What's new

Hatf-IX - Tactical Multi-Tube Ballistic Missile

It is feasible for an army like ours....we all know that how much we are lagging behind in conventional weapons.....probably the first time a country is trying to counter conventional weapons with nuclear ones.....imagine Indian army capturing an area in thar desert...now our army cannot fight back and we cannot get back our area .....suppose the airforce is not in that position because of low quantity+quality and very potent air defences...Nasr will provide very fast and assured destruction.

Remember that the missiles specialized for nuclear use are made keeping in view that there might be a defeat situation so we could use them as a last resort...
but there will be the nuclear radiations everywhere...will come on our forces too...I will destroy our forces too...looks like suicidal attempt weapon too...

:woot:
 
well after 10 page reply the end result is its a short range ballistic missile not what the thread tittle said .:coffee: but how can any body think about droping nuke within 60 km :eek:
 
well after 10 page reply the end result is its a short range ballistic missile not what the thread tittle said .:coffee: but how can any body think about droping nuke within 60 km :eek:

From where you missed the multibarrel thingy?-
 
well after 10 page reply the end result is its a short range ballistic missile not what the thread tittle said .:coffee: but how can any body think about droping nuke within 60 km :eek:

the end result is a short-range MULTI-BARREL ballistic missile....

You can drop a nuke at 4 km too....check this out...
Davy Crockett (nuclear device) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
M65 Atomic Cannon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Special Atomic Demolition Munition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

low-yield W25 (nuclear warhead) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and a helpful link
Tactical nuclear weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Because logically,I think India should nuke Pak Army and the military installations in response...so i dont think India would instead nuke the general population...and of course each and every idea is not bright,e.g.
check out this
Davy Crockett (nuclear device) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and tell me how bright is this...:lol:

during cold war, both the superpowers were geared to start off with nukes. neither was going to wait till the other went nuclear. a very important reason why the cold war never went hot.

you are counting on the indian side escalating only to the point you choose. you nuke troops so india should only nuke troops. that doesnt necessarily hold. india might very well choose to nuke what it pleases once the floodgates are open.

as far as the davy crockett is concerned, even the americans realised how it was a stupid idea and phased it out without replacing it. what good is a small nuke when much bigger ones are flying around
 
After looking on the posts, some people are saying that MRLs cannot have ballistic missiles. (Sorry if I missed the post, as there are 100s of posts)
What is wrong in 'inventing' a new system, that can launch multiple missile at a time?

After looking at the picture, it seems there is a flaw in the news. That must be some other missile, certainly not a ballastic.
Still, was not something bad, and we must appriciate it :) :tup:

Keep up the development, we are backing you (keeping your morale high) :)
 
during cold war, both the superpowers were geared to start off with nukes. neither was going to wait till the other went nuclear. a very important reason why the cold war never went hot.

you are counting on the indian side escalating only to the point you choose. you nuke troops so india should only nuke troops. that doesnt necessarily hold. india might very well choose to nuke what it pleases once the floodgates are open.

as far as the davy crockett is concerned, even the americans realised how it was a stupid idea and phased it out without replacing it. what good is a small nuke when much bigger ones are flying around

alright add the strategic installations to the list........but the population...?
No,I dont think the Indians are that bad...:undecided:
 
in present scenario,I think a hypothetical,possible war wouldn't last more than 3-7 days,before the International community jumps in...

so why use nukes, even tactical ones.

once the nukes are used, the international community wont be able to do squat before both sides have nuked each other to ruin.

if nukes are kept out of the picture, the international community can come in within 3-7 days and stop both sides without the kind of amage a nuke war will bring
 
60 km ballistic missile with nuclear warhead? :taz: :taz: They should have make it 300 km like Russian Iskandar missile.


There you go guys.


2480.jpg

It look more like small rocket or MLRS.
 
Guys, kindly keep the discussion to the topic and that is about the missile, better not convert it into another Pak Vs India battle ground.

There would be no infractions, straight suspensions if anyone does not lets it go.

Talk about the missile, its scope and use.

Got the point...
 
Mifht be a sub-Kiloton warhead mounted on an MBRL missile. India and Pakistan are known to have tactical sub-kiloton nukes for a long time.
 
alright add the strategic installations to the list........but the population...?
No,I dont think the Indians are that bad...:undecided:

dont underestimate the power of human stupidity. and in case of the subcontinent public anger. there is no telling what india will nuke.

even if we assume that india will escalate to nuke strategic facilities only, wont it have been easier for pakistan to start off with them straight away? without the strategic facilities, there wont be any gains from using the tactical nuke. it will be like winning the battle but losing the war
 
After looking on the posts, some people are saying that MRLs cannot have ballistic missiles. (Sorry if I missed the post, as there are 100s of posts)
What is wrong in 'inventing' a new system, that can launch multiple missile at a time?

After looking at the picture, it seems there is a flaw in the news. That must be some other missile, certainly not a ballastic.
Still, was not something bad, and we must appriciate it :) :tup:

Keep up the development, we are backing you (keeping your morale high) :)

Yaar, read my posts. Its a Ballistic Missile, since it seems to be guided. Had it been unguided, it would have been a rocket.

A single vehicle can hold multiple Tactical SSM, ATCAMS is a good example, where two of them can be loaded on a single vehicle.

NASR can be and is a Multi Launched Ballistic Missile system, since a single vehicle can launch multiple missiles, its guided thus it becomes a missile and that it uses ballistics during its flight path.


Its a missile, a ballistic missile.


ATGM are missiles even though they have 4-8KM range.

Any rocket, which gets guidance becomes a missile.

And whatever missile goes to a height with engine power and then uses ballistic to cover rest of the distance becomes a ballistic missile.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom