Hatf-IX - Tactical Multi-Tube Ballistic Missile

[lkozhi]

THe idea is to station strike corps well near border so that in case of war they gets within enemy border quickly and hence pakistan if it plans to use this missile will have to use it on its own land. That means pakistan bombing its own land with a nuclear weapon. Even if we assume pakistans troops give staunch resistance this weapon cannot be used as even they will die if this is used.

 

[Thorough Pro]

Intresting and emotional discussion so far. All Indian members here are more focussed along the lines that Pakistan will have to think before using any neuclear wepon in response to any act of war by Indian forces, but they are forgetting a very simple thing.

Pakistan has a defensive strategy, It's India which has been thinking outloud about "Surgical Strikes" and "Limited War". Pakistan has made it very clear that no such thing exists for Pakistan, any act of aggression incluing crossing of international border or LOC will be regarded as an act of full fledge war and responded accordingly.

Now the "Thinking" that the indian members here are focussing on has to be done by India, Pakistan has already decided and disclosed that it will respod with full force.

Think what you like, but knowing that on more than one occassions fully prepared and deployed Indain forces despite having huge numerical and technological advantage did not dare cross the border is a very clear sign of successful Pakistani strategy and detterence value of its war machinery.

 

[nightcrawler]

They say you need to possess the deadliest weapon to avoid the war and this is where i was heading. Both countries know the result of a nuclear fallout. An inevitable destruction. Coming back to topic, NASR has given us multiple options and the argument of "why NASR when we got hold of A-100?, the answer is, one is a guided missile able to avoid the danger of SAM and the other is a mild guidance equipped rocket so both cannot be compared despite having similar objectives.

Sir I don't think they will have similar objectives either...
A MLRS is a rapid heavy barrage system to defeat enemy forces when the group up for an attack or when they group up to defend from an attack.They are for area targets so precision is not important, but coverage is. That is why the Smerch has INS and gyro stabilisation in each rockets, not so the rocket hits the target exactly but so that the volley stays close together to make sure the coverage of bomblets or warheads or munitions is kept over the target area rather than spread randomly.
Our ATACM system [though lacking in range for now] will be used for precision attacks & not for coverage or POUNDING purpose

Though I agree with most parts of your post, but there is nothing "Humane" about war, your objective is to completely and totally destroy the enemy foces ASAP with the start of hostilities to avoid any such attempt by the enemy.

We are destroying them even with fragmentation warhead, sir.But killing like I said isn't the ONLY motive but the effectiveness of the weapon. Things for infantry were bad when they used depleted uranium rounds in A-10 & we are now talking about full scale nuclear warhead...

 

[TaimiKhan]

Congratulations & Congratulations...i don't know if I be a fortune teller but day before this thread I wrote:

...& perhaps my wishes come true
Taimikhan thnx for giving technical info..however I have some reserves regrading Iskander which isn't like a common Quasi-ballistic as it can intercept the aerial threats as well..& not like typical ATACMs wich are destined for what I say land superiority!!
Our system is a mirror image of Russian Tochka system & not Smerch as was written by an Indian in above posts:
SS-21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For precision puposes this system will surely come in handy/ Armed not with nuclear [I am against it] but fragmentation warheads it deliver serious damage to the advancing army especially tanks regiments...
Our MRLS systems which are mature enough must be used at the frontlines & then for reload scoot way in the meanwhile these systems can precisely attach the enemies counter-measuring regiments.
One must be careful that such systems ( ATACMs) really are prone to be attacked because within battlefield their smoke alone will produce enough visible signature...even more than an MLRS

Abdali missile is our SS-21 with 180KM range, while we have the Ghaznai also with around 300Km range. So, no worries for a missile for these ranges. What we lacked was something in the 100KM range, which is accurate, fast and highly mobile, that we get with the Nasr. If we can increase the range of Nasr to around 80Km or 100KM, its a very good system for delivering small tactical battlefield nuke to its target without getting into harms way. Most likely scenario for this missile would be delivery of nuke on advancing enemy forces within the our own territory.

Yeah, what we can do is, using the technology from this one and the already gotten one through A-100 transfer, we should start having medium range of 60-80KM MBRL system. 122mm should be replaced now with a more advanced, accurate and longer range system, atleast 60KM to 80KM. And for longer range the A-100 to atleast 150KM range.

The 30-40KM range can be covered through tube artillery, 60-80 with a medium-MBRL system and another 150KM long range-MBRL.

An effective stopping power, plus for short range tactical nuke delivery, Nasr would be there.

 

[KS]

In an all out scenario, you are gambling on the fact that the use of this weapon will bring a halt to the enemy's resolve, letting them know you are prepared to use nuclear weapons on your own soil.
Which brings us to two scenario's again..

<..........>

2. It fails: the Enemy retaliates.. then you either go into a tit for tat scenario.. or go all out..in which case you use everything you have. Ensuring your own complete utter destruction in the process, but taking the enemy with you.
India's second strike will wipe out whatever is Pakistan(save balochistan and FATA maybe..ironic isnt it??).. but that second strike will save very little.. the horror of nuclear aftermath will leave India mangled, devastated.. and with a small chance of recovery. Since it is assumed in the circles that be. that any strike by Pakistan will include the essential resources as well.. especially those that involve water.

This is the point I'm saying. And in a case of reversal it is the Indian Public which is hawkish compared to the Govt and in case of a Pakistani first strike - the battlefield nukes as they call - there will be unbearable public,political and even military pressure on the ruling party to go on a retaliatory second strike as per our declared NFU doctrine - disproportionate and massive, even if pushes back our own development massively behind.

 

[MZUBAIR]

New Pak missile to deter Indian war doctrine

Pakistan's new short-range nuclear-capable Hatf-9 missile is primarily aimed at deterring India's Cold Start military doctrine that envisages quick thrusts by small integrated battle groups in the event of hostilities, experts and analysts here have claimed.

The Hatf-9 or Nasr, described as a missile with a range of 60 km and designed to carry "nuclear warheads of appropriate yield with high accuracy", was tested for the first time at an undisclosed location on Tuesday.

The missile 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.

The new system is primarily aimed at deterring India's Cold Start doctrine, for which the Indian army has created integrated battle groups comprising infantry and mechanised elements that could be quickly mobilised and used for launching rapid thrusts into Pakistani territory in the event of hostilities, claimed an analyst who did not want to be named.

The Hatf-9 missile system is a tactical nuclear weapons and "low-yield battlefield deterrent" capable of inflicting damage on mechanised forces such as armed brigades and divisions, military sources told The Express Tribune newspaper.

With the development of the Hatf-9's shoot and scoot capability, "Indian planners will now be deterred from considering options of limited war", the military sources said.

The development of the Hatf-9 is also being seen as a major achievement in terms of miniaturisation of nuclear warheads, the daily reported.

Another analyst, who did not want to be named, told PTI that weapons like the Hatf-9 missile will limit the space for "limited war under a nuclear umbrella".

However, the analyst noted that the military may have to use such a system within Pakistani territory in the event of an Indian thrust and this could have adverse consequences, such as nuclear fallout or the radiation hazard from an atomic blast.

In a statement issued after Tuesday's test, the Pakistani military said the Hatf-9 had been developed to "add deterrence value to Pakistan's strategic weapons development programme at shorter ranges".


Source

 

[KS]

Tactical nukes come under a completely different doctrine compared to strategic weapons.

and @ all who repeatedly use the terminology "Tactical Nuke" :-

There is NOTHING like Tactical or Strategic nukes in the context of declared Indian NFU doctrine.

Every nuke, however small the yield may be, will be considered a nuclear first strike and will be replied in a manner as said in our NFU Doctrine.

If somebody thinks otherwise they are fooling themselves with meaningless terminologies.

New Pak missile to deter Indian war doctrine

Another wannabe defence reporter who doesnt know what the hell he is writing.

For starters there is no such thing called the Cold Start

 

[mjnaushad]

There is NOTHING like Tactical or Strategic nukes in the context of declared Indian NFU doctrine.

Every nuke, however small the yield would be, will be considered a nuclear first strike and will be replied in a manner as said in our NFU Doctrine.

If somebody thinks otherwise they are fooling themselves with meaningless terminologies.



Another wannabe defence reporter who doesnt know what the hell he is writing.

For starters there is no such thing called the Cold Start

Few Months ago when i left every indian on every thread was saying " The cold war doctrine will takeover Pakistan in no time and we'll disable all your defence capabilities in just 48 hours and bla bla bla"


And now there is no such thing as Cold start... ROFL....

 

[mjnaushad]

Another Important thing to consider is that this as a short range missile (less than 300 KM) have chance to be exported to other countries..... (of course without nukes )

 

[KS]

Few Months ago when i left every indian on every thread was saying " The cold war doctrine will takeover Pakistan in no time and we'll disable all your defence capabilities in just 48 hours and bla bla bla"

And now there is no such thing as Cold start... ROFL....

So do you believe these online Indians over the Indian Military ?

I would not.

You are free to believe anything friend, but as I said there is nothing Tactical or Strategic in the usage of nukes as per the declared Indian NFU. Everything is a nuke irrespective of its yield.

 

[mjnaushad]

So do you believe these online Indians over the Indian Military ?

I would not.

But you guys do believe these online Pakistanis over Pakistan's Military and Govt when it suites you....


Its just a missile (rocket for Indians)... Don't worry.. Also i am surprised why is taking so long to call it copy of some other country's missile... Why are indians not fully following their SOP.

 

[Areesh]

Few Months ago when i left every indian on every thread was saying " The cold war doctrine will takeover Pakistan in no time and we'll disable all your defence capabilities in just 48 hours and bla bla bla"


And now there is no such thing as Cold start... ROFL....

I have seen some senior Indian members debating with Pakistanis that this cold start is very much practical and can be implemented in future. And now no such thing as Cold start. Lolzzz.

 

[KS]

But you guys do believe these online Pakistanis over Pakistan's Military and Govt when it suites you....

We believe the online Pakistanis when they give credible sources to back their opinion and not just their opinion.

And the Indian Army has NEVER confirmed that a phrase called Cold Start exists.

Its just a missile (rocket for Indians)... Don't worry.. Also i am surprised why is taking so long to call it copy of some other country's missile... Why are indians not fully following their SOP.

Does it matter if its a copy as long as it gets launched and explodes on the correct area ?

 

[Bang Galore]

Pakistan has made it very clear that no such thing exists for Pakistan, any act of aggression incluing crossing of international border or LOC will be regarded as an act of full fledge war and responded accordingly.
.

Makes no sense. If Pakistan's position is that any "act of aggression" will be regarded as full scale war, what exactly is the point of tactical/battlefield nukes since these effectively are based on hope of fighting a limited war albeit on a nuclear scale. Exploding nuclear weapons, whatever their size on your own territory is not as simple. Even if India played by your rules of keeping it limited, an immediate response would be to target large chunks of the Pakistani military in retaliatory nuclear strikes. How does that help you? Either way, its an act of suicide. If India responds as per doctrine, there will be complete annihilation & if it plays by your rules there will be considerable annihilation of your armed forces. At what point do you see yourselves as victorious?

Only a fool will believe that there are any victors in a war gone nuclear. There are only losers in such a situation.

There is an argument that many Pakistanis are prone to using. It is based on Pakistan's insistence that they will deploy nukes or that every act of aggression will be seen as declaration of full fledged war and they will respond accordingly. What exactly does this mean? Does it mean that in response to an Indian strike on "militant/terrorist camps, Pakistan will risk its whole country in its attempt at retaliation? What if India argues that a terrorist strike like 26/11 is an act of war? At what point will Pakistan decide that they are going to take it nuclear? Not an easy decision to make considering the Indian response. The importance of such an assertion lies in Indians believing it. If the bluff is called, Pakistan suddenly faces a situation of being seen as hollow boasters or face the terrifying decision of doing what was said knowing that it is automatic suicide. You also have to hope that India does not fully believe in Pakistan's stated intent to use nukes; a massive nuclear first strike might result otherwise. Pakistan's policy only works when the situation is obfuscated, i.e. that India is not sure whether or not Pakistan will carry out its threat. If India is sure either way, its essentially game over.

 

[MZUBAIR]

Makes no sense. If Pakistan's position is that any "act of aggression" will be regarded as full scale war, what exactly is the point of tactical/battlefield nukes since these effectively are based on hope of fighting a limited war albeit on a nuclear scale. Exploding nuclear weapons, whatever their size on your own territory is not as simple. Even if India played by your rules of keeping it limited, an immediate response would be to target large chunks of the Pakistani military in retaliatory nuclear strikes. How does that help you? Either way, its an act of suicide. If India responds as per doctrine, there will be complete annihilation & if it plays by your rules there will be considerable annihilation of your armed forces. At what point do you see yourselves as victorious?

Only a fool will believe that there are any victors in a war gone nuclear. There are only losers in such a situation.

There is an argument that many Pakistanis are prone to using. It is based on Pakistan's insistence that they will deploy nukes or that every act of aggression will be seen as declaration of full fledged war and they will respond accordingly. What exactly does this mean? Does it mean that in response to an Indian strike on "militant/terrorist camps, Pakistan will risk its whole country in its attempt at retaliation? What if India argues that a terrorist strike like 26/11 is an act of war? At what point will Pakistan decide that they are going to take it nuclear? Not an easy decision to make considering the Indian response. The importance of such an assertion lies in Indians believing it. If the bluff is called, Pakistan suddenly faces a situation of being seen as hollow boasters or face the terrifying decision of doing what was said knowing that it is automatic suicide. You also have to hope that India does not fully believe in Pakistan's stated intent to use nukes; a massive nuclear first strike might result otherwise. Pakistan's policy only works when the situation is obfuscated, i.e. that India is not sure whether or not Pakistan will carry out its threat. If India is sure either way, its essentially game over.

One thing I want to assre u abt the mood & the decision of Pakistan Gov, miltary forces, that they will straightly use Nukes if War emposed, and the attack would be extremely severe that there would be no chance of second attack. [Mark my words]. Similarl words used after Mumbai attacks. And ur miltary and Gov knew that Pakistan [GOP, Miltary] wasnt involve in Mumbai attacks