How will Nasr's Neutron warhead neutralize advancing enemy columns...

[randomradio]

Oh really? As far as 2008 is concerned, Pakistan has militarily made massive strides as well. Either way those purchases have now been checkmated by Pakistan as of 2011. So as far as Pakistan is concerned, indian conventional military superiority is null and void from our perspective. Also if what you say is true then india would have launched an attack against Pakistan in December 2015 after the military base attack in pathankot both to avenge that attack and for mumbai 26/11/2008 Let me explain: Before May 1998, high ranking indian politicians, scientists, military officials and other so called experts all vehemently and confidently claimed that Pakistan could NEVER EVER possess nuclear weapons with or without Chinese assistance. They got the shock of their lives when we tested our nukes and could not believe or fathom how this was possible. Now keeping in line with severe underestimations of Pakistan's military, the following independent and factual article from 2011 is very pertinent:

http://isis-online.org/isis-reports...g-nuclear-weapons-time-for-pakistan-to-rever/

The above confirms the fact that Pakistan does indeed have the capability to produce H-bombs and thermonuclear weapons in 2011. Imagine what Pakistan's strategic weapons capabilities are now in 2016. Especially in light of increased assistance by China in our missile and other military programs.This is very telling. Pakistan now in all probability has the ability to annihilate our enemy in any war that gets out of hand. The indian military high command is aware of this reality which is why it is reluctant to attack Pakistan regardless of whatever internet trolls and armchair generals say on PDF.

How many exercises does the PA conduct at the corps level every year?

Apologies, I honestly took you as a "Sane" member.

No need to apologize. Even Einstein was considered insane.

It appears some people are so badly misinformed about nuclear weapons that they need their first round of education, right from the basics.

Read the article in its entirety.
http://www.oism.org/nwss/s73p912.htm

All myths and some facts which are relevant in the Indo-Pak scenario.

Myth: Fallout radiation from a nuclear war would poison the air and all parts of the environment. It would kill everyone.

Myth: Fallout radiation penetrates everything; there is no escaping its deadly effects.

Myth: Because some modern H-bombs are over 1000 times as powerful as the A-bomb that destroyed most of Hiroshima, these H-bombs are 1000 times as deadly and destructive.

Myth: A Russian nuclear attack on the United States would completely destroy all American cities.
- Fact: As long as Soviet leaders are rational they will continue to give first priority to knocking out our weapons and other military assets that can damage Russia and kill Russians. To explode enough nuclear weapons of any size to completely destroy American cities would be an irrational waste of warheads. The Soviets can make much better use of most of the warheads that would be required to completely destroy American cities; the majority of those warheads probably already are targeted to knock out our retaliatory missiles by being surface burst or near-surface burst on their hardened silos, located far from most cities and densely populated areas.

India related fact: Indian cities are bigger than American cities.

Myth: So much food and water will be poisoned by fallout that people will starve and die even in fallout areas where there is enough food and water.
- Facts: If the fallout particles do not become mixed with the parts of food that are eaten, no harm is done. Food and water in dust-tight containers are not contaminated by fallout radiation. Peeling fruits and vegetables removes essentially all fallout, as does removing the uppermost several inches of stored grain onto which fallout particles have fallen. Water from many sources -- such as deep wells and covered reservoirs, tanks, and containers -- would not be contaminated. Even water containing dissolved radioactive elements and compounds can be made safe for drinking by simply filtering it through earth, as described later in this book.

Myth: Most of the unborn children and grandchildren of people who have been exposed to radiation from nuclear explosions will be genetically damaged will be malformed, delayed victims of nuclear war.

Myth: Overkill would result if all the U.S. and U.S.S.R, nuclear weapons were used meaning not only that the two superpowers have more than enough weapons to kill all of each other's people, but also that they have enough weapons to exterminate the human race.

Myth: Blindness and a disastrous increase of cancers would be the fate of survivors of a nuclear war, because the nuclear explosions would destroy so much of the protective ozone in the stratosphere that far too much ultraviolet light would reach the earth's surface. Even birds and insects would be blinded. People could not work outdoors in daytime for years without dark glasses, and would have to wear protective clothing to prevent incapacitating sunburn. Plants would be badly injured and food production greatly reduced.

Myth: Unsurvivable "nuclear winter" surely will follow a nuclear war. The world will be frozen if only 100 megatons (less than one percent of all nuclear weapons) are used to ignite cities. World-enveloping smoke from fires and the dust from surface bursts will prevent almost all sunlight and solar heat from reaching the earth's surface. Universal darkness for weeks! Sub-zero temperatures, even in summertime! Frozen crops, even in the jungles of South America! Worldwide famine! Whole species of animals and plants exterminated! The survival of mankind in doubt!

=============

Overall, nuclear weapons are so overrated that the only thing scary about them are the stories around them.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

How many exercises does the PA conduct at the corps level every year?



No need to apologize. Even Einstein was considered insane.

It appears some people are so badly misinformed about nuclear weapons that they need their first round of education, right from the basics.

Read the article in its entirety.
http://www.oism.org/nwss/s73p912.htm

All myths and some facts which are relevant in the Indo-Pak scenario.

Myth: Fallout radiation from a nuclear war would poison the air and all parts of the environment. It would kill everyone.

Myth: Fallout radiation penetrates everything; there is no escaping its deadly effects.

Myth: Because some modern H-bombs are over 1000 times as powerful as the A-bomb that destroyed most of Hiroshima, these H-bombs are 1000 times as deadly and destructive.

Myth: A Russian nuclear attack on the United States would completely destroy all American cities.
- Fact: As long as Soviet leaders are rational they will continue to give first priority to knocking out our weapons and other military assets that can damage Russia and kill Russians. To explode enough nuclear weapons of any size to completely destroy American cities would be an irrational waste of warheads. The Soviets can make much better use of most of the warheads that would be required to completely destroy American cities; the majority of those warheads probably already are targeted to knock out our retaliatory missiles by being surface burst or near-surface burst on their hardened silos, located far from most cities and densely populated areas.

India related fact: Indian cities are bigger than American cities.

Myth: So much food and water will be poisoned by fallout that people will starve and die even in fallout areas where there is enough food and water.
- Facts: If the fallout particles do not become mixed with the parts of food that are eaten, no harm is done. Food and water in dust-tight containers are not contaminated by fallout radiation. Peeling fruits and vegetables removes essentially all fallout, as does removing the uppermost several inches of stored grain onto which fallout particles have fallen. Water from many sources -- such as deep wells and covered reservoirs, tanks, and containers -- would not be contaminated. Even water containing dissolved radioactive elements and compounds can be made safe for drinking by simply filtering it through earth, as described later in this book.

Myth: Most of the unborn children and grandchildren of people who have been exposed to radiation from nuclear explosions will be genetically damaged will be malformed, delayed victims of nuclear war.

Myth: Overkill would result if all the U.S. and U.S.S.R, nuclear weapons were used meaning not only that the two superpowers have more than enough weapons to kill all of each other's people, but also that they have enough weapons to exterminate the human race.

Myth: Blindness and a disastrous increase of cancers would be the fate of survivors of a nuclear war, because the nuclear explosions would destroy so much of the protective ozone in the stratosphere that far too much ultraviolet light would reach the earth's surface. Even birds and insects would be blinded. People could not work outdoors in daytime for years without dark glasses, and would have to wear protective clothing to prevent incapacitating sunburn. Plants would be badly injured and food production greatly reduced.

Myth: Unsurvivable "nuclear winter" surely will follow a nuclear war. The world will be frozen if only 100 megatons (less than one percent of all nuclear weapons) are used to ignite cities. World-enveloping smoke from fires and the dust from surface bursts will prevent almost all sunlight and solar heat from reaching the earth's surface. Universal darkness for weeks! Sub-zero temperatures, even in summertime! Frozen crops, even in the jungles of South America! Worldwide famine! Whole species of animals and plants exterminated! The survival of mankind in doubt!

=============

Overall, nuclear weapons are so overrated that the only thing scary about them are the stories around them.

For an indian PDFer you are giving very unindian responses. Respect to you. But seriously think you are underestimating the power of nukes and thermo-nukes.

 

[randomradio]

For an indian PDFer you are giving very unindian responses. Respect to you. But seriously think you are underestimating the power of nukes and thermo-nukes.

I'm not underestimating nukes. Nukes are severely overestimated because of anti-nuclear groups that want to create a negative opinion about it in order to eliminate it.

India did not hesitate to fight Pak in 1999, even after India knew Pak had nukes since many years before that. There was no such issue in 2002 either. The reason why India has not yet attacked Pakistan is the same reason why US or Russia have not fought a war, nuclear weapons are not the reason. The fact is India cannot yet defeat Pak without getting bloodied. And there is a better and less risky way to defeat Pak, simply outspend Pak in every field, which is happening today.

Nukes are simply large bombs. Now their capability in destroying cities have become more and more limited. For example, cities like Mumbai, Delhi and Bangalore are so big you will need something like the Tsar Bomba in order to inflict damage to them. Or you will need multitudes of 200KT bombs. Even then aspects like geography, weather conditions and infrastructure will limit death and destruction outside the blast area.

A 20KT bomb can theoretically make a 200m crater and kill people up to 4Km diameter. But Indian cities are made with concrete, so a large amount of radiation is absorbed by concrete. A 200KT bombs can roughly double that, so you are killing people in a 6Km diameter. But a city like Bangalore is spread out over 50Km. Delhi is even bigger.

Then there's the problem with volume. If you want to completely destroy Mumbai, you will need about 50-100 nukes in the 20-200KT range. 6 or 7 bombs will simply not do. Do you see where I'm going here? If you don't destroy a city like Mumbai, then it is pointless to even attack Indian cities.

Otoh, a nuclear attack on Karachi won't need 100 nukes. Why is that so? It's because of our massive conventional superiority. Once nukes hit Mumbai, disaster relief can be sent for rescue and cleaning. But in case of Karachi, these teams can be attacked by the IAF. We are talking about nuclear war, so human rights are going to take a back seat.

Take a look at this.

This is the Nevada test site. A 1000 tests happened here and over 100 were surface blasts. People are happily walking around ground zero. So the effects of radiation is highly exaggerated.

This is of particular interest to all the nonsense beliefs people have about nukes.

The captions say the troops were placed 9.7Km from the explosion. That's barely anything. Compare that to a city like Bangalore where most of the people live away from the city center, even 15Km away.

The Americans and Russians have tested multiple times in the presence of troops in tactical battlefield situations.

In fact battle tanks, IFVs and troops with the right equipment can enter blast zones and even fight in those regions for extended periods.

And radiation can be washed off. Sailors cleaning the carrier deck from real fallout from the Fukushima incident. Most of them have not covered themselves completely. Hell, Tupperware can protect your food from contamination.

And BMD significantly reduces the impact of nuclear weapons. The reduction can be 80-90%. So at best case, even if Pak fires 100 nukes into India, only about 10-20 of them will not be stopped by BMD. Even the, apparently claimed, less capable Iron Dome system has been 90% efficient.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

I'm not underestimating nukes. Nukes are severely overestimated because of anti-nuclear groups that want to create a negative opinion about it in order to eliminate it.

India did not hesitate to fight Pak in 1999, even after India knew Pak had nukes since many years before that. There was no such issue in 2002 either. The reason why India has not yet attacked Pakistan is the same reason why US or Russia have not fought a war, nuclear weapons are not the reason. The fact is India cannot yet defeat Pak without getting bloodied. And there is a better and less risky way to defeat Pak, simply outspend Pak in every field, which is happening today.

Nukes are simply large bombs. Now their capability in destroying cities have become more and more limited. For example, cities like Mumbai, Delhi and Bangalore are so big you will need something like the Tsar Bomba in order to inflict damage to them. Or you will need multitudes of 200KT bombs. Even then aspects like geography, weather conditions and infrastructure will limit death and destruction outside the blast area.

A 20KT bomb can theoretically make a 200m crater and kill people up to 4Km diameter. But Indian cities are made with concrete, so a large amount of radiation is absorbed by concrete. A 200KT bombs can roughly double that, so you are killing people in a 6Km diameter. But a city like Bangalore is spread out over 50Km. Delhi is even bigger.

Then there's the problem with volume. If you want to completely destroy Mumbai, you will need about 50-100 nukes in the 20-200KT range. 6 or 7 bombs will simply not do. Do you see where I'm going here? If you don't destroy a city like Mumbai, then it is pointless to even attack Indian cities.

Otoh, a nuclear attack on Karachi won't need 100 nukes. Why is that so? It's because of our massive conventional superiority. Once nukes hit Mumbai, disaster relief can be sent for rescue and cleaning. But in case of Karachi, these teams can be attacked by the IAF. We are talking about nuclear war, so human rights are going to take a back seat.

Take a look at this.

This is the Nevada test site. A 1000 tests happened here and over 100 were surface blasts. People are happily walking around ground zero. So the effects of radiation is highly exaggerated.

This is of particular interest to all the nonsense beliefs people have about nukes.

The captions say the troops were placed 9.7Km from the explosion. That's barely anything. Compare that to a city like Bangalore where most of the people live away from the city center, even 15Km away.

The Americans and Russians have tested multiple times in the presence of troops in tactical battlefield situations.

In fact battle tanks, IFVs and troops with the right equipment can enter blast zones and even fight in those regions for extended periods.

And radiation can be washed off. Sailors cleaning the carrier deck from real fallout from the Fukushima incident. Most of them have not covered themselves completely. Hell, Tupperware can protect your food from contamination.

And BMD significantly reduces the impact of nuclear weapons. The reduction can be 80-90%. So at best case, even if Pak fires 100 nukes into India, only about 10-20 of them will not be stopped by BMD. Even the, apparently claimed, less capable Iron Dome system has been 90% efficient.

Okayyyyy! You seem very confident in your beliefs which I completely disagree with it. Will leave it there. Think me and you are from different realms of existence.....lol.

 

[باپ]

I'm not underestimating nukes. Nukes are severely overestimated because of anti-nuclear groups that want to create a negative opinion about it in order to eliminate it.

India did not hesitate to fight Pak in 1999, even after India knew Pak had nukes since many years before that. There was no such issue in 2002 either. The reason why India has not yet attacked Pakistan is the same reason why US or Russia have not fought a war, nuclear weapons are not the reason. The fact is India cannot yet defeat Pak without getting bloodied. And there is a better and less risky way to defeat Pak, simply outspend Pak in every field, which is happening today.

Nukes are simply large bombs. Now their capability in destroying cities have become more and more limited. For example, cities like Mumbai, Delhi and Bangalore are so big you will need something like the Tsar Bomba in order to inflict damage to them. Or you will need multitudes of 200KT bombs. Even then aspects like geography, weather conditions and infrastructure will limit death and destruction outside the blast area.

A 20KT bomb can theoretically make a 200m crater and kill people up to 4Km diameter. But Indian cities are made with concrete, so a large amount of radiation is absorbed by concrete. A 200KT bombs can roughly double that, so you are killing people in a 6Km diameter. But a city like Bangalore is spread out over 50Km. Delhi is even bigger.

Then there's the problem with volume. If you want to completely destroy Mumbai, you will need about 50-100 nukes in the 20-200KT range. 6 or 7 bombs will simply not do. Do you see where I'm going here? If you don't destroy a city like Mumbai, then it is pointless to even attack Indian cities.

Otoh, a nuclear attack on Karachi won't need 100 nukes. Why is that so? It's because of our massive conventional superiority. Once nukes hit Mumbai, disaster relief can be sent for rescue and cleaning. But in case of Karachi, these teams can be attacked by the IAF. We are talking about nuclear war, so human rights are going to take a back seat.

Take a look at this.

This is the Nevada test site. A 1000 tests happened here and over 100 were surface blasts. People are happily walking around ground zero. So the effects of radiation is highly exaggerated.

This is of particular interest to all the nonsense beliefs people have about nukes.

The captions say the troops were placed 9.7Km from the explosion. That's barely anything. Compare that to a city like Bangalore where most of the people live away from the city center, even 15Km away.

The Americans and Russians have tested multiple times in the presence of troops in tactical battlefield situations.

In fact battle tanks, IFVs and troops with the right equipment can enter blast zones and even fight in those regions for extended periods.

And radiation can be washed off. Sailors cleaning the carrier deck from real fallout from the Fukushima incident. Most of them have not covered themselves completely. Hell, Tupperware can protect your food from contamination.

And BMD significantly reduces the impact of nuclear weapons. The reduction can be 80-90%. So at best case, even if Pak fires 100 nukes into India, only about 10-20 of them will not be stopped by BMD. Even the, apparently claimed, less capable Iron Dome system has been 90% efficient.

Its another thing that you are posting pics from 1950s and 60s when effects of radiation and nuclear weapons themselves were less understood and these pictures were released as cold war propaganda tool. Did not depict the reality.
Why don't you post the cold war propaganda video of Chinese nuclear explosion in which Chinese soldiers are shown running towards a nuclear explosion while the mushroom cloud is still rising and shooting at some imaginary enemy ad if after a nuclear blast there still will be a need of shooting enemy with Kalashnikov.

Your continuous humbug is quite uneducated and irritating.

Radio active materials don't get washed away by rain as you claim. The isotopes are very heavy, many times heavier than iron.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Its another thing that you are posting pics from 1950s and 60s when effects of radiation and nuclear weapons themselves were less understood and these pictures were released as cold war propaganda tool. Did not depict the reality.
Why don't you post the cold war propaganda video of Chinese nuclear explosion in which Chinese soldiers are shown running towards a nuclear explosion while the mushroom cloud is still rising and shooting at some imaginary enemy ad if after a nuclear blast there still will be a need of shooting enemy with Kalashnikov.

Your continuous humbug is quite uneducated and irritating.

Radio active materials don't get washed away by rain as you claim. The isotopes are very heavy, many times heavier than iron.

Let him go on. I'm enjoying his dismissiveness of nuclear war. It makes life on PDF very "interesting". According to him, 100 nukes may just about be enough to destroy mumbai alone.....lol.....but then it will recover...lol......keep going.

PS if nuclear war was'nt very harmful the americans would have used it many times the last 50 years.

 

[باپ]

Let him go on. I'm enjoying his dismissiveness of nuclear war. It makes life on PDF very "interesting". According to him, 100 nukes may just about be enough to destroy mumbai alone.....lol.....but then it will recover...lol......keep going.

PS if nuclear war was'nt very harmful the americans would have used it many times the last 50 years.

True. At least he is entertaining and sticking to his guns.
On topic, the results of actual use of a comparatively low yeild nuke on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were quite horrendous.

 

[SecularNationalist]

LOLZ, when you distroy the TEL, whether 4 or 8 NASR or to be more specific Chinese M-20 will also be distroyed.

dude you sound like some 12 year old seriously
Who is denying the destruction of the chinese M-20 ? Do you know the meaning of "missile battery" ?I used the word battery to mention the TEL as well as the missiles.

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

Share your source who says the warhead hasn't been tested.

Any Nuclear test to be done outside lab has be notified ... and once it is conducted Pakistan will come under fresh slew of sanctions by world at large. ...

 

[Paksanity]

Initially I didn't give much thought to Nasr. But after I see how much it scares the sh*t out of Indians, I think it hits right where it needs to; Indian nerves.

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

Initially I didn't give much thought to Nasr. But after I see how much it scares the sh*t out of Indians, I think it hits right where it needs to; Indian nerves.

Whatever rocks your boat mate...

 

[Taimoor Khan]

You folks are just damn stupid.


View attachment 304341

LOL. Brilliant!

 

[Signalian]

These So called Tactical arms will be the First One Which Will Be taken Out in war . Whenever Any army Invades the First strategy will Be Always To destroy Enemy Defenses May it Ground Or SEAD

NASR will be hard to take out mainly because:

1.They will be placed at certain strategic positions inside Pakistan when the intel gives a report of escalation in near future.
2. PA knows monitoring by satellite so uses the cover of fog for important convoys movement.
3. PA will use decoys and to create confusions about location and numbers.
4. The shoot and scoot capability favours NASR.

Nasr Batteries has 60 Km Limited Range They Easy target For MBRL & Tactical arms Like Brahmos & Prahaar,Smerch ,Pinaka or Any Stand-off in CAS

60 Km is no way a limited range.

An Indian Armoured thrust may make its way dozens of miles into south-eastern area of Pakistan. This area is mostly barren and desert like. Nasr may show up at different locations in north, west or south at same time, shoot and scoot.
The Indian MBRL's will not find hunting NASR an easy task. By the time Brahmos is fired, NASR would have already left the battlefield.
PAF in its own borders will make short work of CAS aircrafts. PAF conserves its aircrafts for AD role.

Always Remember India will Always Out number the Ratio 5:1 there will Be always Be 5 Batteries of Tactical Arms Against 1 batteries of Nasr or babur to count In

Not necessarily so.

The High Radiation Emission Makes this Weapon Vulnerable To Anti-Radiation Stand-offs they will be easily Picked up By Military recon Surveillance Satellite's

By the time it shows up and is picked up, NASR would have completed the job.

That's why IA is interested in Israel's Iron Dome.

Iron dome will not be deployed on border just like NASR so range will be an issue, NASR is still capable of firing a slavo that would be hard to intercept and Iron Dome doesnt have the capability to intercept missiles coming from two or more directions.

They aren´t. You have a gargantuan danger of islamists gaining acess to those weapons.

This is a pure case of western media fed brain.

Do you have institutions in Pakistan that could even stop a democratic elected government to have acess to those weapons?

Glad you asked instead of assuming like above.
Yes, Pakistan Army.

1. How will they know planes have come to attack them? or are you saying Pakistan military is complicit and will pass on the intelligence?

AWACS.

How will Nasr's Neutron warhead neutralize advancing enemy columns...

Nasr can and will neutralize advancing enemy columns...

But what (retaliation) AFTER the Nasr attack from the enemy?
This is the million $ question.

The MILLION $$$$DOLLAR$$$$ QUESTION is :

Does India have the balls to send its armoured forces to a CERTAIN Nuclear-melting skin-painfully agonizing death by NASR ??????

 

[Spectre]

AWACS.

Jihadis and Kashmiri terrorists have AWACS?

Please read the context of the discussion and my post before commenting. Pakistan will have few minutes of warning once Aircrafts take off for a strike mission and you are saying they would utilize this time to warn the Jihadis even when they have no knowledge of the target vectors? If so, then it proves their complicity.

 

[PaklovesTurkiye]

View attachment 304341