass but i really like to see that missile as 200 km with anti-missile like s-300 but it is different type of missile so good for pakistan but why testing again?any reason for that


----------



## pm modi

what is multi tube? Anybody have idea?


----------



## nomi007

hope soon we will test Babur from agusta-90b


----------



## yyetttt

@dravidian

You have to understand that PA is not going for ICBM. NAS'R is only for attacking military camps of India along the border.


----------



## acetophenol

Imran Khan said:


> new baby of our missile arsenal still i never look it properly lolz sitting in tube


 
Two missiles per launcher?


----------



## Zarvan

Islamabad: Pakistan on Tuesday successfully carried out a test of its quick reaction tactical nuclear-capable Hatf-IX missile with a range of 60 km, aimed at "deterring evolving threats at shorter range. 

The military described the test of the "indigenously developed short range, surface-to-surface multi-tube missile Hatf-IX" or Nasr as successful. 

A military statement said the missile can carry "nuclear warheads of appropriate yield with high accuracy and possesses shoot and scoot attributes". 

"This quick response system addresses the need to deter evolving threats, specially at shorter ranges," it said. 



It did not say where the test was conducted. The first test of the Hatf-IX was conducted in April last year. 

At the time, experts and analysts said the short-range missile was primarily aimed at deterring India's Cold Start military doctrine, which envisages quick thrusts by small integrated battle groups in the event of hostilities. 

Experts have said the Hatf-IX will be deployed with a mobile multi-barrel launch system that has "shoot and scoot attributes", or the ability to fire at a target and immediately relocate to another position to avoid enemy counter-fire. 

Today's test was witnessed by Lt Gen (retired) Khalid Kidwai, the chief of the Strategic Plans Division, which is responsible for managing Pakistans nuclear arsenal. 

Kidwai described the Hatf-IX as "a weapon of peace" and claimed the test "was a major development which will consolidate Pakistan's deterrence capability at all levels of the threat spectrum, thereby ensuring peace in the region". 

The test was also witnessed by NESCOM chairman Irfan Burney, Army Strategic Forces Command chief Lt Gen Tariq Nadeem Gilani, senior officers from the strategic forces and scientists and engineers of strategic organisations. 

The test was "warmly appreciated" by the President, Prime Minister and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, who congratulated the scientists and engineers. 

Pakistan has conducted several missile tests in recent weeks. 

On April 25, it tested an improved version of the nuclear-capable Hatf-IV with a range of 1,000 km while the nuclear-capable Hatf-III, with a range of 290 km, was tested on May 10. 

PTI 
I love the ignorance shown by people who were commenting on the above news on the channel website


----------



## Hyde

congrats to all of us for this test!

we waited for it for the whole month!!! congrats to every Pakistani and espacially the scientists who spent day n night to develop this beast

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Zarvan

Zakii said:


> congrats to all of us for this test!
> 
> we waited for it for the whole month!!! congrats to every Pakistani and espacially the scientists who spent day n night to develop this beast


I am disappointed because they have not increased the range of the missile


----------



## HANI

Zarvan said:


> I am disappointed because they have not increased the range of the missile



we have other long range missile sir and Nasar with 60-65 km is a deadly weapon ...........


----------



## TaimiKhan

Zarvan said:


> I am disappointed because they have not increased the range of the missile



Yaar, pehlay missile kaam karnaa tu start karay, then range kae baray mae soocha jayee gaaa. 

last test kamiyam nahien thaaa, that's why 2nd test in such a short time period.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## regular

pm modi said:


> what is multi tube? Anybody have idea?


Multi tube means that there are two tubes on the launching mobile platform means truck here. Each tube is carrying a missile in it. total of two missiles on the mobile launcher......from the two tubes its called multitube thats all nothing so special about it other than its speed , accuracy and short range.........


----------



## TaimiKhan

*And yeah guys, anymore trolling or nonsense posts, you will get an infraction as a gift and some bans too. 

New members should be very careful. *


----------



## HANI

Zarvan said:


> I am disappointed because they have not increased the range of the missile



we have other long range missiles sir and Nasar with 60-65 km is a deadly weapon ...........


----------



## Bratva

TaimiKhan said:


> Yaar, pehlay missile kaam karnaa tu start karay, then range kae baray mae soocha jayee gaaa.
> 
> *last test kamiyam nahien thaaa, that's why 2nd test in such a short time period.*



Intriguing statement, Like to comment on it further? My assumption was, A Missile selected from a newly produced batch and test fired like it happens with every other missile.


----------



## Windjammer

*Pakistan successfully conducted the test fire of indigenously developed Short Range Surface to Surface Multi Tube Missile Hatf IX (NASR) today. *
_

Do i see four tube launchers on the vehicle. _

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Bratva

Imran Khan said:


> new baby of our missile arsenal still i never look it properly lolz sitting in tube



These are the pics of last year test not of today, you should have mention it in your post.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mr_cool

Wow is that an original pic? I will be extremely happy if they have increased the tube luanchers from two to four!!


----------



## TaimiKhan

mafiya said:


> Intriguing statement, Like to comment on it further? My assumption was, A Missile selected from a newly produced batch and test fired like it happens with every other missile.



You don't start batch production by testing the missile just once. It needs multiple testing before it goes into production. 

This time the Multi tube numbers has been increased, plus the missile again tested, since the last time it didn't go as per the planning or you can say it did not meet all the parameters it was set for.


----------



## mr_cool

Windjammer said:


> *Pakistan successfully conducted the test fire of indigenously developed Short Range Surface to Surface Multi Tube Missile Hatf IX (NASR) today. *
> _
> 
> Do i see four tube launchers on the vehicle. _



BTW where did you find this pic from please bro?


----------



## Windjammer

mr_cool said:


> BTW where did you find this pic from please bro?



From...ISPR Office. 

The new launcher has four missile launching tubes, it sure is a shoot and scoot beauty, imagine what kind of havoc, even in conventional mode, four of these weapons can cause on the battle formations.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mr_cool

Windjammer said:


> From...ISPR Office.
> 
> The new launcher has four missile launching tubes, it sure is a shoot and scoot beauty, imagine what kind of havoc, even in conventional mode, four of these weapons can cause on the battle formations.



Its rare to see good news coming from pakistan now a days so this is fantastic news! Congratulations to all my fellow pakistanis!


----------



## Bratva

TaimiKhan said:


> You don't start batch production by testing the missile just once. It needs multiple testing before it goes into production.
> 
> This time the Multi tube numbers has been increased, plus the missile again tested, since the l*ast time it didn't go as per the planning or you can say it did not meet all the parameters it was set for*.



Last time test was declared successful and this time successful too. So any news if this time it did go as per plan or met all the parameters?


----------



## WAQAS119

Imran Khan said:


>



New picture released seems to be having four tubes rather than two.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TaimiKhan

mafiya said:


> Last time test was declared successful and this time successful too. So any news if this time it did go as per plan or met all the parameters?



When have you heard ISPR saying any of the test was unsuccessful. 

They never say and we never know. 

We don't have a 100% successful test rate.



mafiya said:


> Last time test was declared successful and this time successful too. So any news if this time it did go as per plan or met all the parameters?



When have you heard ISPR saying any of the test was unsuccessful. 

They never say and we never know. 

We don't have a 100% successful test rate.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Armstrong

I read somewhere that one of these armed with a 'tactical nuclear warhead' would be enough to obliterate everything in a 1 mile radius....pray tell me whether thats true and if so then what would be devastating capability of one of these missiles when armed with a 'conventional warhead' ?


----------



## regular

Windjammer said:


> From...ISPR Office.
> 
> The new launcher has four missile launching tubes, it sure is a shoot and scoot beauty, imagine what kind of havoc, even in conventional mode, four of these weapons can cause on the battle formations.


I'm amazed, I guess the very first test of Nasr some years ago had three tubes launcher, then they decreased to two tubes and now they jumped to four tubes.......ammazing isn't it....????.......


----------



## Jango

WAQAS119 said:


> New picture released seems to be having four tubes rather than two.



Why is that red line there?

On the launcher?


----------



## tarrar

Congrats to Pakistanis & congrats to the Scientist on the successful test of Nasr Missile. I am so happy on the successful test of Nasr. Pakistan Zindabad, Pakistan Paindabad, Pak Fauj Zindabad.


----------



## Windjammer

nuclearpak said:


> Why is that red line there?
> 
> On the launcher?



Close up of the launcher reveals some form of wiring. !!


----------



## Rana4pak



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## graphican

Guys, 

I would've appreciated more if its range was extended from 60 to something 160 and this is what I've been expecting but right now I was correcting myself that why am I expecting more range when it is a mobile system.. when needed to attack deeper, the truck itself can travel further and let the Nasr cause havoc at 60KM further deep. 

The news to celebrate is that it is now it has 4 tubes. Imagine how many of these mobile launchers would you need to eliminate entire battle front of the enemy? Probably just one system with 4 missiles would be enough to neutralize 100KM of battle front and that is the strength of this missile system which is worth appreciating and celebrating. Mashallah - Alhamdolillah. Great news for our defense.


----------



## Bratva

Feeling any difference? or the image is blur of second pic?


----------



## regular

nuclearpak said:


> Why is that red line there?
> 
> On the launcher?


Means anybody crosses the red line of our boundry would be sent to hell straight away.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## graphican

mafiya said:


> Feeling any difference? or the image is blur of second pic?



The Blur is along the length of missile and any object extending out its bordering lines must have been visible but would've been prolonged. I think you've got a good point and missile seems to have lost its head fins. 

It also appears that the missile has kind of shiny surface or may be the image is over-exposed.. not sure though.


----------



## Bratva



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Windjammer

*Check out @ 0.22 and again @ 0.54....two missiles sitting in the launch tubes.....both display different war heads. *

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Imran Khan

Windjammer said:


> *Pakistan successfully conducted the test fire of indigenously developed Short Range Surface to Surface Multi Tube Missile Hatf IX (NASR) today. *
> _
> 
> Do i see four tube launchers on the vehicle. _



lolz at desi made in pakistan patriot or ASTROS-II SS-30 look


----------



## Bratva

Windjammer said:


> *Check out @ 0.22 and again @ 0.54....two missiles sitting in the launch tubes.....both display different war heads. *



Missile on right look Fin less to you?


----------



## The Deterrent

mafiya said:


> Missile on right look Fin less to you?



Both have fins...


----------



## Windjammer

hawx said:


> 60 km range ??????
> Do pakistan want to be the first country to nuke itself ?????????



Place it 10 Km inside the Pakistan border.....and you would save all the firewood on your side. 



mafiya said:


> Missile on right look Fin less to you?



Same weapon....different warhead.


----------



## The Deterrent

Anyways the good thing is that Nasr is Pakistan's idea and Pakstan's own effort...NO ONE can say or imply that there was foreign help involved...
P.S. Note the launch rails inside the tubes. I wonder if the same type of setup can be used to canisterize two Abdalis on one vehicle.)



Windjammer said:


> Same weapon....different warhead.



On what basis can you differentiate the warheads? 
Guidance systems or Nuke/non-nuke?


----------



## lightoftruth

Congrats Pakistan for successful test.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ajaxpaul

What is the point of keeping the range at 60kms...I think only Amritsar falls in that range.


----------



## graphican

Armstrong said:


> I read somewhere that one of these armed with a 'tactical nuclear warhead' would be enough to obliterate everything in a 1 mile radius....pray tell me whether thats true and if so then what would be devastating capability of one of these missiles when armed with a 'conventional warhead' ?



It might be true because larger atomic weapons do not have a proportionally large destructive radius. If destructive radius of 1Kilo Ton nuclear warhead is 1km, destructive power of 10Kilo Ton nuclear war head might be 2.5 KM or so but not 10KM because larger explosions cause greater air-pressure around it and as a result atmosphere around exerts greater pressure back causing expansion of destructive radius more and more difficult. In one of the interviews Dr. Samar Mubarik had mentioned that a nuclear weapon equal to what was dropped on Japan would burn everything in 2.5KM radius so we can say roughly 1mile around the point of impact would be cleansed as if never born but life in 4-6 kilometers will be severely hurt if not entirely destroyed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Windjammer

AhaseebA said:


> On what basis can you differentiate the warheads?
> Guidance systems or Nuke/non-nuke?



My first guess would be weapon yield but then it could be an air burst design armed with cluster munitions.
Oscar and sir Agno are best guys to comment on this.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TaimiKhan

Ajaxpaul said:


> What is the point of keeping the range at 60kms...I think only Amritsar falls in that range.



Don't worry, its not for Amritsar.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Safriz

The missile indicates that Pakistan has Micro nukes..

probably next step should be to make Miniature MIRV out of these Micro warheads and an Ghauri....
5-6 of these can be fitted in Ghauri....or Shaheen.


----------



## dravidianhero

congratulations pakistan

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Deterrent

Windjammer said:


> My first guess would be weapon yield but then it could be an air burst design armed with cluster munitions.
> Oscar and sir Agno are best guys to comment on this.



Or it could just be a mockup with a different paint scheme?
My guess is that the second missile was a dummy.

Cluster munitions are a possibility because Pakistan has made Artillery shells having cluster munitions.


----------



## graphican

Ajaxpaul said:


> What is the point of keeping the range at 60kms...I think only Amritsar falls in that range.



You should study what is this missile for and then you can comment on its range. As of we know, this is just right length to do the job just right. People in Pakistan term it as "Cold Start Killer" so there would be a reason why they call it that.


----------



## Pakistanisage

OrionHunter said:


> Good! But you could have at least provided some details! I'll do that for you...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The name "Nasr" is an Arabic word meaning "Victory". (*Why give Arabic names is a mystery*!!
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> Developed by Pakistan's National Development Complex (NDC), the Hatf IX Nasr has a range of 60 km and is carried by the an 8x8 high mobility transporter erector launcher (TEL) as the Pakistan Army's AR-1A / A-100E 300mm Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS).
> 
> The Hatf IX was developed to add deterrence value at shorter ranges with high accuracy and shoot and scoot capability. The system appears to have been developed as a low-yield battlefield deterrent targeted at mechanized forces like armed brigades and divisions. The system is probably to respond to India's so called "Cold Start Doctrine".
> 
> Cheers!




Arabic names are mystery to you ? Really ?

All the Muslims in Pakistan and India have Arabic names.

What planet have you been living on ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

Safriz said:


> The missile indicates that Pakistan has Micro nukes..
> 
> probably next step should be to make Miniature MIRV out of these Micro warheads and an Ghauri....
> 5-6 of these can be fitted in Ghauri....or Shaheen.



There is nothing as "micro" nukes...
No, it isnt THAT simple and easy. I suppose that these small warheads are too small to survive re-entry into the atmosphere. Thats why MIRVs have always been large enough.
Plus the diameter of the missile warhead assembly should be large enough to house at least 3 MIRVs.


----------



## graphican

Safriz said:


> The missile indicates that Pakistan has Micro nukes..
> 
> probably next step should be to make Miniature MIRV out of these Micro warheads and an Ghauri....
> 5-6 of these can be fitted in Ghauri....or Shaheen.



After Nasr, the 60KM range - the next missile might be shoulder-launched nuclear capable 5KM range design. An idea that would be a suicidal design but imagine what it can cause to enemy as a single person can penetrate into enemy territory which in the days of wars is no big deal and fire at GHQ, Airports and Ammunition Storage. Sounds toooooo good if it turns true.


----------



## The Deterrent

graphican said:


> After Nasr, the 60KM range - the next missile might be shoulder-launched nuclear capable 5KM range design. An idea that would be a suicidal design but imagine what it can cause to enemy as a single person can penetrate into enemy territory which in the days of wars is no big deal and fire at GHQ, Airports and Ammunition Storage. Sounds toooooo good if it turns true.



One word- Dangerous.

Atomic demolition munition is more preferable.


----------



## Windjammer

AhaseebA said:


> Or it could just be a mockup with a different paint scheme?
> My guess is that the second missile was a dummy.
> 
> Cluster munitions are a possibility because Pakistan has made Artillery shells having cluster munitions.



It could be a back up missile....in case the first launch malfunctions or goes astray. ??


----------



## The Deterrent

Windjammer said:


> It could be a back up missile....in case the first launch malfunctions or goes astray. ??



Could be...
It couldn't be a ripple launch too, because I don't think Nasr could be trusted to perform extremely well.


----------



## graphican

AhaseebA said:


> One word- Dangerous.
> 
> Atomic demolition munition is more preferable.



Yup but missile defense shields can act as a partial barrier in their operation. If something is as low flying as anti-tank missile then who's going to track that. Having got tactile nuclear weapons, there is an opportunity of entirely new range of weapons and a fundamental different usage strategy. 

Until few years back, no one had thought of Nasr kind of missile and as it has arrived, it has changed the way we look at our defense. Who knows in next few years we see a soldiers carrying such tactile missiles. Its loud thinking but IMO possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

graphican said:


> Yup but missile defense shields can act as a partial barrier in their operation. If something is as low flying as anti-tank missile then who's going to track that. Having got tactile nuclear weapons, there is an opportunity of entirely new range of weapons and a fundamental different usage strategy.
> 
> Until few years back, no one had thought of Nasr kind of missile and as it has arrived, it has changed the way we look at our defense. Who knows in next few years we see a soldiers carrying such tactile missiles. Its loud thinking but IMO possible.



I would highly disagree...

The tactical nukes come with a risk i.e. potential misuse because of some rogue element or misjudgement. The smaller they become, the greater is the chance of their misuse.


----------



## Firemaster

What is the speed of this missile?


----------



## The Deterrent

So, "triple range"...anybody there?


----------



## ice_man

what is the accuracy of NASR & is it similar to the cruise missile BABUR???


----------



## Xestan

NASR is damn fast, does anyone know about its speed?


----------



## AsianLion

https://www.facebook.com/CriticalPakistan/posts/300055166751517


----------



## F-16_Falcon

Great work Pakistan. But the range is very less. I thought it will be 180 km range.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## S.Y.A

ice_man said:


> what is the accuracy of NASR & is it similar to the cruise missile BABUR???



I dont think accuracy of a ballistic missile could be equal to a cruise missile, oh and btw how much launchers will be assigned per division or corps?



F-16_Falcon said:


> Great work Pakistan. But the range is very less. I thought it will be 180 km range.



it will be used to counter enemy armored thrusts and not as a missile to attack cities


----------



## Safriz

AhaseebA said:


> Could be...
> It couldn't be a ripple launch too, because *I don't think Nasr could be trusted to perform extremely well.*



and what PHD in missile technology makes you say that?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Deterrent

Safriz said:


> and what PHD in missile technology makes you say that?





It is the second test dude. And there are rumors that the first one didnt go well.
It is a new system and UNDER TESTING. That makes me say that.

Ripple launches are generally conducted in military exercises by the end user i.e. the ASFC.


----------



## air marshal



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Windjammer

AhaseebA said:


> It is the second test dude. And there are rumors that the first one didnt go well.
> It is a new system and UNDER TESTING. That makes me say that.
> 
> Ripple launches are generally conducted in military exercises by the end user i.e. the ASFC.



Dude, first test was conducted over a year ago, if that test wasn't successful, i would have expected a second firing within a month or so. As for the ripple delivery....remember this was a test not a display. !!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Desert Fox

I'm overjoyed!!! This test included doubled the amount of Missile carried on the previous TeL and triple the range!!


----------



## VelocuR

I am really very pleased with four tubes and extended ranges. Next goal is six tubes. 

It is fast progressing than we expected, super fassst Nasr 

*Pakistan successfully test fires nuclear capable Hatf IX*







RAWALPINDI: Pakistan successfully conducted the test fire of indigenously developed, nuclear capable Hatf IX (NASR) missile, on Tuesday a statement issued by Inter Services Public Relation (ISPR) said.

*Hatf IX NASR is a short-range surface to surface multi tube missile. With a range of 60km, it can carry nuclear warheads of appropriate yield, with high accuracy, and possesses shoot and scoot attributes. This quick response system addresses the need to deter evolving threats &#8211; especially at shorter ranges.*

The test was witnessed by Director General Strategic Plans Division Lieutenant General Khalid Ahmed Kidwai (Retd), Chairman NESCOM Irfan Burney, Commander Army Strategic Forces Command Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani, senior officers from the strategic forces and scientists and engineers from strategic organisations.

The Director General Strategic Plans Division, Lieutenant General Khalid Ahmed Kidwai (Retd), *termed the NASR Missile as a weapon of peace.* He further stated that the test was a major development which will consolidate Pakistan&#8217;s deterrence capability at all levels of the threat spectrum, thereby ensuring peace in the region.

The successful test has also been warmly appreciated by President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani and the chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success.


----------



## Hyde

I am sorry for my ignorance but what is the benefit of four tubes?


----------



## VelocuR

Nasr is growing bigger threat to the enemy.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Areesh

Zakii said:


> I am sorry for my ignorance but what is the benefit of four tubes?



Four tubes mean four missiles. More than the previous TEL.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## VelocuR

*Holy Smoking*
















Who is stopping Pakistan's now, Mr. Gilani? 



Areesh said:


> Four tubes mean four missiles. More than the previous TEL.



What Zakii means the benefits, I think the benefits is more warheads (tubes) available make it harder for enemy. It increase enemy to think four times instead two times.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Desert Fox

How come only one Missile was fired? Why didn't they show all missiles being launched?


----------



## VelocuR

my dear, enemy is general, not India. Let we enjoy this thread, not trolling please.


----------



## Mech

Big Boss said:


> With its very very short range (60 kms) its more of a threat to pakistan itself.



I think the idea here is to play the nuclear card on advancing Indian troops without exacting a similar more devastating reply from the Indian side. You see, they intent on lobbing it on enemy troops advancing on Pakistani soil ( at-least this is what i can infer ). Since, nuclear strike is not being carried out on Indian soil, they hope that an Indian retaliation would be avoided and prompt our military planners to order a retreat. If India is the primary focus, Pakistanis are playing an enormous gamble. We have an NFU ( No First Use policy ) not a NUN policy  ( Never Use Nukes ). Any use of nuclear weapons on Indian soil or troops would be construed as an attack on India and will prompt a swift retaliation along the similar lines. Also, the Indian hawks are not likely to recommend holding back anything.

More than the Indian threat, I believe the Pakistanis are developing Nasr to counter possible aggressive maneuver from the United States or the ANA.


----------



## Windjammer

Big Boss said:


> With its very very short range (60 kms) its more of a threat to pakistan itself.



Then you have nothing to worry about......sleep tight. 

One wonders, why do armies come all the way up to the border to launch an attack.....they should do that from at least 60 Kms distant.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## VelocuR

Aeronaut said:


> *Pakistan to test fires new ballistic missile Nasr by end of May*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> INP 12 hrs ago | Comments (0)
> 
> KARACHI - Pakistan will test fire its new missile Nasr by the end of this month and most likely on May 28. *The missile with 180 Kilometers range* has high degree of accuracy.
> 
> According to sources, Pakistan army has completed all its preparation to test fire the nuclear-capable, surface-to-surface ballistic missile Nasr on May 28 Monday. The name "Nasr" is an Arabic word meaning "Victory".
> 
> Nasr can carry nuclear warheads and can hit the target with high accuracy, it is learnt.
> The missile has been developed to add deterrence to Pakistans strategic weapons development programme.
> 
> Pakistan to test fires new ballistic missile


 

Where is 180 kilometers range?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Windjammer

Mech said:


> I think the idea here is to play the nuclear card on advancing Indian troops without exacting a similar more devastating reply from the Indian side. You see, they intent on lobbing it on enemy troops advancing on Pakistani soil ( at-least this is what i can infer ). Since, nuclear strike is not being carried out on Indian soil, they hope that an Indian retaliation would be avoided and prompt our military planners to order a retreat. If India is the primary focus, Pakistanis are playing an enormous gamble. We have an NFU ( No First Use policy ) not a NUN policy  ( Never Use Nukes ). Any use of nuclear weapons on Indian soil or troops would be construed as an attack on India and will prompt a swift retaliation along the similar lines. Also, the Indian hawks are not likely to recommend holding back anything.
> 
> More than the Indian threat, I believe the Pakistanis are developing Nasr to counter possible aggressive maneuver from the United States or the ANA.



Albeit, it's a nuclear capable weapon but it doesn't has to be launched as such. Armed with cluster bomblets and shoot and scoot capability, it can rain devastation on any aggressor.
As for NFU or NUN or CSGF (Cold Start Gone Frozen) is concerned, when an enemy comes knocking at your door, you don't go into a thinking mode of you may end up in a jail or a hospital. You tend to give him a bloody nose.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## alibaz

mafiya said:


> Feeling any difference? or the image is blur of second pic?



Appears to be two different launchers, the first one with two tubes and second with four tubes.


----------



## BelligerentPacifist

I think the photo of two Nasrs sitting side by side in their tubes is carefully put in to send a specific message. Notice the different coloured areas on the nosecones - possibly implying an unconventional as well as the conventional role.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

RaptorRX707 said:


>


The two missile tubes/canisters at the top do not appear to have any launch rails inside for the NASR - the addition of the two missile tubes might therefore have been primarily for structural testing.

I am still curious about the exact dimensions of the missile (length and diameter), and the maximum warhead size for the suggested range.



Zakii said:


> I am sorry for my ignorance but what is the benefit of four tubes?


Reduced overall system cost, since you now need one TEL to transport and launch 4 (or more) missiles simultaneously/almost simultaneously, at a target.


----------



## Najam Khan

Another great improvement in Pakistan's strategic forces. Improvement in tubes mean more shock waves to the CSD

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BelligerentPacifist

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> The two missile tubes/canisters at the top do not appear to have any launch rails inside for the NASR - the addition of the two missile tubes might therefore have been primarily for structural testing....


My thoughts are along similar lines. But how would you test structural integrity without any load being borne by the top tubes? I think it might just be there to show the future developmental roadmap of the TEL.



AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> ...I am still curious about the exact dimensions of the missile (length and diameter), and the maximum warhead size for the suggested range.


 The length seems to correspond to that of the AR100, since the same launch truck has been used without any cabin relocation. That puts it to 6.25m. Somebody could measure us out the diameter by ratios.
I'm curious about the throw-weight too. 250kg is my first estimate, assuming the rocket is marginally inferior in performance to the WS2, and the guidance package is more sophisticated and heavier.


----------



## Kompromat

Both missiles look different , does it mean they could carry different warheads?


----------



## RayKalm

Ary Daily News 29-May, 2012 Pakistan testfires Hatf IX missile - YouTube


----------



## Safriz

RayKalm said:


> Ary Daily News 29-May, 2012 Pakistan testfires Hatf IX missile - YouTube



Banana journalism...They are showing tyhe wrong missile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Imran Khan

Safriz said:


> Banana journalism...They are showing tyhe wrong missile

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Edevelop

Windjammer said:


> *Pakistan successfully conducted the test fire of indigenously developed Short Range Surface to Surface Multi Tube Missile Hatf IX (NASR) today. *
> _
> 
> Do i see four tube launchers on the vehicle. _





>



Wow. Doesnt it look more like a SAM i.e the Spada 2000?


----------



## RayKalm

Look at the dislikes from this western news source

Pakistan tests new short-range nuclear missile - YouTube

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Safriz

cb4 said:


> Wow. Doesnt it look more like a SAM i.e the Spada 2000?



which rases the question..Can this be converted into a SAM?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Edevelop

Safriz said:


> which rases the question..Can this be converted into a SAM?



If we look at this example, especially at the missiles, there are lots of variations in the design and capability to make it a SAM....


----------



## Desert Fox

RayKalm said:


> Look at the dislikes from this western news source
> 
> Pakistan tests new short-range nuclear missile - YouTube



Man, that's one fast missile.


----------



## Safriz

what guidance system is used in this missile?


----------



## Safriz

Some notes on NASR
Pakistan Tests HATF IX Nuclear-Capable Short Range Tactical Guided Weapon | Defense Update
Pakistan has tested a nuclear-capable tactical missile dubbed HATF IX (also known as Nasr). The missile was developed as a *quick response weapon*, two missiles contained in transported and launched from a Transporter-Erector-Launcher (TEL) unit carried on a vehicle, similar to a multiple rocket launcher. The single stage solid-fuel missile, developed by Pakistans National Development Complex (NDC), has a range of 60 km. It is powered by a *high-thrust single-stage solid-propellant rocket motor*. The missile has a *midcourse guidance system, employing movable control surfaces emplaced behind the nose. Tail fins also help stabilizing the missile in flight. A terminal guidance system is also employed, further improving hit accuracy.* Nasr test firing also demonstrates that Pakistan has progressed with the development of compact sub-kiloton, low yield tactical nuclear warheads.

*This was the analysis of the previous experiment By a Quaide Azam University Professor*

The test indicates Pakistan has the technology to build a small nuclear warheads for all kinds of delivery platforms, said Mansoor Ahmed, a lecturer at Quaid-e-Azam University here who specializes in nonconventional weapons and missiles, quoted by Defense News. Theoretically, 1 kilogram of weapons-grade plutonium boosted with 4-5 grams of tritium gives a 10-20KT yield, provided the trigger is sophisticated, Ahmed said. However, the diameter size of Nasr suggests that the warhead would be less than 1 kilogram, and would be of sub-kiloton range, suitable for battlefield use and could be a fission boosted sub-kiloton fission device.Pakistan will now not accept any cap in plutonium production in the foreseeable future, he said.

The missile offers Pakistans military a quick response system, enabling the country to rapidly deploy massive firepower based on nuclear delivery capability, employing effective shoot-and-scoot tactics. These assets are believed to effectively counter Indias Cold Start strategy, part of its limited war doctrine, using massive air-land attack by forces maintained at high readiness level. According to Pakistani Lt. General (Retd.) Khalid Ahmed Kidwai, Director-General of Pakistans Strategic Plans Division at the National Command Authority, Nasr represents a new milestone in consolidating Pakistans strategic deterrence capability at all levels of the threat spectrum. It means Pakistan could potentially refrain from using strategic nuclear weapons in a limited conflict, by employing a low-yield tactical warheads as battlefield weapons capable of deterring and inflicting unacceptable losses among overwhelming mechanized forces that could be employed by India under a Cold Start attack. While India is not expected to reassess its Cold Start strategy yet, such a move will be required once Pakistan demonstrates its tactical weapons capability by detonating such a low-yield warhead.

While the Pakistani move was applauded at home, as a counterweight to a potential Indian threat, some voices are also questioning the value within Pakistans overall defense strategy.


----------



## VelocuR

Safriz said:


> which rases the question..Can this be converted into a SAM?



Not possible. Both are differences role. With my surprise, Pakistan hasn't invested in Air-Defence missiles (i.e S300/400) against jet intruders which is still most important. It is clearly Pakistan focus heavy on the land at this moment. 



> It means *Pakistan could potentially refrain from using strategic nuclear weapons in a limited conflict, by employing a low-yield tactical warheads as &#8216;battlefield weapons&#8217; capable of deterring*........



The top priority right now is testing with TUBES experiments. I am confident to say, it will be success tubes in new future submarines with the armed-missiles test as well as frigates.


----------



## Thorough Pro

Three tube launcher was for Babur Cruise missile, not Nasar.




regular said:


> I'm amazed, I guess the very first test of Nasr some years ago had three tubes launcher, then they decreased to two tubes and now they jumped to four tubes.......ammazing isn't it....????.......



I am not sure if it's just me or the missile in this test looked way faster than the one tested previously. Any one feel the same? Can somone compare the videos from two tests to substantiate the speed difference, thanks.

Fins are visible in the closeup of missile inside the tube, watch the news clip again, the tip in the tube was red, I feel that the new missiles speed is much higher than the previous one.



graphican said:


> The Blur is along the length of missile and any object extending out its bordering lines must have been visible but would've been prolonged. I think you've got a good point and missile seems to have lost its head fins.
> 
> It also appears that the missile has kind of shiny surface or may be the image is over-exposed.. not sure though.


----------



## razgriz19

Can't they just use the missile and modify it to a SAM?
I mean keep the missile with rocket motor, develop a seeker (or use chinese one).

I know its easy said than done but im just asking if its possible?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Thorough Pro

Nasr means help, Fatah means victory. 

Nasum minAllah-e-wa fathun Qareeb.




Pakistanisage said:


> Arabic names are mystery to you ? Really ?
> 
> All the Muslims in Pakistan and India have Arabic names.
> 
> What planet have you been living on ?


----------



## Thorough Pro

Are you referring to the same hawks who stood at the border fully armed for two years craping in their pants? On this side of the border we call them crows.




Mech said:


> I think the idea here is to play the nuclear card on advancing Indian troops without exacting a similar more devastating reply from the Indian side. You see, they intent on lobbing it on enemy troops advancing on Pakistani soil ( at-least this is what i can infer ). Since, nuclear strike is not being carried out on Indian soil, they hope that an Indian retaliation would be avoided and prompt our military planners to order a retreat. If India is the primary focus, Pakistanis are playing an enormous gamble. We have an NFU ( No First Use policy ) not a NUN policy  ( Never Use Nukes ). Any use of nuclear weapons on Indian soil or troops would be construed as an attack on India and will prompt a swift retaliation along the similar lines. Also, the *Indian hawks *are not likely to recommend holding back anything.
> 
> More than the Indian threat, I believe the Pakistanis are developing Nasr to counter possible aggressive maneuver from the United States or the ANA.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Thorough Pro

Don't want to derail the thread, but I think AD systems are kept highly secret as they are usually the first target of any air strike and secondly they would play a vital role in air defence of key installations. Element of surprise still has it's place in the war scenario. 




RaptorRX707 said:


> Not possible. Both are differences role. With my surprise, Pakistan hasn't invested in Air-Defence missiles (i.e S300/400) against jet intruders which is still most important. It is clearly Pakistan focus heavy on the land at this moment.
> 
> 
> 
> The top priority right now is testing with TUBES experiments. I am confident to say, it will be success tubes in new future submarines with the armed-missiles test as well as frigates.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Its all about High Altitude & 15,000 KM range missiles now


----------



## Thorough Pro

Navigation for a land attack missile is much more simpler than an AD missile because of static/slow movment of the target. An air defence missile needs advanced sensors (infrared seeker/radar, etc) and a super fast computer to process the target movment data, probable path and then guiding the missile to it's target. If that can be achieved other things are comparatively very easy.




razgriz19 said:


> Can't they just use the missile and modify it to a SAM?
> I mean keep the missile with rocket motor, develop a seeker (or use chinese one).
> 
> I know its easy said than done but im just asking if its possible?


----------



## stopper

can Pakistan install these "NASR" batteries on one of its PIA 747 and use it as a strategic bomber?


----------



## Thorough Pro

Why do I thin you are nothing more than a troll?

Your first post about Chogy and now this crap. Are you one of those paranoid americans?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## stopper

Thorough Pro said:


> Why do I thin you are nothing more than a troll?
> 
> Your first post about Chogy and now this crap. Are you one of those paranoid americans?



dont think too much ...


----------



## Thorough Pro

Don't worry we can.............

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ababeel22

guys what is the speed of this missile???????????? by the look of it, it looked very fast.


----------



## The Deterrent

ababeel22 said:


> guys what is the speed of this missile???????????? by the look of it, it looked very fast.



It looks very fast because it accelerates quickly because of lighter weight-to-power ratio. Our other missiles take longer times to accelerate.

But I doubt if its speed is above Mach-4.


----------



## I M Sikander

ababeel22 said:


> guys what is the speed of this missile???????????? by the look of it, it looked very fast.



Yes you are right, the speed is unbelievable. This missile has killer speed. It approaches towards its target like a bullet. 

*Its miniature size, unbelievable high speed, capability both as conventional/nuclear and multi-tube provision all loaded on a mobile vehicle makes it a Killer Boy among HATF family. *


----------



## regular

Ranasikander said:


> Yes you are right, the speed is unbelievable. This missile has killer speed. It approaches towards its target like a bullet. *Its miniature size, unbelievable high speed, capability both as conventional/nuclear and multi-tube provision all loaded on a mobile vehicle makes it a Killer Boy among HATF family. *


Okay Great!!! So this means that the Indian Anti missile defences won't be able to intercept them......


----------



## I M Sikander

regular said:


> Okay Great!!! So this means that the Indian Anti missile defences won't be able to intercept them......


Yes, with this speed and miniature size, it will be hard nut for any anti missile defense system.

With this speed (lets assume Mach 3) it will reach its target at 60 km within 59 sec, so the response time to take counter measures after its launch is very less.


----------



## [--Leo--]

Pakistan test fired Short Range Multi Tube Missile Hatf IX (NASR) - May 29, 2012 - YouTube


4 multi tube missile system

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ANG

Pakistan Missile Test Underscores Need for Deterrence | Defense News | defensenews.com

ISLAMABAD  Pakistans recent test of a short-range surface-to-surface missile was aimed at strengthening its conventional deterrence and complicating Indian war planning, experts said.

The May 29 test of the HATF-IX/Vengeance-IX NASR Short Range Surface-to-Surface Multi Tube Missile system was witnessed by retired Lt. Gen. Khalid Ahmed Kidwai, director-general, Strategic Plans Division, who said the test would consolidate Pakistans deterrence capability at all levels of the threat spectrum, thereby ensuring peace in the region.

An image from the militarys Inter Service Public Relations showed the NASR missile system to be armed with four missiles. When it was first revealed in 2011 it was comprised of only two box launchers fitted to the back of the Chinese-origin TEL vehicle.

Mansoor Ahmed, lecturer in the Department of Defence and Strategic Studies at Quaid-e-Azam University where he specializes in Pakistans non-conventional program and associated delivery systems, says the NASR is designed for counterforce targets.

In this respect, it symbolizes Pakistans resolve to develop nuclear weapons and delivery systems for use at the substrategic level, designed to deter India from exploiting Pakistans nuclear thresholds and attempting limited war or pro-active military operations, he said.

NASR was particularly aimed to augment Pakistans conventional deterrence at the tactical level for eventual employment in case of collapse of conventional defenses on any vulnerable theater of operations, he said, and signified Pakistan is developing miniaturized warheads of appropriate counter-force yields.

Because the test was carried out using a new four-round box launcher layout, Ahmed said NASR will probably be used to salvo-launch low-yield nuclear weapons on an incoming enemy armored column that breaks through the conventional defenses.

Former Australian defense attaché to Islamabad, Brian Cloughley, said the test highlights the similarities between the NASR and a similar Chinese system, the WS-2.

It and Hatf IX appear very similar, although, of course, I dont know the scale of the pictures. Both TELs are 6x6 and although WS-2 has six tubes, and Nasr four, the systems are remarkably alike, and I consider that at the very least there has been cooperation between the PRC and Pakistan, to their mutual benefit, as always, he said.

Regardless, Cloughley believes it to be a significant weapon in Pakistans arsenal.

When it enters service as a nuclear-capable [surface-to-surface missile] system it will be a significant battlefield player that India cannot afford to ignore, he said.

Cloughley served as a reconnaissance and survey officer in an MGR-1 Honest John rocket regiment in the British Army, a weapon he remembers as having a very long preparation time because the warhead was de-mated. In this area, he rates NASR highly.

It seems a most flexible system that probably has a very short preparation time, and it can be assumed that the rockets come ready-mated, he said.

But such weapons are escalatory by nature, he said.

Tactical nuclear weapons are a force multiplier of great importance, but they also raise the stakes enormously, because once they are employed there is no guarantee that the use of nuclear weapons could be confined to the battlefield. The risk of all-out nuclear war rises accordingly, he said.

He would therefore like to know more about the doctrine, as he concedes would the Indians.

Analyst Usman Shabbir of the Pakistan Military Consortium think tank said keeping the NASR solely as a non-conventional system is somewhat wasteful.

NASR should also be equipped with conventional warheads and be used against forward bases and troop concentrations as just keeping such a system for nuclear delivery alone is not going to be cost-effective, and considering our economy, we need to have a Swiss Army-knife like mentality, in which one system should be used for multiple things.

He also has doubts about the stated 60-kilometer range of the NASR.

I think it is more than that. They are very much understating it, he said.

Ahmed, however, believes it to be symbiotically linked with Pakistans nuclear, specifically its plutonium, program. This is especially so in light of recent reports by the Institute for Science and International Security that work on its fourth plutonium enrichment reactor at Khushab was proceeding at a faster pace than had been the case with the previous reactors.

Coupled with the recent reports of the fourth plutonium production reactor at the Khushab Nuclear Complex being half-way to completion, the NASR test demonstrates that Pakistan is serious in providing plutonium and tritium for its evolving force goals and meeting the requirements of substrategic nuclear weapons, he said.

Adding, This ought to be seen in the context of Pakistans desire to offset the acutely exacerbating conventional military imbalance with India and potential for India to develop or deploy its own substrategic nuclear weapons.


----------



## k&#7779;am&#257;

Well i suppose u know the concept of a nuclear fission. Well then on those grounds let me brush a few basics.The basic fission reaction that occurs in a nuclear explosion involves

(Neutron) + (Fissionable Isotope of large atom) &#8594; (Isotope of medium sized atom) + (Isotope of medium sized atom) + 3 or 4 (Neutron)

For a nuclear explosion to occur, the average number of the product neutrons that trigger another reaction needs to be greater than 1.

There are several things that can happen to neutrons that are produced as a product of a fission reaction

(1) They can move out of the region where the fissionable material is
(2) They can be absorbed by atoms other than the fissionable ones
(3) They are usually very fast moving -- they can bounce around off other atoms a bit and gradually get slowed down, OR
(4) If conditions are just right, they can collide with another fissionable atom, and produce another fission reaction.

If each reaction produces, say, 3.5 neutrons out for each neutron in, then there will only be a nuclear explosion if about 30% or more of those neutrons trigger another fission.
With a small lump of fissionable material, you will not get a nuclear hand grenade, Nearly all of the neutrons will travel straight out of the lump, maybe having a few collisions and warming things up, but more than 90% will take route (1) above.

For a medium size lump, routes (2) and (3) become more important. The lump will probably melt and make a bit of a mess, but not an explosion.

Quite a sizable lump of material is required for there to be any chance of an explosion. The actual size needed depends on shape and purity, but for a 100% pure sphere of fissionable material there is a "critical mass" (you may be able to find how much on the web -- I think it is somewhere in the region of 10-15 kg) required.

Now let's take 10Kg for the sake of discussion. I have not added to it the wight of firing mechanisms, shielding [Yup weapons too have shielding], safeguards and redundancies. So the question arises, what weight should a small self contained nuke weigh? Smallest, that can make a impact, 100 kg but it used ~100% enriched U235 and 350kg with abt 98.3% enrichment.

So at last, how much can Nasr carry as a warhead ? Sadly just 50kg.

So I suppose Pakistan are producing Californium-251 (cost of production $10,000,000 Per gram) for the warheads for Nasr ? 

Pls shed some light on the topic
Eg:
(1). Type of Fission material ? 
(2). Fission material weight ?
(3). yield?


----------



## The Deterrent

k&#7779;am&#257;;3154704 said:


> Well i suppose u know the concept of a nuclear fission. Well then on those grounds let me brush a few basics.The basic fission reaction that occurs in a nuclear explosion involves
> 
> (Neutron) + (Fissionable Isotope of large atom) &#8594; (Isotope of medium sized atom) + (Isotope of medium sized atom) + 3 or 4 (Neutron)
> 
> For a nuclear explosion to occur, the average number of the product neutrons that trigger another reaction needs to be greater than 1.
> 
> There are several things that can happen to neutrons that are produced as a product of a fission reaction
> 
> (1) They can move out of the region where the fissionable material is
> (2) They can be absorbed by atoms other than the fissionable ones
> (3) They are usually very fast moving -- they can bounce around off other atoms a bit and gradually get slowed down, OR
> (4) If conditions are just right, they can collide with another fissionable atom, and produce another fission reaction.
> 
> If each reaction produces, say, 3.5 neutrons out for each neutron in, then there will only be a nuclear explosion if about 30% or more of those neutrons trigger another fission.
> With a small lump of fissionable material, you will not get a nuclear hand grenade, Nearly all of the neutrons will travel straight out of the lump, maybe having a few collisions and warming things up, but more than 90% will take route (1) above.
> 
> For a medium size lump, routes (2) and (3) become more important. The lump will probably melt and make a bit of a mess, but not an explosion.
> 
> Quite a sizable lump of material is required for there to be any chance of an explosion. The actual size needed depends on shape and purity, but for a 100% pure sphere of fissionable material there is a "critical mass" (you may be able to find how much on the web -- I think it is somewhere in the region of 10-15 kg) required.
> 
> Now let's take 10Kg for the sake of discussion. I have not added to it the wight of firing mechanisms, shielding [Yup weapons too have shielding], safeguards and redundancies. So the question arises, what weight should a small self contained nuke weigh? Smallest, that can make a impact, 100 kg but it used ~100% enriched U235 and 350kg with abt 98.3% enrichment.
> 
> So at last, how much can Nasr carry as a warhead ? Sadly just 50kg.
> 
> So I suppose Pakistan are producing Californium-251 (cost of production $10,000,000 Per gram) for the warheads for Nasr ?
> 
> Pls shed some light on the topic
> Eg:
> (1). Type of Fission material ?
> (2). Fission material weight ?
> (3). yield?



Did you just try to SOMEHOW prove that Nasr is too small to deliver nukes?? 
In response to the really weird logic that you gave, I'm just gonna give a comparison. 

The US W-74 is a 155mm artillery shell, and is sadly a plutonium based nuclear weapon. On the other hand, Nasr's warhead has a diameter of 300mm, which sadly can also deliver a nuke. So there isn't any use of PROVING anything, those nukes are real, not bluffs.

(1) Plutonium
(2) No official statement on the warhead weight.
(3) Subkiloton range (most probably)

P.S. Try to do some research before posting something serious...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Bratva

AhaseebA said:


> Did you just try to SOMEHOW prove that Nasr is too small to deliver nukes??
> In response to the really weird logic that you gave, I'm just gonna give a comparison.
> 
> The US W-74 is a 155mm artillery shell, and is sadly a plutonium based nuclear weapon. On the other hand, Nasr's warhead has a diameter of 300mm, which sadly can also deliver a nuke. So there isn't any use of PROVING anything, those nukes are real, not bluffs.
> 
> (1) Plutonium
> (2) No official statement on the warhead weight.
> (3) Subkiloton range (most probably)
> 
> P.S. Try to do some research before posting something serious...



also he should know what is dirty bomb and if dirty bomb can explode than why not NASR can explode nuclear material.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pak47

Can this system be used as Air Defence?


----------



## hatf IX

Pak47 said:


> Can this system be used as Air Defence?



no . . . . .

need totally other type of guidance . . . . but . . . . . i think Pakistan should work on this


----------



## v9s

k&#7779;am&#257;;3154704 said:


> Well i suppose u know the concept of a nuclear fission. Well then on those grounds let me brush a few basics.The basic fission reaction that occurs in a nuclear explosion involves
> 
> 
> Bla bla bla i'm a super chutia



That minimum critical mass you stated is required for a sustained nuclear reaction with no outside influence, i.e. if you put 2 sub-critical parts together with no change in heat, density, etc

Nuclear weapon designs allow you to reduce the critical mass because the other factors change (density, temp, usage of a damper, etc), for example: 



> By surrounding the fissionable material with a suitable neutron "reflector", the loss of neutrons can reduced and the critical mass can be reduced.
> 
> By using a neutron reflector, only about 11 pounds (5 kilograms) of nearly pure or weapon's grade plutonium 239 or about 33 pounds (15 kilograms) uranium 235 is needed to achieve critical mass.



Plus you can boost the weapon using tritium and deuterium.

This was done over 50 years ago: W54 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Pak47

hatf IX said:


> no . . . . .
> 
> need totally other type of guidance . . . . but . . . . . i think Pakistan should work on this



Well i know obviously it can't be done with this guidance.. but seeing the video of its launch.. the first thing that comes to my mind is air defence.. and.. Yes.. i think it can be done with a different guidance system..


----------



## Last Hope

Why would you use a nuke to be used as a Surface-to-Air missile? You have long-range missiles which work perfectly fine like HQ-18.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## k&#7779;am&#257;

self delete


----------



## k&#7779;am&#257;

AhaseebA said:


> Did you just try to SOMEHOW prove that Nasr is too small to deliver nukes??
> In response to the really weird logic that you gave, I'm just gonna give a comparison.
> 
> The US W-74 is a 155mm artillery shell, and is sadly a plutonium based nuclear weapon. On the other hand, Nasr's warhead has a diameter of 300mm, which sadly can also deliver a nuke. So there isn't any use of PROVING anything, those nukes are real, not bluffs.
> 
> (1) Plutonium
> (2) No official statement on the warhead weight.
> (3) Subkiloton range (most probably)
> 
> P.S. Try to do some research before posting something serious...



Thanks 4 replying to the post non-trolingly. Well firstly donn you urself think there was some intellectual thinking done b4 posting [if not research, sorry I have other prior commitments ] else it would be a troling ?

Ok now back on topic. My first observation, according to many references in d.pk and outside there is a consistent figure on the payload capacity of 50kg conventional (ie, without shielding) . A quick search will pop up quite a large no of results. Now above I have discussed Uranium 235 reason enriching uranium is is cost effective and Pakistan has quite a few complexes to do so. I think, I impart my polestar of logic upon you.

Now that u have enlightened me its PU239, well may know better. Ok. I think there are two complexes for PU enrichment, rite? So you again may be correct. 

Now I too had remembered those artillery shells for a reference on weight. Those shells, W-48 is 58kg(128lbs). The lightest is W-54 Davy Crockett warhead, 15kg but the catch is with shielding it weighted 68 kg. Now its should be noted that these people at UCRL (creators of W-54) were the aces of the game, then why did they abandoned the project and non of them saw a conflict, not even at sea or anti-sat role?? A few observations
1. They cost a (read "large no of") bomb(s).Exactly $425,000 (in 1973) a pop. Oh and yes pls add inflation to it.
2. Low yield seems trivial compared to weapons with yields in the kilotons or megatons, but it is actually far more dangerous than conventional explosives of equivalent yield due to the intense radiation emitted. A 20 ton fission explosion, for example, produces a very dangerous 500 rem radiation exposure at 400 meters from burst point, and a 100% lethal 1350 rem exposure at 300 meters. A yield of 10-20 tons is also equal to the yield of the lowest yield nuclear warhead ever deployed by the US -- the W-54 used in the Davy Crockett recoilless rifle.
3. In a single word SAFEGUARDS. 

Apart from the obvious weight issue here are some more things to observe. From above you could see that at the cost of these one can buy a boat load of conventional CBUs like CBU-150. You can now rain down a **** load of them and no country will raise an eyebrow also India or any nuclear state cannot retaliate in nuclear to that, rite? So doesn't the scale tip in using conventional weaponry on infantry ??

Also First world nations are right on our throats on issue of safeguards. No one knows better than the scientist and the users. The compact designs all mentioned above have the greatest flaw that they do not contain the type of security as the bigger cousins enjoy. And that is a real deal breaker. We both know what a rouge nuclear device can do, it doesn't matter which side it belonged earlier. When it explodes it kills irrespective of the nationality, cast creed or skin color. No one will want such a thing even for an enemy. At least I won't. 


"also he should know what is dirty bomb and if dirty bomb can explode than why not NASR can explode nuclear material."

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...missile-tested-pakistan-17.html#ixzz1zyNbwbSE

Well sir dirty bombs are exploded/scattered by a conventional explosive so that it could irradiate the area. They do not fission and neither do they yield any explosion due to fission. But the official reports it dose yield a subkiloton yield. If you propose that its basically a dirty-bomb-delivery system then, even if Indian forces do a tactical retreat, it will be a ecological disaster at your hands. Members from Japan, Russia and few from USA can be referred for the same. Also if they were to produce a dirty bomb then many cheaper replacements are available against PU239 or U235.

--------------------------------------
To all,
Pls reply if you have anything constructive to say. Pls do not troll. Both India and Pakistan.
regards


----------



## Pak47

Last Hope said:


> Why would you use a nuke to be used as a Surface-to-Air missile? You have long-range missiles which work perfectly fine like HQ-18.



Ahh, you're right.. i completely took range out of the equation.


----------



## Kompromat

k&#7779;am&#257;;3154704 said:


> Well i suppose u know the concept of a nuclear fission. Well then on those grounds let me brush a few basics.The basic fission reaction that occurs in a nuclear explosion involves
> 
> (Neutron) + (Fissionable Isotope of large atom) &#8594; (Isotope of medium sized atom) + (Isotope of medium sized atom) + 3 or 4 (Neutron)
> 
> For a nuclear explosion to occur, the average number of the product neutrons that trigger another reaction needs to be greater than 1.
> 
> There are several things that can happen to neutrons that are produced as a product of a fission reaction
> 
> (1) They can move out of the region where the fissionable material is
> (2) They can be absorbed by atoms other than the fissionable ones
> (3) They are usually very fast moving -- they can bounce around off other atoms a bit and gradually get slowed down, OR
> (4) If conditions are just right, they can collide with another fissionable atom, and produce another fission reaction.
> 
> If each reaction produces, say, 3.5 neutrons out for each neutron in, then there will only be a nuclear explosion if about 30% or more of those neutrons trigger another fission.
> With a small lump of fissionable material, you will not get a nuclear hand grenade, Nearly all of the neutrons will travel straight out of the lump, maybe having a few collisions and warming things up, but more than 90% will take route (1) above.
> 
> For a medium size lump, routes (2) and (3) become more important. The lump will probably melt and make a bit of a mess, but not an explosion.
> 
> Quite a sizable lump of material is required for there to be any chance of an explosion. The actual size needed depends on shape and purity, but for a 100% pure sphere of fissionable material there is a "critical mass" (you may be able to find how much on the web -- I think it is somewhere in the region of 10-15 kg) required.
> 
> Now let's take 10Kg for the sake of discussion. I have not added to it the wight of firing mechanisms, shielding [Yup weapons too have shielding], safeguards and redundancies. So the question arises, what weight should a small self contained nuke weigh? Smallest, that can make a impact, 100 kg but it used ~100% enriched U235 and 350kg with abt 98.3% enrichment.
> 
> So at last, how much can Nasr carry as a warhead ? Sadly just 50kg.
> 
> So I suppose Pakistan are producing Californium-251 (cost of production $10,000,000 Per gram) for the warheads for Nasr ?
> 
> Pls shed some light on the topic
> Eg:
> (1). Type of Fission material ?
> (2). Fission material weight ?
> (3). yield?



No one would give you any info on the type of Warheads because its a state secret. Making TNWs are indeed a specialized technology only possessed by a handful of countries. We won't know whats inside it until an invading Indian IBG gets smoked.


----------



## The Deterrent

k&#7779;am&#257;;3155792 said:


> Thanks 4 replying to the post non-trolingly. Well firstly donn you urself think there was some intellectual thinking done b4 posting [if not research, sorry I have other prior commitments ] else it would be a troling ?
> 
> Ok now back on topic. My first observation, according to many references in d.pk and outside there is a consistent figure on the payload capacity of 50kg conventional (ie, without shielding) . A quick search will pop up quite a large no of results. Now above I have discussed Uranium 235 reason enriching uranium is is cost effective and Pakistan has quite a few complexes to do so. I think, I impart my polestar of logic upon you.
> 
> Now that u have enlightened me its PU239, well may know better. Ok. I think there are two complexes for PU enrichment, rite? So you again may be correct.
> 
> Now I too had remembered those artillery shells for a reference on weight. Those shells, W-48 is 58kg(128lbs). The lightest is W-54 Davy Crockett warhead, 15kg but the catch is with shielding it weighted 68 kg. Now its should be noted that these people at UCRL (creators of W-54) were the aces of the game, then why did they abandoned the project and non of them saw a conflict, not even at sea or anti-sat role?? A few observations
> 1. They cost a (read "large no of") bomb(s).Exactly $425,000 (in 1973) a pop. Oh and yes pls add inflation to it.
> 2. Low yield seems trivial compared to weapons with yields in the kilotons or megatons, but it is actually far more dangerous than conventional explosives of equivalent yield due to the intense radiation emitted. A 20 ton fission explosion, for example, produces a very dangerous 500 rem radiation exposure at 400 meters from burst point, and a 100% lethal 1350 rem exposure at 300 meters. A yield of 10-20 tons is also equal to the yield of the lowest yield nuclear warhead ever deployed by the US -- the W-54 used in the Davy Crockett recoilless rifle.
> 3. In a single word SAFEGUARDS.
> 
> Apart from the obvious weight issue here are some more things to observe. From above you could see that at the cost of these one can buy a boat load of conventional CBUs like CBU-150. You can now rain down a **** load of them and no country will raise an eyebrow also India or any nuclear state cannot retaliate in nuclear to that, rite? So doesn't the scale tip in using conventional weaponry on infantry ??
> 
> Also First world nations are right on our throats on issue of safeguards. No one knows better than the scientist and the users. The compact designs all mentioned above have the greatest flaw that they do not contain the type of security as the bigger cousins enjoy. And that is a real deal breaker. We both know what a rouge nuclear device can do, it doesn't matter which side it belonged earlier. When it explodes it kills irrespective of the nationality, cast creed or skin color. No one will want such a thing even for an enemy. At least I won't.


 
My friend the only weapons that ever saw a CONFLICT were the Fat Man and Little Boy designs. Yet the US produced hundreds of designs and thousands of nukes. 

1. Cost issues? Pakistan's SPD receives enough funds to do more than maintaining the minimum deterrent capability. Remember, NESCOM is not DRDO. Their claims are solid, and are only made once the product is successful. 

2. Yeah thats the point. Scare the enemy, thats what it is about. You see, Nasr and other TNWs are all about bringing the nuclear threshold to the minimum level.

3. So you think safe guards can only be employed inside a weapon? What about the outside? Can't they be safeguarded in secure containers?
Don't tell me that you think that someone is going to walk out of a SMG base with a Nasr warhead in his backpack. 

Agreed, but who is going to sell us those advanced CBUs? Forgot that US won't do that, neither will its allies?

You guys just consider the SIZE before while raising the concerns. Maybe you think that the 'bigger cousins' are too heavy to be carried away quietly, eh? 
No one can use Pakistan's nukes without authentication, NO ONE. Not only we have multi-layered outer protection, but also PAL-based triggers and multiple arming codes. All those things require a freakin' authentication from a dozen freakin' Armed Forces personnel.

Yeah, now you are going to say that 'what if that 'dozen' goes rogue?' 
Well, sweet dreams.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bratva

k&#7779;am&#257;;3155792 said:


> Thanks 4 replying to the post non-trolingly. Well firstly donn you urself think there was some intellectual thinking done b4 posting [if not research, sorry I have other prior commitments ] else it would be a troling ?
> 
> Ok now back on topic. My first observation, according to many references in d.pk and outside there is a consistent figure on the payload capacity of 50kg conventional (ie, without shielding) . A quick search will pop up quite a large no of results. Now above I have discussed Uranium 235 reason enriching uranium is is cost effective and Pakistan has quite a few complexes to do so. I think, I impart my polestar of logic upon you.
> 
> Now that u have enlightened me its PU239, well may know better. Ok. I think there are two complexes for PU enrichment, rite? So you again may be correct.
> *
> Now I too had remembered those artillery shells for a reference on weight. Those shells, W-48 is 58kg(128lbs). The lightest is W-54 Davy Crockett warhead, 15kg but the catch is with shielding it weighted 68 kg. Now its should be noted that these people at UCRL (creators of W-54) were the aces of the game, then why did they abandoned the project and non of them saw a conflict, not even at sea or anti-sat role?*? A few observations
> 1. They cost a (read "large no of") bomb(s).Exactly $425,000 (in 1973) a pop. Oh and yes pls add inflation to it.
> 2. Low yield seems trivial compared to weapons with yields in the kilotons or megatons, but it is actually far more dangerous than conventional explosives of equivalent yield due to the intense radiation emitted. A 20 ton fission explosion, for example, produces a very dangerous 500 rem radiation exposure at 400 meters from burst point, and a 100% lethal 1350 rem exposure at 300 meters. A yield of 10-20 tons is also equal to the yield of the lowest yield nuclear warhead ever deployed by the US -- the W-54 used in the Davy Crockett recoilless rifle.
> 3. In a single word SAFEGUARDS.
> 
> Apart from the obvious weight issue here are some more things to observe. From above you could see that at the cost of these one can buy a boat load of conventional CBUs like CBU-150. You can now rain down a **** load of them and no country will raise an eyebrow also India or any nuclear state cannot retaliate in nuclear to that, rite? So doesn't the scale tip in using conventional weaponry on infantry ??
> 
> Also First world nations are right on our throats on issue of safeguards. No one knows better than the scientist and the users. The compact designs all mentioned above have the greatest flaw that they do not contain the type of security as the bigger cousins enjoy. And that is a real deal breaker. We both know what a rouge nuclear device can do, it doesn't matter which side it belonged earlier. When it explodes it kills irrespective of the nationality, cast creed or skin color. No one will want such a thing even for an enemy. At least I won't.
> 
> 
> "also he should know what is dirty bomb and if dirty bomb can explode than why not NASR can explode nuclear material."
> 
> Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...missile-tested-pakistan-17.html#ixzz1zyNbwbSE
> 
> Well sir dirty bombs are exploded/scattered by a conventional explosive so that it could irradiate the area. They do not fission and neither do they yield any explosion due to fission. But the official reports it dose yield a subkiloton yield. If you propose that its basically a dirty-bomb-delivery system then, even if Indian forces do a tactical retreat, it will be a ecological disaster at your hands. Members from Japan, Russia and few from USA can be referred for the same. Also if they were to produce a dirty bomb then many cheaper replacements are available against PU239 or U235.
> 
> --------------------------------------
> To all,
> Pls reply if you have anything constructive to say. Pls do not troll. Both India and Pakistan.
> regards




You should have thought more before writing those lines. Dude, it's all about priorities and strategic needs, Is there any country near to USA who have CSD? That's why they abondened the project coz they don't needed that small warheads.


----------



## k&#7779;am&#257;

Aeronaut said:


> No one would give you any info on the type of Warheads because its a state secret. Making TNWs are indeed a specialized technology only possessed by a handful of countries. We won't know whats inside it until an invading Indian IBG gets smoked.


 Well the thing is, experts can guess the type and make of the warhead even when they left out of the loop. Though its not that I am considering myself as an "Expert".

Said that, a few factual realities. Plutonium cannot be enriched, ie one cannot purify Pu239 after a certain level. The type and size of warhead we are talking about is extremely small and complex. Firstly the core used is about exclusively 98% to ~100% pure plutonium.That level of purification is extremely difficult to attain. The pointer to the fact only two countries were able to do so where US and USSR both of whom had a backyard full of uranium enrichment plants/power plants and to purify the Pu239 they had special purpose scientific reactors. Latter they even purified that by electro-refining. This was 50yrs ago.

Today USA and Russia are still the unchallenged kings of nuclear throne. Players like France, Germany and Japan are fast trying to overtake them. These nations have a very large no of research reactors. Basically these reactors increase the %age of Pu-239 in the fuel mix. A fuel mix with 96% Pu-239 is one of the most purified form of Pu and used bu US NAVY for weapons and propulsion. So why not refine it till 99% which has higher power density when used in onboard reactor ? and in weapons it has higher yield without spiking ? Answer to both of them "Cost ineffective".

Today India has 6 research reactors (under BARC, others unknown to me) Pakistan has 2 (correct me if I am wrong). If we add to it the total no of fast breeder reactors present here in India (which also provides Pu-239 but at 93%), even then we (both Pakistan And India combined potential) do not have the stock pile of those nations. Also neither we both posses the technology to refine it over 96% let alone "98% to ~100%"

So why was all this discussed?? Payload vs warhead wt. what I am trying to say over here is even when it is labeled as nuclear tipped we will have to take the claim with a pinch of salt. Also neither the 300mm artillery ie, MLRS of USA and Russia do not have nuke tipped rockets. Though they do have thermobaric weapons which may suite your operational requirements.


----------



## Nishan_101

Man there are only fears that US has reached about 65 nautical miles from Gawadr and we are unable to do anything although we are allies, so called. But people are suggesting that they are here to finish the game forever.


----------



## k&#7779;am&#257;

AhaseebA said:


> My friend the only weapons that ever saw a CONFLICT were the Fat Man and Little Boy designs. Yet the US produced hundreds of designs and thousands of nukes.


And wat dose your point has to convey to me ?? 



AhaseebA said:


> 1. Cost issues? Pakistan's SPD receives enough funds to do more than maintaining the minimum deterrent capability. Remember, NESCOM is not DRDO. Their claims are solid, and are only made once the product is successful.


Let me say this again. More Clearly, 425,000 USD in 1973 is 40.6 million PKR. For a scale its roughly 0.02% of Pakistan's GDP (as of data till 2010) and NESCOM may have a Pandora's box worth of budget from govt but at last PA has to buy these from it. And this just the warhead, I have not included any other expenses like the R&D for the same. Army also has to provide with delivery systems hence the pay for it.

For your comment on DRDO, I won't troll back on u. Pls refrain from doing so again while replying to me. Also it asks for counter troll from Indian side. 


AhaseebA said:


> 2. Yeah thats the point. Scare the enemy, thats what it is about. You see, Nasr and other TNWs are all about bringing the nuclear threshold to the minimum level.


Radiation is non discriminatory for who it is irradiating. It is harmful for any aggressor forces as well as for the defending forces too. Remember Pu-239 has a half life of 24,100 years. If the aggressor forces full back then even then PA can do much from that region. 



AhaseebA said:


> 3. So you think safe guards can only be employed inside a weapon? What about the outside? Can't they be safeguarded in secure containers? Don't tell me that you think that someone is going to walk out of a SMG base with a Nasr warhead in his backpack.


My point was that every nuclear device has a fail-safe lock-down mode that is even after being launched if deemed necessary the nuclear core can be shutdown. Also this system is at work when not launched hence it prevents any tampering to be device itself. And this adds weight to the already heavy weapons packaging (wrto Nasar's payload capacity) 





AhaseebA said:


> You guys just consider the SIZE before while raising the concerns. Maybe you think that the 'bigger cousins' are too heavy to be carried away quietly, eh?
> No one can use Pakistan's nukes without authentication, NO ONE. Not only we have multi-layered outer protection, but also PAL-based triggers and multiple arming codes. All those things require a freakin' authentication from a dozen freakin' Armed Forces personnel.
> 
> Yeah, now you are going to say that 'what if that 'dozen' goes rogue?'
> Well, sweet dreams.



Did u have any problem getting my point ? By security I donn mean 4 armed guards sitting over the device. I mean the non-tamparable security features that are embedded with the warhead. With its "bigger cousins" having no restrictions on size and volume hence highly efficient security systems can be embedded with it. Smaller nukes, like W-54 used in the Davy Crockett recoilless rifle had very stringent requirements and hence it was forgone with little or no security.


----------



## k&#7779;am&#257;

mafiya said:


> You should have thought more before writing those lines. Dude, it's all about priorities and strategic needs, Is there any country near to USA who have CSD? That's why they abondened the project coz they don't needed that small warheads.



So, as per your idea one should develop a TNW only when one has a neighbor with CSD ? 
Jokes apart, USA has a expeditionary force. This clue might help you finding the flaw.


----------



## asad71

How far do these travel? Can they reach Israel?


----------



## regular

asad71 said:


> How far do these travel? Can they reach Israel?


These missiles are India-centric don't go more than 60km...so Israel is safe from them.......


----------



## The Deterrent

k&#7779;am&#257;;3158106 said:


> And wat dose your point has to convey to me ??



My point was in response to your following statement:


> Now its should be noted that these people at UCRL (creators of W-54) were the aces of the game, then why did they abandoned the project and *non of them saw a conflict*, not even at sea or anti-sat role??


Perhaps you wanted to say something else but didnt use the right words.



> Let me say this again. More Clearly, 425,000 USD in 1973 is 40.6 million PKR. For a scale its roughly 0.02% of Pakistan's GDP (as of data till 2010) and NESCOM may have a Pandora's box worth of budget from govt but at last PA has to buy these from it. And this just the warhead, I have not included any other expenses like the R&D for the same. Army also has to provide with delivery systems hence the pay for it.


Is this amount for ONE weapon?
Look, this 'miniaturization' of nukes was a very difficult and expensive task in 1970s because the technology they used was inefficient. The equipment, machines used were of primitive designs. Now, times have changed. If you take a look at our nuclear weapons program, it achieved its goals using the minimum financial resources among all the nuclear nations.

R & D? Again, we are not re-inventing the wheel. Some prior knowledge is obtained by legal/illegal means and more work is done on it.

The Army doesn't provides anything. It is the end-user.



> For your comment on DRDO, I won't troll back on u. Pls refrain from doing so again while replying to me. Also it asks for counter troll from Indian side.


I wasn't trolling. I was stating a fact. I meant to say that these guys mean serious business, there is no bluffing involved.




> Radiation is non discriminatory for who it is irradiating. It is harmful for any aggressor forces as well as for the defending forces too. Remember Pu-239 has a half life of 24,100 years. If the aggressor forces full back then even then PA can do much from that region.


Agreed. You see, in a nuclear war scenario, Pakistan Army doesn't cares about the aftermath. We haven't got much to lose (speaking in terms of economy).




> My point was that every nuclear device has a fail-safe lock-down mode that is even after being launched if deemed necessary the nuclear core can be shutdown. Also this system is at work when not launched hence it prevents any tampering to be device itself. And this adds weight to the already heavy weapons packaging (wrto Nasar's payload capacity)


That is what I meant by "Arming codes" (locks). Yes, Pakistan's nuclear delivery systems have multiple arming locks.
So you mean to say that since somehow the weapon becomes "overloaded", Pakistanis decide to remove those arming locks, eh?
By the way a ~60-80 seconds flight time doesn't really requires an on-board arming lock 





> Did u have any problem getting my point ? By security I donn mean 4 armed guards sitting over the device. I mean the non-tamparable security features that are embedded with the warhead. With its "bigger cousins" having no restrictions on size and volume hence highly efficient security systems can be embedded with it. Smaller nukes, like W-54 used in the Davy Crockett recoilless rifle had very stringent requirements and hence it was forgone with little or no security.


I get your point. Since both of us don't have any solid evidence whether they do or don't employ non-tamperable security locks, we really can't say anything. However, I am pretty confident about their security (and everyone should be).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Safriz

This missile has fins at the nose?


----------



## Safriz

Looks like a GMLRS...







with guidance and movable fins at the nose and Warhead behind the nose...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Safriz

Pakistan's version of PRAHAAR


----------



## AHAM BRIHMASMI

TechMan said:


> Pakistan can do what ever it want on its own soil. We are not nuking Indians in India (which of course we will do later when the time is right) but we are defending ourselves from the Indian invasion. So this missile is for defence purpose not offence.



battlefields in pakistani or indian land will not be in uninhabited places, there is hardly any 10 km long stretch with out any kind of settlement in both countries these days. so tactical nuks or a farce unless you are intended to wipe out you own population. So what will you defend if you kill your own country men ? this strategy it self shows that how retard are pakistani policy makers and supporting pdf fan boys. one more thing, you people are openly saying that one day you will nuke india also, getting proper opportunity. Doesn't it give india a right to do a Tit for tat in advance? But relax, we are a responsible nation, we respect the value of human life. we will never commit such barbaric crime, we will wait for your PROPER OPPORTUNITY instead to achieve our aim.


----------



## Slayer786

tharkibuddha said:


> battlefields in pakistani or indian land will not be in uninhabited places, there is hardly any 10 km long stretch with out any kind of settlement in both countries these days. so tactical nuks or a farce unless you are intended to wipe out you own population. So what will you defend if you kill your own country men ? this strategy it self shows that how retard are pakistani policy makers and supporting pdf fan boys. one more thing, you people are openly saying that one day you will nuke india also, getting proper opportunity. Doesn't it give india a right to do a Tit for tat in advance? But relax, we are a responsible nation, we respect the value of human life. we will never commit such barbaric crime, we will wait for your PROPER OPPORTUNITY instead to achieve our aim.



Well usually Pakistan weapons are mostly defensive in nature. Pakistan will not attack India. It is India with its *COLD START DOCTRINE* and what not showing its intentions to attack Pakistan. (So much for* responsible nation and value for human life*).
Anyway, *MAD* is a very important word here. Pakistan and India has to make sure that they keep to it. (Hoping that you know what the word means).

NASR missile is a tactical weapon intended for use against specifically for the opposing army. It means that we dont want the *CIVILIANS* in the enemy country to get killed.


----------



## Gentelman

Windjammer said:


> *Pakistan successfully conducted the test fire of indigenously developed Short Range Surface to Surface Multi Tube Missile Hatf IX (NASR) today. *
> _
> 
> Do i see four tube launchers on the vehicle. _



i suppose there is good chance that there isnot 4launchers on one vehicle bt there r two vehicles standing side by side.....


----------



## alibaz

Gentelman said:


> i suppose there is good chance that there isnot 4launchers on one vehicle bt there r two vehicles standing side by side.....


 Its one vehicle with four tubes


----------



## HANI

Gentelman said:


> i suppose there is good chance that there isnot 4launchers on one vehicle bt there r two vehicles standing side by side.....


hahahahaha quite a eye u got brother .............there is only one vehicle


----------



## Windjammer

Gentelman said:


> i suppose there is good chance that there isnot 4launchers on one vehicle bt there r two vehicles standing side by side.....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## hellboy007

Well I had say that every nation is entitled to its protection in whatever way it deems necessary unless it affects others.
But on the issue of tactical Nukes, Its just something to keep on table and tell the other side that "just dont do something foolish."
But if your policy makers seriously believe in using them then I had say
1. Get ready for indian as well as International backlash. Today Even uncle sam cant use any nukes cause of international pressure and international image. so its a tightrope to walk on for your policy makers.
As for cold start doctrine :- I think its partially true and partially a Bogeyman.


----------



## Windjammer

hellboy007 said:


> *Well I had say that every nation is entitled to its protection in whatever way it deems necessary *unless it affects others.
> But on the issue of tactical Nukes, Its just something to keep on table and tell the other side that "just dont do something foolish."
> But if your policy makers seriously believe in using them then I had say
> 1. Get ready for indian as well as International backlash. Today Even uncle sam cant use any nukes cause of international pressure and international image. so its a tightrope to walk on for your policy makers.
> As for cold start doctrine :- I think its partially true and partially a Bogeyman.


After the highlighted bit, you seem to be contradicting your own self.......albeit over half a dozen countries posses the nuclear weapons but none have used it since 1945..... one could question, what's the need for acquiring them.
These are weapons for deterrence, if India doesn't feel adventurous with it's now outdated cold start, there's no need for Pakistan to turn the border into a Shamshan Ghatt. !!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hellboy007

Windjammer said:


> After the highlighted bit, you seem to be contradicting your own self.......albeit over half a dozen countries posses the nuclear weapons but none have used it since 1945..... one could question, what's the need for acquiring them.
> These are weapons for deterrence, if India doesn't feel adventurous with it's now outdated cold start, there's no need for Pakistan to turn the border into a Shamshan Ghatt. !!


If you had read properly the second part of my line said *"If it does not affect others*". Tactical nukes are gonna affect your as well as our population. That's why you should read the whole line before shooting from your hip. Don't highlight half sentences or misquote others


----------



## AHAM BRIHMASMI

Slayer786 said:


> Well usually Pakistan weapons are mostly defensive in nature. Pakistan will not attack India. It is India with its *COLD START DOCTRINE* and what not showing its intentions to attack Pakistan. (So much for* responsible nation and value for human life*).
> Anyway, *MAD* is a very important word here. Pakistan and India has to make sure that they keep to it. (Hoping that you know what the word means).
> 
> NASR missile is a tactical weapon intended for use against specifically for the opposing army. It means that we dont want the *CIVILIANS* in the enemy country to get killed.



Have you ever gone through cold start doctrine ? try to find and invest some time to read it please, and it is PAKISTAN, not india, who have attacked every time or compelled other party to attack (leaving it no other option). MAD seems a very romantic word to use in posts, but having impact unimaginable in practical ground. 
And if you have a weapon which is not intended to use on civilians of enemy country but your own, "tab to aapka khuda hi malik hai." one more thing, "It dosnt matter how much you and your army yell, MAD has only one meaning i.e. partial destruction of india and complete destruction of pakistan. " That is why wise people say-
" *War is a too serious business to leave upon generals.*" Hope you get my point.


----------



## Slayer786

*


tharkibuddha said:



Have you ever gone through cold start doctrine ? try to find and invest some time to read it please, and it is PAKISTAN, not india, who have attacked every time or compelled other party to attack (leaving it no other option). MAD seems a very romantic word to use in posts, but having impact unimaginable in practical ground. 
And if you have a weapon which is not intended to use on civilians of enemy country but your own, "tab to aapka khuda hi malik hai." one more thing, "It dosnt matter how much you and your army yell, MAD has only one meaning i.e. partial destruction of india and complete destruction of pakistan. " That is why wise people say-
" War is a too serious business to leave upon generals." Hope you get my point.

Click to expand...

*
*COLD START DOCTRINE *
Cold Start is a military doctrine developed by the Indian Armed Forces for use in a possible war with Pakistan.[1] It involves the various branches of *India's military conducting offensive operations* as part of unified battle groups.
As per Cold Start promulgation,* offensive operations could begin within 48 hours* after orders have been issued. Such a limited response time would enable Indian forces to surprise their Pakistani counterparts. Operations would involve armored spearheads launched from *forward positions in Punjab and Rajasthan.*

So what dont you understand about India actually having a plan to attack Pakistan. Pakistan does not have a made up plan to attack India. 
But your so-called peace loving, valuing human life govt is ready for war with a well designed plans.
Also, that last statement of yours would be a very good dialogue in your B-grade indian movies. But for e.g., USA is led by civilians in conducting wars and look at the result that brought them. They lost Vietnam war. In the second Iraq War they had to hastily withdraw as too many soldiers dying and we all know what the mess is in Iraq. Then we come to the Afghanistan War where they are planning to withdraw in 2014 after more than 13 years and taliban are talking with the Afghan govt with USA's blessing. So much for the "War on Terror". 
So with the civilian govt playing at war and getting results like that, I am sure the generals would be as bad as these nincompoops in playing war.

Again I will try to explain to you, I dont know if you are intellectually capable of comprehending that MAD doctrine will assure a general peace in the region and hence the need for Pakistan to keep developing nuclear technology which can be used in missiles to make India think 100 times before initiating fo0lish doctrines as COLD START.


----------



## Safriz

http://www.irs.org.pk/strategic/spso12.pdf

good read here


----------



## air marshal

*Pakistan Zindabaad!!*!


----------



## skyisthelimit

Congrats to Pakistan


----------



## WAQAS119

Last Hope said:


> Why would you use a nuke to be used as a Surface-to-Air missile?



for EMP attack.


----------



## Edevelop

enjoy

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Viper0011.

hellboy007 said:


> If you had read properly the second part of my line said *"If it does not affect others*". Tactical nukes are gonna affect your as well as our population. That's why you should read the whole line before shooting from your hip. Don't highlight half sentences or misquote others



It's kind of sad to talk about nuke options when there are millions of people involved but if some of your population suffers but your country's safe and the enemy loses half of its advancing forces.....vs. you lose the battle and your country's cut into pieces....what would you take??? Cost benefit analysis. Slavery isn't an option anymore is what the Pakistanis are trying to achieve in my opinion. I can't blame them. Take a look inside India and see what Christians and Muslims are going through.....they get killed and cut like carrots in a blender!! Anyway, different topic. But to save the mother land, nations do what they need to. Sometimes....it does make average citizens suffer too.


----------



## Viper0011.

tharkibuddha said:


> Have you ever gone through cold start doctrine ? try to find and invest some time to read it please. MAD seems a very romantic word to use in posts, but having impact unimaginable in practical ground.



Allow me to surprise you with what you already know but you guys act innocent:
1) Cold Start is the worse doctrine people have ever seen. I think it was the Pentagon or the State Dept who told you NOT to ever implement it as it might hand your as* in a plate back to you. The damage to the growing economy will be immense. There are two nations on the planet who are ready for a war almost every day. The comparison between their militaries may not be real due to one being a super force and the other one being a large professional force, but they are Israel and Pakistan. Both face 8-9 times the enemy on their immediate border and they go to sleep with it every night. There may not be a one to one comparison between the Israelis and the Pakistanis but the Pakistanis have defended their country a few times. Or per-emptively offended the other party first...whichever story you believe in.

2) MAD isn't romantic, trust me. It is the mother of all evil. And, in this case, it is playing the role that it played during the Cold War between the US and Russia. In India and Pakistan's case, it is a lot more realistic and extremely dangerous due to the fact you guys are right next to each other. A SMALL series of events can turn into both upward and downward spiral chain of escalations causing nothing but destruction to hundreds of millions people within a few hundred miles of proximity. 
So PLEASE, try to get off the mighty horse and realize that the wars and the MAD are real. It is yours, your neighbors and everyone else's responsibility to save lives and NEVER get to a scenario like MAD. Many think tanks have already declared that there is NO such thing as a conventional war in the case of India and Pakistan!!! So chill out, build peace, trade and prosperity for your nations. Both of you guys have poor people and in hundreds of millions and they can use a better lifestyle, healthcare, jobs, etc. A WAR should be the last thing on anyone's mind.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Safriz

I will need some opinion from members here..I been looking into specs of compatible GMLRS...Rockets similar to Nasr..
Most carry 90KG warhead and have an apogee of 15Km but range of 70 KM..
Nasr has less range ..but seems to have a bigger Warhead....The guess is that nasr carries a warhead of 100-110 KG ..a design change probably to compensate for the heavier Nuclear warheads which probably will be bigger than 90 KG.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hellboy007

orangzaib said:


> It's kind of sad to talk about nuke options when there are millions of people involved but if some of your population suffers but your country's safe and the enemy loses half of its advancing forces.....vs. you lose the battle and your country's cut into pieces....what would you take??? Cost benefit analysis. Slavery isn't an option anymore is what the Pakistanis are trying to achieve in my opinion. I can't blame them. Take a look inside India and see what Christians and Muslims are going through.....they get killed and cut like carrots in a blender!! Anyway, different topic. But to save the mother land, nations do what they need to. Sometimes....it does make average citizens suffer too.


Err... Dude with all due respect, please tell me of a place where Muslims and especially Christians, are as you say and I quote "Cut like carrots in a blender". I live here and maybe I know about all of this a bit better than you do. What you see or hear in the news is often exaggerated prime time masala News. But if you think likewise then I have tons of examples to show you that in many cases they are treated better than the general population. Our society is far from being perfect but the situation is not like you wrote.
Anyways, I had like to hear your side of the story.
Till then Adios Amigo


----------



## Last Hope

Safriz said:


> I will need some opinion from members here..I been looking into specs of compatible GMLRS...Rockets similar to Nasr..
> Most carry 90KG warhead and have an apogee of 15Km but range of 70 KM..
> Nasr has less range ..but seems to have a bigger Warhead....The guess is that nasr carries a warhead of 100-110 KG ..a design change probably to compensate for the heavier Nuclear warheads which probably will be bigger than 90 KG.



You answered your question yourself!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Windjammer



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bratva

Windjammer said:


>



I always get a feeling it's a modified CM-400 AKG missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HRK

mafiya said:


> I always get a feeling it's a modified CM-400 AKG missile.



Y....any particular reason.....??


----------



## Bratva

HAMMAD REHMAN KHAN said:


> Y....any particular reason.....??



Particular reason which gives me such weird vibe.


mafiya said:


>


----------



## Windjammer

mafiya said:


> Particular reason which gives me such weird vibe.



Two completely different weapons, one equipped with conventional war head reportedly travels at hypersonic speed with a range of 400 km, while NASR a nuclear tipped BRBM with a range of 60 km.
Even these American air defence missiles have a similarity to NASR.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Safriz

India's response on Hatf IX test launch... 
This guy is so damn funny..It takes talent to make such good fun of a missile launch,and make such hilarious commedy out of it.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## True pakistani 22

Maybe it is Right time to use Nasr Battle field Range Missile at LOC


----------



## Arsalan

True pakistani 22 said:


> Maybe it is Right time to use Nasr Battle field Range Missile at LOC


NO, not at all!
This will just escalate things beyond control. We are no war lovers, will fight one if it is enforced on us but Pakistan wont like to be the one to start the war. Things at LoC are nothing much more then regular stand-offs between India and Pakistan at the Kashmir border. The only things is that a hype has been created by media.
I don't see missiles getting involved in this because this is something media cannot do and the men who can are wise enough!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## True pakistani 22

Arsalan said:


> NO, not at all!
> This will just escalate things beyond control. We are no war lovers, will fight one if it is enforced on us but Pakistan wont like to be the one to start the war. Things at LoC are nothing much more then regular stand-offs between India and Pakistan at the Kashmir border. The only things is that a hype has been created by media.
> I don't see missiles getting involved in this because this is something media cannot do and the men who can are wise enough!



we are also not War lover 

but Nasr Missile without Nuclear Warhead can be used 

Indian army should keep in mind we have Missiles like Nasr for LOC


----------



## dilpakistani

True pakistani 22 said:


> Maybe it is Right time to use Nasr Battle field Range Missile at LOC



Yea and then we'll not only have india on our butt but also coalition of 50 nations to kick our a$$-et. Dude please don't save your brain to return it to your Lord as it is. He has given it to you to use it.


----------



## alibaz

True pakistani 22 said:


> we are also not War lover
> 
> but Nasr Missile without Nuclear Warhead can be used
> 
> Indian army should keep in mind we have Missiles like Nasr for LOC



Moving different accets of war towards borders have different connotations, therefore moving accets like these would escalate things and the escalation ment for election benefits, political planning or limited to small caliber will have new dimension and such situation is not desired by either side.


----------



## Arsalan

True pakistani 22 said:


> we are also not War lover
> 
> but Nasr Missile without Nuclear Warhead can be used
> 
> Indian army should keep in mind we have Missiles like Nasr for LOC


Still, even without nukes, involvement of Nasr will point to induction of Missiles in active battle. This will escalate the stand-off and it is not something Pakistan or India will want.
What is going on at LoC is more or less routine matter with the media hype being an exception and thus making it a NEWS!

Things will get back to normal and the response of Pakistan army so far have been enough and quite sensible!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Alpha1

In theory won't an ERW be more effective as the Warhead of the Nasr missile? I mean the Nasr is supposed to be used against large Indian Armoured formation and ERWs are supposedly great anti-tank weopens.


----------



## RAMPAGE

Alpha1 said:


> In theory won't an ERW be more effective as the Warhead of the Nasr missile? I mean the Nasr is supposed to be used against large Indian Armoured formation and ERWs are supposedly great anti-tank weopens.


Sir G the radiation wont have any affect on the latest armors 



Windjammer said:


> Two completely different weapons, one equipped with conventional war head reportedly travels at hypersonic speed with a range of 400 km, while NASR a nuclear tipped BRBM with a range of 60 km.
> Even these American air defence missiles have a similarity to NASR.


So you're saying that nasr can be modified as a Surface to air Missile ?


----------



## Umair Nawaz

RAMPAGE said:


> Sir G the radiation wont have any affect on the latest armors
> 
> So you're saying that nasr can be modified as a Surface to air Missile ?



Sir the radiation is not meant to deter Armour but to deter those sitting inside Armour.


----------



## Alpha1

RAMPAGE said:


> Sir G the radiation wont have any affect on the latest armors


The question is Can they penetrate Armour of Indian MBTs to give a lethal dose of Neutron Radiation to kill the Tank crew? 
@Dillinger @Dazzler


----------



## Dillinger

Alpha1 said:


> The question is Can they penetrate Armour of Indian MBTs to give a lethal dose of Neutron Radiation to kill the Tank crew?
> @Dillinger @Dazzler



@RAMPAGE you are assuming that an ERW is the only warhead that can be used.

The Russians have given due consideration to CBN protection to their armored vehicles since NATO doctrine specifically revolved around going nuke crazy once the superior Soviet armor divs punched through (now that is a war I would have liked to see, ah but one needs to read Red Storm Rising) so yes the armor may prove resilient on the other hand if I am right about the guidance on the Nasr then damage can be inflicted with sub-kiloton warheads. It would be interesting (in a macabre way) to make a dash for certain targets in the Sialkot and Chamb region and see whether Pakistan will actually escalate with the Nasr despite knowing the heavy price that any such strike (by itself and sans any retaliation on our part) at said specific places would evince out of the Pakistani populace.


----------



## The Deterrent

Alpha1 said:


> The question is Can they penetrate Armour of Indian MBTs to give a lethal dose of Neutron Radiation to kill the Tank crew?
> @Dillinger @Dazzler



That is very less likely. For a dozen or two tanks the radiation might be lethal but for others (if they farther apart), tactical nuclear weapons won't be very successful.

I think that you guys are considering only one scenario i.e. targeting of IA Armoured Columns by Nasr. 
-It can be used as a mere show of force on the battlefield, to draw the attention of international community in order to facilitate ceasefire. 
-It can also be used as a last resort weapon to destroy a force which has occupied a certain territory, in a situation when all other strategic assets have been compromised.
-Only when used in larger numbers, it can be used to irradiate large areas of the battlefield to make sure that unprotected personnel (which constitute a very large part of the IA) cannot fight any longer.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Capt.Popeye

AhaseebA said:


> That is very less likely. For a dozen or two tanks the radiation might be lethal but for others (if they farther apart), tactical nuclear weapons won't be very successful.
> 
> I think that you guys are considering only one scenario i.e. targeting of IA Armoured Columns by Nasr.
> -It can be used as a mere show of force on the battlefield, to draw the attention of international community in order to facilitate ceasefire.
> -It can also be used as a last resort weapon to destroy a force which has occupied a certain territory, in a situation when all other strategic assets have been compromised.
> -Only when used in larger numbers, it can be used to irradiate large areas of the battlefield to make sure that unprotected personnel (which constitute a very large part of the IA) cannot fight any longer.



That is a fairly accurate analysis @AhaseebA.
However I have an issue with the underlined part of what you have written. All the Strike Corps of the IA facing Pakistan have been geared up for NBC warfare conditions for a pretty long time (i.e. > 5yrs). In recent times, even the Holding Corps have been equipped for it. Just recall the reports of the Command & Corps level Military Exercises over more than the last 3 years. All of them have been exercised in NBC conditions. I'd suggest that you revisit all the reports thereof.

Even the Mechanised Infantry Regts. and the the acquisition of the ICVs in 1979 were precisely to raise a force for NBC warfare. Now that force is fully come of age with established doctrines and SOPs which are routinely exercised and which have now become _de riguer_ for them.
Actually I need to tell you that the first move in this direction was made way back in 1969 when some Infantry Regts. re-equipped with TOPAZ, SKOT and BTR-60 APCs. While the APCs were still considered to be just "battle-taxis" for the troops, they were the first IA vehs that could operate in NBC conditions. In 1972, I saw troops exercising with these features at the AC Center and School for the first time; and it was a revelation for me. But it was a novel feature for everyone including the Army then. Then the whole process crystallised with the formation of the Mech. Inf. Regt. by Gen. Sundarjee in 1979. Do not forget that the Soviet influence on tactics was mainly predicated on fighting in NBC conditions across Europe. According to me; the BMPs were acquired mainly for their NBC abilities than providing Armored protection to their occupants. The Mech. Inf. Regts. are the Indian Army's youngest Regts.; created solely to fight in a NBC war.

Do not make the mistake of overlooking these facts.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sikilmis Eksisozluk

Neutron bombs are overly complicated.The fissile material used has very low half life and decays into Helium which is Neutron absorbent and reduced efficiency of the weapon..
The Warhead is expensive to make and expensive to maintain. It has to be disassembled every year and decayed Fissile material replaced with new...

For permanently irradiating the terrain Cobalt bomb is used,which is a different fish.


----------



## The Deterrent

Capt.Popeye said:


> That is a fairly accurate analysis @AhaseebA.
> However I have an issue with the underlined part of what you have written. All the Strike Corps of the IA facing Pakistan have been geared up for NBC warfare conditions for a pretty long time (i.e. > 5yrs). In recent times, even the Holding Corps have been equipped for it. Just recall the reports of the Command & Corps level Military Exercises over more than the last 3 years. All of them have been exercised in NBC conditions. I'd suggest that you revisit all the reports thereof.
> 
> Even the Mechanised Infantry Regts. and the the acquisition of the ICVs in 1979 were precisely to raise a force for NBC warfare. Now that force is fully come of age with established doctrines and SOPs which are routinely exercised and which have now become _de riguer_ for them.
> Actually I need to tell you that the first move in this direction was made way back in 1969 when some Infantry Regts. re-equipped with TOPAZ, SKOT and BTR-60 APCs. While the APCs were still considered to be just "battle-taxis" for the troops, they were the first IA vehs that could operate in NBC conditions. In 1972, I saw troops exercising with these features at the AC Center and School for the first time; and it was a revelation for me. But it was a novel feature for everyone including the Army then. Then the whole process crystallised with the formation of the Mech. Inf. Regt. by Gen. Sundarjee in 1979. Do not forget that the Soviet influence on tactics was mainly predicated on fighting in NBC conditions across Europe. According to me; the BMPs were acquired mainly for their NBC abilities than providing Armored protection to their occupants. The Mech. Inf. Regts. are the Indian Army's youngest Regts.; created solely to fight in a NBC war.
> 
> Do not make the mistake of overlooking these facts.



Exercises are usually conducted by a relatively smaller group of troops. Are you sure that majority (say 75%) of the IA troops (infantry, not armoured or mechanized) are equipped with NBC protection gear and are capable of waging a conflict in extreme conditions?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Capt.Popeye

AhaseebA said:


> Exercises are usually conducted by a relatively smaller group of troops. Are you sure that majority (say 75%) of the IA troops (infantry, not armoured or mechanized) are equipped with NBC protection gear and are capable of waging a conflict in extreme conditions?


 
IA Exercises in the Western Sector since "Brasstacks" have been Corps level atleast once a year. In the last three years they have been Corps+ level. Even Brasstacks involved 50,000 troops though that was more to do with mobilisation and less to do with NBC warfare conditions. Also Western Command and South Western Command of the IA exercise separately; since as I mentioned even the Holding Corps are now involved. All this is in response to the much touted "TacNukes" that are now being brandished. Both of these Commands are heavily Mechanised now. Conventional Infantry are mainly with Southern and Eastern Commands, while Mountain Troop Divisions are with Northern and Eastern Commands. Gen. Sundarjee started the process and changed the Infantry mind-set of the Indian Army (for ever IMO). Check out the ORBAT of the Indian Army now and the picture will get clearer

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

Capt.Popeye said:


> IA Exercises in the Western Sector since "Brasstacks" have been Corps level atleast once a year. In the last three years they have been Corps+ level. Even Brasstacks involved 50,000 troops though that was more to do with mobilisation and less to do with NBC warfare conditions. Also Western Command and South Western Command of the IA exercise separately; since as I mentioned even the Holding Corps are now involved. All this is in response to the much touted "TacNukes" that are now being brandished. Both of these Commands are heavily Mechanised now. Conventional Infantry are mainly with Southern and Eastern Commands, while Mountain Troop Divisions are with Northern and Eastern Commands. Gen. Sundarjee started the process and changed the Infantry mind-set of the Indian Army (for ever IMO). Check out the ORBAT of the Indian Army now and the picture will get clearer



And the most important thing to bear in mind is that the battlefield that is the Indo-pak border is possibly some of the most tank-friendly terrain in the region. The BMP-2's which form the core of the Indian Mechanized force were designed for NBC warfare that was a _given_ in Europe. Basically, here is a vehicle that was designed for a war in Europe in which is was expected that NATO would eventually resort to tac nukes(_whether that protection has been passed onto the Sarath-in terms of the specialist onboard equipment apart from design protection is not known to me_) . That being said, the effectiveness of a nuke to at the very least stall and deter offensives along with causing disruption in Command and Control flow is well speculated. Hence, regardless of NBC preparation and war tactics the very usage of a Tac nuke will cause severe disruption to an advance and perhaps lead to consternation on other actions that might have occurred(_such as the deployment of a counter nuke, all out nuclear exchange etc_)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## indiatester

Oscar said:


> That being said, the effectiveness of a nuke to at the very least stall and deter offensives along with causing disruption in Command and Control flow is well speculated. Hence, regardless of NBC preparation and war tactics the very usage of a Tac nuke will cause severe disruption to an advance and perhaps lead to consternation on other actions that might have occurred(_such as the deployment of a counter nuke, all out nuclear exchange etc_)



Wouldn't the effect of tactical nukes been simulated already? There must already have run through scenarios to avoid being nuked, responding to a nuke both as a battle group and as a country. 

Are those details too much of a secret to discuss in public?


----------



## Capt.Popeye

Oscar said:


> And the most important thing to bear in mind is that the battlefield that is the Indo-pak border is possibly some of the most tank-friendly terrain in the region. The BMP-2's which form the core of the Indian Mechanized force were designed for NBC warfare that was a _given_ in Europe. Basically, here is a vehicle that was designed for a war in Europe in which is was expected that NATO would eventually resort to tac nukes(_whether that protection has been passed onto the Sarath-in terms of the specialist onboard equipment apart from design protection is not known to me_) . That being said, the effectiveness of a nuke to at the very least stall and deter offensives along with causing disruption in Command and Control flow is well speculated. Hence, regardless of NBC preparation and war tactics the very usage of a Tac nuke will cause severe disruption to an advance and perhaps lead to consternation on other actions that might have occurred(_such as the deployment of a counter nuke, all out nuclear exchange etc_)


 
You are fairly accurate there. The BMP-1 and BMP-2 were designed with that NBC scenario in mind as were their predecessors of the BTR family. As I said earlier; we were quite astounded to see the NBC 'lock-down' features on the wheeled APCs at the AC Center and School in 1972. IMO, even the IA was pretty much amazed at them then (and maybe even wondered what use they were !); since Nuclear Warfare in the Region was unimaginable! The _Sarath_ (the Indian analogue of the BMP-2) is identical to the BMP, since its the BMP.......Only when it gets re-engined with an Indian Engine (probably from Cummins India) will it become any different.

Now about the use of TacNukes; as you say their role(s) are as you envisage. Their primary role in our Sub-Continental context at least; is to _dissuade._
After that--- to _disrupt._
Of course; contemporary thinking on that is mixed. There are enough studies done on the subject which have analysed the effects of (sub-kiloton) TacNukes on massed Mech./Armd. Formations.Esp. WRT to spacing in deployment of 'well locked-down forces'. (n.b. @AhaseebA)
*And most Conventional (and Contemporary) Wisdom indicates that the perceived benefits of TacNukes are dubious. At best they could be considered to be weapons of "scorched earth" philosophy and finally; as WLR (Weapons of Last Resort) or Suicidal/Hara-Kiri intentions. They simply raise the stakes in "Nuclear Poker" to uncontrollable limits. Do consider: that firing off a (or some) TacNukes simply invites the possibility of Strategic Nukes in retaliation---without emasculating the Enemy's Nuke Capabilities completely (or atleast to any reasonable extent). 
And if this is coupled with the lack of any viable "Second Strike Capability"; what would you call it? I call it absurdly Stupid!*

The Strategic Estt. in India (like most other advanced Military Forces) lays little store in the efficiency and efficacy of TacNukes.

After that; to think that TacNukes can _defeat_ the Enemy is "highly imaginative", to put it mildly and charitably.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1


----------



## hunter_hunted

We could have tested on Mullah Radio Hideout .


----------



## SQ8

Capt.Popeye said:


> * They simply raise the stakes in "Nuclear Poker" to uncontrollable limits. Do consider: that firing off a (or some) TacNukes simply invites the possibility of Strategic Nukes in retaliation---without emasculating the Enemy's Nuke Capabilities completely (or atleast to any reasonable extent).
> And if this is coupled with the lack of any viable "Second Strike Capability"; what would you call it? I call it *_*absurdly Stupid! *_
> 
> The Strategic Estt. in India (like most other advanced Military Forces) lays little store in the efficiency and efficacy of TacNukes.
> 
> After that; to think that TacNukes can _defeat_ the Enemy is "highly imaginative", to put it mildly and charitably.



It is that particular gamble that Pakistan counts on. Even with BMD's the chances of a few nukes getting through to the more important centres of Indian population is quite high. Oddly enough you wonder why suicide bombing is popular here; when the whole psyche of the defence plans rests on a final suicide plan to wage nuclear holocaust. A simple statement of _I am going down but Ill take your arms and legs off before I do. _Lets put it this way; the Pakistani population is expendable, troops are expendable and land is expendable so long as the Kamikaze idea of dealing the final blow is achieved.
The issue of second strike capability may not be as dire as perceived in public, and nuclear assets are afforded much better protection from being destroyed(or stolen) as is perceived in the Media. One has to understand the gaping black hole that is Pakistan's strategic plans division in terms of funding to realize how much effort(and stakes) have been put into the program.

As a useful weapon the Tac Nuke has little value..but serves well IMO as a Russian Roulette. Basically leaving the Indian leadership considering the costs of war and whether recovery from such a conflict would even be possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

indiatester said:


> Wouldn't the effect of tactical nukes been simulated already? There must already have run through scenarios to avoid being nuked, responding to a nuke both as a battle group and as a country.
> 
> Are those details too much of a secret to discuss in public?



This is a good read
http://www.princeton.edu/sgs/faculty-staff/zia-mian/Limited-Military-Utility-of-Pakistans.pdf

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Capt.Popeye

Oscar said:


> It is that particular gamble that Pakistan counts on. Even with BMD's the chances of a few nukes getting through to the more important centres of Indian population is quite high. Oddly enough you wonder why suicide bombing is popular here; when the whole psyche of the defence plans rests on a final suicide plan to wage nuclear holocaust. A simple statement of _I am going down but Ill take your arms and legs off before I do. _Lets put it this way; the Pakistani population is expendable, troops are expendable and land is expendable so long as the Kamikaze idea of dealing the final blow is achieved.
> The issue of second strike capability may not be as dire as perceived in public, and nuclear assets are afforded much better protection from being destroyed(or stolen) as is perceived in the Media. One has to understand the gaping black hole that is Pakistan's strategic plans division in terms of funding to realize how much effort(and stakes) have been put into the program.
> 
> As a useful weapon the Tac Nuke has little value..but serves well IMO as a Russian Roulette. Basically leaving the Indian leadership considering the costs of war and whether recovery from such a conflict would even be possible.


 
@Oscar; your points make sense (as they usually do, )
What desperation could cause a country to use nukes?
In the scenario that is being discussed, that could happen if Pakistan (all or most of it) is going to be invaded and occupied! However it will make no sense at all for India to even consider doing such a thing (assuming that it is doable).

I'm afraid that hoping that TacNukes will even prevent any conflict/war is ..........what should I say.........Strategically Delinquent......... may be that should be polite enough?

Kargil was another illustration of Strategic Delinquency;  while this idea takes it many notches upward of that. One very important (if not critical) requirement in Strategic Thinking is the need and ability to retain control of developing situations to the greatest possible extent and for the longest possible time. This conceptual use of TacNukes militates against that very basic tenet. One of the reasons that Strategic Thinking has now nearly completely _junked_ TacNukes.

However secure the Command Control of Nuclear weapons may be; the risks of failure of that system increase majorly (even exponentially) WRT TacNukes as compared to StratNukes. And I do not even have some 'wild bunch of _Jihadis' _in mind when I say that.

Or is it that TacNukes help to fulfil some other agenda? To fuel a sense of paranoia to continually increasing levels. And whose _payola_ is something else? Which does not even have anything to do with a Battle-Front!


----------



## farhan_9909

They should have a export variant with 100km range and SImilar TEL having either 5-6 missile launchers.


----------



## SQ8

Capt.Popeye said:


> I'm afraid that hoping that TacNukes will even *prevent any conflict/war* is ..........what should I say.........Strategically Delinquent......... may be that should be polite enough?
> 
> Or is it that TacNukes help to fulfil some other agenda? To fuel a sense of paranoia to continually increasing levels. And whose _payola_ is something else? Which does not even have anything to do with a Battle-Front!



History is testament that when war really has to happen it does..after all they have happened over assassinated arch dukes. That being said, nations do weigh in the cost of war and whether what they set out to achieve will be worth the cost. If the possibility of tac nukes and their usage ends up with the Indian objectives in a case of _Sonay se ziada garhai mehngi_(results not worth the effort) then perhaps they might be preventable enough. 

Again, that is the policy on which Pakistan counts on for deterrence. Its armed forces count on the calculations of Indian leaders in terms of the losses they are prepared to take and to ensure future survival. Essentially the idea being that of "_the edge of total chaos_". Knowing that Indian leadership is smart enough to try and force rapid resolution and minimizing losses which rests on a finely tuned battle plan.. the idea of tac nukes is that of the wrench in the gears. After all, while the Indian thrust may be well prepared for a NBC scenario.. the article above illustrates that damage and slowdown will be inevitable; moreover, the use of the nuke WILL invite a response from India.. if that response is total.. then suddenly all the IBGs and well oiled plans go to naught because then its all out nuclear holocaust. In essence, it actually baits the Indian plan from being too effective in its execution. It is mathematically not possible even with Russian level BMDs to stop the number of nuclear weapons Pakistan actually has(or for that matter India). Hence, the losses for India are severe as well in a total nuclear exchange..which was triggered all by the single tactical nuke that(_while not being that effective_) that was launched to prevent an attack. Basically, the tactical nuke scenario here cannot be entirely compared to the scenario in western Europe but rather a catch-22 situation or perhaps the situation in Dr Strangelove. 

The sense of Paranoia for Pakistani population does not really need a tac nuke since our population is generally dumb enough not to understand its implications(_if that is what you implied_) and as such is much less paranoid over the Indian threat as is imagined across the border or portrayed here; essentially India is seen as somewhat the scheming Baniya who uses cunning against us but in a bloody fight we might just prevail.As such, India is a constant threat but at the same time the balance of this rides on the oddest oscillations from "_Ghazwa-e-Hind_" to "_All is good once Kashmir is solved_".So the population is not the target for any PR generated by this weapon. 

Where it might fuel a certain paranoia is to the world community that the prospect of nuclear war over Kashmir is very real and its implications(for the world) are quite dire. Hence, Unless that problem is resolved by the UN or others forcing India to the table.. this region will remain a nuclear powderkeg.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
2 | Like Like:
1


----------



## Riz

Another NASAR missile tested successfully today..........................


----------



## Golden Eagle 007

*میزائل ’’نصر‘‘ نے بھارت کی کولڈ سٹارٹ ڈاکٹرائن تہس نہس کردی: بھارت کو دندان شکن جواب کا عندیہ دیا گیا*
Share















اسلام آباد (سٹاف رپورٹر) پریڈ میں شامل ’’نصر‘‘ وہ بیلسٹک میزائل ہے جس نے بھارت کی کولڈ سٹارٹ ڈاکٹرائن کو عملی طور پر تہس نہس کردیا ہے۔ پریڈ میں دکھائے گئے ہتھیاروں کا احتیاط کے ساتھ انتخاب کرکے بھارت کو یہ پیغام دیا گیا ہے کہ وہ پاکستان کے خلاف محدود اورسرعت سے شروع کرنے والے حملے کا تصور ترک کردے ورنہ اسے دندان شکن جواب ملے گا۔ شاہین اول اور دوم بھارت کے اندر تک ایٹمی ہتھیاروں کے ساتھ مار کرسکتے ہیں جبکہ بابر کروز میزائل راڈار پر نظر آئے بغیر ساڑھے سات سو کلومیٹر تک ہدف کو نشانہ بنا سکتا ہے۔




what does that mean? any comments?


----------



## graphican

Golden Eagle 007 said:


> اسلام آباد (سٹاف رپورٹر) پریڈ میں شامل ’’نصر‘‘ وہ بیلسٹک میزائل ہے جس نے بھارت کی کولڈ سٹارٹ ڈاکٹرائن کو عملی طور پر تہس نہس کردیا ہے۔ پریڈ میں دکھائے گئے ہتھیاروں کا احتیاط کے ساتھ انتخاب کرکے بھارت کو یہ پیغام دیا گیا ہے کہ وہ پاکستان کے خلاف محدود اورسرعت سے شروع کرنے والے حملے کا تصور ترک کردے ورنہ اسے دندان شکن جواب ملے گا۔ شاہین اول اور دوم بھارت کے اندر تک ایٹمی ہتھیاروں کے ساتھ مار کرسکتے ہیں جبکہ بابر کروز میزائل راڈار پر نظر آئے بغیر ساڑھے سات سو کلومیٹر تک ہدف کو نشانہ بنا سکتا ہے۔



Not verbatim but translation of the *message *is following.

Nasr is a ballistic missile that has nullified India's Cold Start doctrine and was selected thoughtfully along with other equipment in the parade to give India a message that is should give-up its imagined quick-and-limited action against Pakistan or face jaw breaking response. Shaheen-I and Shaneen-II can strike deep in Indian territory with nuclear weapons while Babar cruise missile can strike targets at 750KM without becoming visible to a radar.

*To put some context to aboev news bit:* Shaheen I and Shaheen II has been part of parades before but Babur and Nasr were probably part of this parade for the first time.


----------



## Golden Eagle 007

graphican said:


> Not verbatim but translation of the *message *is following.
> 
> Nasr is a ballistic missile that has nullified India's Cold Start doctrine and was selected thoughtfully along with other equipment in the parade to give India a message that is should give-up its imagined quick-and-limited action against Pakistan or face jaw breaking response. Shaheen-I and Shaneen-II can strike deep in Indian territory with nuclear weapons while Babar cruise missile can strike targets at 750KM without becoming visible to a radar.
> 
> *To put some context to aboev news bit:* Shaheen I and Shaheen II has been part of parades before but Babur and Nasr were probably part of this parade for the first time.



How come theier whole doctrine is nullified with just one type of missile?


----------



## Dalit

Golden Eagle 007 said:


> How come theier whole doctrine is nullified with just one type of missile?



What is so hard to figure out about that? These are just mind games and useless muscle flexing. Neither India and nor Pakistan will do anything. They can't. The world won't allow these nuclear countries to go to war. You can be rest assured.


----------



## graphican

Golden Eagle 007 said:


> How come theier whole doctrine is nullified with just one type of missile?



It can evaporate entire mechanized and artillery division. It can carry tactile nuclear weapon and reaches its target within minutes without going into atmosphere and thus gives no visibility/opportunity to missile defense systems. We do not know how quick it travels but It is light-weight and mobile in nature + a single launcher can release 4 of these together, thus one launcher can destroy more or less a 10 square KM area leaving nothing alive except cockroaches.

As of my info, there are no mobile missile defense systems and armies cannot operate/stay under protected zones If they are invade into an enemy territory. Such invading enemies would be vulnerable to all sort of attacks and no enemy can withstand a battlefield nuclear attack.

Previously, nuclear weapons were expected to be used against cities and large military bases which were fixed and always there - but Nasr has given us a unique ability to use nuclear weapons in the battlefield against mobile and aggressive enemy. Got the point?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## alimobin memon

Its stupid to use Nukes to counter Corps of Cold start doctrine. with only 5kn to 10kn warhead it would not do enough damage to tanks with pressurized NBC suites in formation gap of even 10meters.
Create a Nuclear Firestorm - Nuclear Weapons Explosion Simulator | Nuclear Darkness & Nuclear Famine
Size Nasr missile indicates that warhead cannot be more than 7kn to 10kn. According to this simulator and my calculations its not enough to counter strike corps that india will deploy in Cold Start.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HRK

alimobin memon said:


> Its stupid to use Nukes to counter Corps of Cold start doctrine.



Cold start is a doctrine based on the belief that India has the capability to wage a conventional war under nuclear the threshold, its further emphasis on holding the territory to use as bargain-chip

So basically three things comes out clearly from the COLD START DOCTRINE

1- CAPABILITIES (and/or INTENTIONS) of our enemy to wage a conventional war. 
2- Availability of 'CONVENIENT SPACE' to our enemy in our defence approach under NUCLEAR THRESHOLD
3- HOLDING of PAKISTANI TERRITORY (not just capturing the land during the war) for unspecific period of time.

So the question is how is NASR an encounter of COLD START DOCTRINE ??

1- *Counter to disparity of Conventional Capabilities*: 

India do have superiority in conventional forces because of this they believe that their conventional superiority can win them a *LIMITED WAR* against Pakistan & for this they have an immediate example of KARGIL WAR as a reference. 

Here they should understand as a *general rule of thumb *that NUCLEAR capability neutralize the conventional superiority which mean whichever the scope of war would be (limited or full blown) with the introduction of nuclear option in that scenario the dynamic of the war would change immediately & the question of parity or disparity in conventional forces wold not remain relevant. 

At that stage the more relevant question for the leadership of both of the countries would be 

*How far they wanna go for the desire objectives and the cost associated with those objectives* ? 

2- *Counter to CONVENIENT SPACE*:

The question raised above represent a scenario which would not be convenient for the leadership of both the countries, hence effectively denying the space available to Indian forces to wage a war be it a limited conventional war.

Cold Start in its basics is (was) a concept of limited *conventional* war *with the assumption* that Pakistan's response would also remain limited to the conventional means only where she does not enjoy relative parity with India, so it was supposedly *convenient for Indian forces *to *Attack & Neutralize* the Pakistani forces in the certain limited area to capture & *hold *the Pakistani Territory (same as Kargil). 

With the induction of Tactical Nuclear option that convenient zone does not exist any more, now the price associated with the desire objective would be more then the leadership of India might be willing to bear, further it shows that the Pakistan's response will not remain limited to conventional means only so in response to Pakistan's TNW Indian side might have to go for full nuclear response or would have to increase the scale of war in both case the war would not remain limited, so *the basic purpose of COLD START would be dead*. 

3- *Counter to Indian Objective of Holding Pakistani territory* 

As said earlier it will raise the *cost of war* even at 'limited war scenario' particularly for Indian holding corps as they will be the first one to pay the price in Tactical Nuclear War scenario, this will obviously limit the capabilities of Indian forces to hold a chunk of Pakistani territory for a longer period of time. 

An attack on Indian holding corps even with in the territory of Pakistan will ask Indian response of bigger magnitude which will have its own implication but would suddenly kill the doctrine of LIMITED WAR.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## alimobin memon

HRK said:


> Cold start is a doctrine based on the belief that India has the capability to wage a conventional war under nuclear the threshold, its further emphasis on holding the territory to use as bargain-chip
> 
> So basically three things comes out clearly from the COLD START DOCTRINE
> 
> 1- CAPABILITIES (and/or INTENTIONS) of our enemy to wage a conventional war.
> 2- Availability of 'CONVENIENT SPACE' to our enemy in our defence approach under NUCLEAR THRESHOLD
> 3- HOLDING of PAKISTANI TERRITORY (not just capturing the land during the war) for unspecific period of time.
> 
> So the question is how is NASR an encounter of COLD START DOCTRINE ??
> 
> 1- *Counter to disparity of Conventional Capabilities*:
> 
> India do have superiority in conventional forces because of this they believe that their conventional superiority can win them a *LIMITED WAR* against Pakistan & for this they have an immediate example of KARGIL WAR as a reference.
> 
> Here they should understand as a *general rule of thumb *that NUCLEAR capability neutralize the conventional superiority which mean whichever the scope of war would be (limited or full blown) with the introduction of nuclear option in that scenario the dynamic of the war would change immediately & the question of parity or disparity in conventional forces wold not remain relevant.
> 
> At that stage the more relevant question for the leadership of both of the countries would be
> 
> *How far they wanna go for the desire objectives and the cost associated with those objectives* ?
> 
> 2- *Counter to CONVENIENT SPACE*:
> 
> The question raised above represent a scenario which would not be convenient for the leadership of both the countries, hence effectively denying the space available to Indian forces to wage a war be it a limited conventional war.
> 
> Cold Start in its basics is (was) a concept of limited *conventional* war *with the assumption* that Pakistan's response would also remain limited to the conventional means only where she does not enjoy relative parity with India, so it was supposedly *convenient for Indian forces *to *Attack & Neutralize* the Pakistani forces in the certain limited area to capture & *hold *the Pakistani Territory (same as Kargil).
> 
> With the induction of Tactical Nuclear option that convenient zone does not exist any more, now the price associated with the desire objective would be more then the leadership of India might be willing to bear, further it shows that the Pakistan's response will not remain limited to conventional means only so in response to Pakistan's TNW Indian side might have to go for full nuclear response or would have to increase the scale of war in both case the war would not remain limited, so *the basic purpose of COLD START would be dead*.
> 
> 3- *Counter to Indian Objective of Holding Pakistani territory*
> 
> As said earlier it will raise the *cost of war* even at 'limited war scenario' particularly for Indian holding corps as they will be the first one to pay the price in Tactical Nuclear War scenario, this will obviously limit the capabilities of Indian forces to hold a chunk of Pakistani territory for a longer period of time.
> 
> An attack on Indian holding corps even with in the territory of Pakistan will ask Indian response of bigger magnitude which will have its own implication but would suddenly kill the doctrine of LIMITED WAR.


The Indian response would be full escalation no matter if War doctrine is killed it will lead to worse.


----------



## HRK

alimobin memon said:


> The Indian response would be full escalation no matter if War doctrine is killed it will lead to worse.



& this is what the Pakistan's strategy as a full scale nuclear war would be much costly for India as well, which India also want to avoid & COLD START DOCTRINE itself is a proof of Indian strategic compulsion.


----------



## alimobin memon

HRK said:


> & this is what the Pakistan's strategy as a full scale nuclear war would be much costly for India as well, which India also want to avoid & COLD START DOCTRINE itself is a proof of Indian strategic compulsion.


I think that means cold start is itself a failure to launch (Y)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Safriz

So was Nasr Missiles' range increased to 180 km according to this thread from 2012?
Read first page.


----------

