India possessed “enough fissile material … for more than 2,000 warheads.”

[randomradio]

how much do you think it would cost to build and maintain that many warheads?? let alone putting them on ICBMs/Cruise Missiles.

If Russia can, then India can. India's economy is twice as big.

 

[Beast]

tive

The Test Was Conducted in 1998 You India Still Judging 18 years old Primitive Design's. Warhead is Already Upgraded Their Various Cold Test And Virtual Mock tests.
RV Mk-1 is on top Agni-1 Missile
RV MK-3 on Agni-3-5
RV-MK 5 on Shourya Missile
RV-MK-6 & 4

What Is The Difference Btw PSLV & GSLV And ICBM As I posted Above The All US & Soviet ICBM were a Derivative of there SLV Programs

R-7 Semyorka

The Atlas missile was the first US ICBM. First launch 1957, successful launch 1958

HGM-25A Titan I

There is no proof of India upgraded the war head and no test of India 10000km ICBM conducted. It is useless to bring out USA or Russia.

 

[Gen Padmanabhan]

There is no proof of India upgraded the war head and no test of India 10000km ICBM conducted. It is useless to bring out USA or Russia.

Even if not upgraded the warhead.

If you put your head you should know how much devastation a 250 KT boosted fission blasted at 10 KM above the ground could have.

 

[Beast]

Even if not upgraded the warhead.

If you put your head you should know how much devastation a 250 KT boosted fission blasted at 10 KM above the ground could have.

You need to miniature your warhead and throw as much powerful warhead as possible to pose the credibilities to deter your enemy.

Just having nuclear warhead is not enough. China and USA calculated if we can afford to wipe major enemy off the worldmap while taking a 20perceny damage is worth it. You are doom.

 

[Gen Padmanabhan]

You need to miniature your warhead and throw as much powerful warhead as possible to pose the credibilities to deter your enemy.

Just having nuclear warhead is not enough. China and USA calculated if we can afford to wipe major enemy off the worldmap while taking a 20perceny damage is worth it. You are doom.

You think miniaturization only work by changing whole warhead design?

Lol, sometimes RV become heavier than warhead.

Just having nuclear warhead is not enough. China and USA calculated if we can afford to wipe major enemy off the worldmap while taking a 20perceny damage is worth it. You are doom.

In that sense, China is doomed since 1980, you think 300 warheads enough against western powers? Also that 300 warheads counted how much Pu China have, not on basis of reprocessing capabilities, or how many ICBM it hold. You conclude not more than 100 warheads China possess, and India dont possess not more than 30 warhead.

Welcome to realities.

 

[Beast]

You think miniaturization only work by changing whole warhead design?

Lol, sometimes RV become heavier than warhead.

I dont even know what you try to convey. The fact is India has yet to prove minature workable RV warhead

In that sense, China is doomed since 1980, you think 300 warheads enough against western powers? Also that 300 warheads counted how much Pu China have, not on basis of reprocessing capabilities, or how many ICBM it hold. You conclude not more than 100 warheads China possess, and India dont possess not more than 30 warhead.

Welcome to realities.

In the 80s, the US missile shield was hardly workable and US has no confident in prevent China nuclear strike. Plus, China has demonstrated hydrogen bomb capabilities in 1967. Even 300 hydrogen is enough to destroy more than a whole America. India nuclear bomb is only ordinary atomic bomb level and not lethal enough.

India is not the same position as China. You have no demonstrated workable high yield hydrogen bomb. Now in the 2016, US missile shield is enough to knock out a single launch ICBM with no MIRV.

 

[cerberus]

There is no proof of India upgraded the war head and no test of India 10000km ICBM conducted. It is useless to bring out USA or Russia.

Chinese Asking For Proof, These our Classified Strategic Details What you ask Next Where these Warhead Deployed .Its Natural procedure Technology is Upgraded with Time or Do you Still Operate Desktop With Windows 95

Do you Have Even Half Of Proof or Data What CCP claims Surpass Europe And US in AESA Development,Radar And Sensor fusion & Engine Technology

Not Tested Yes But We Don't Posses Technology Is Insult Our Rocket Propulsion System Reached Mars For Satisfaction PSLV & GSLV Can Easily Converted Into ICBM Its All Political Will

 

[Gen Padmanabhan]

India is not the same position as China. You have no demonstrated workable high yield hydrogen bomb. Now in the 2016, US missile shield is enough to knock out a single launch ICBM with no MIRV.

India never developed or targeted any warhead or nukes against US. It was & is Chinese plan.

I dont even know what you try to convey. The fact is India has yet to prove minature workable RV warhead



In the 80s, the US missile shield was hardly workable and US has no confident in prevent China nuclear strike. Plus, China has demonstrated hydrogen bomb capabilities in 1967. Even 300 hydrogen is enough to destroy more than a whole America. India nuclear bomb is only ordinary atomic bomb level and not lethal enough.

India is not the same position as China. You have no demonstrated workable high yield hydrogen bomb. Now in the 2016, US missile shield is enough to knock out a single launch ICBM with no MIRV.

And before you remain on this idiotic course. watch this

 

[Beast]

Chinese Asking For Proof, These our Classified Strategic Details What you ask Next Where these Warhead Deployed .Its Natural procedure Technology is Upgraded with Time or Do you Still Operate Desktop With Windows 95

Do you Have Even Half Of Proof or Data What CCP claims Surpass Europe And US in AESA Development,Radar And Sensor fusion & Engine Technology

Not Tested Yes But We Don't Posses Technology Is Insult Our Rocket Propulsion System Reached Mars For Satisfaction PSLV & GSLV Can Easily Converted Into ICBM Its All Political Will

Looks like you have comprehension problem. Liquid fuel propulsion can hardly be used as true nuclear deterrent. What does your space rocket got to do with your nuclear deterrent?

 

[Gen Padmanabhan]

Looks like you have comprehension problem. Liquid fuel propulsion can hardly be used as true nuclear deterrent. What does your space rocket got to do with your nuclear deterrent?

So Silo based ICBM filled with which fuel? Before banging your head on wall do some research.

 

[Beast]

So Silo based ICBM filled with which fuel? Before banging your head on wall do some research.

Does that looks Silo based or liquid fuel? DF-31A is solid fuel quick launch ICBM with 10000km range and 3 MIRV and 2 decoy system.

 

[wiseone2]

View attachment 301506

Does that looks Silo based or liquid fuel? DF-31A is solid fuel quick launch ICBM with 10000km range and 3 MIRV and 2 decoy system.

your nukes are just for show. you could not use it

 

[Gen Padmanabhan]

View attachment 301506

Does that looks Silo based or liquid fuel? DF-31A is solid fuel quick launch ICBM with 10000km range and 3 MIRV and 2 decoy system.

Lol, you saying Liquid fuel ICBM is not possible for deterrence or MAD. Unable to grasp your own argument?

Or an explosion above 10 KM from ground in Shanghai distinguish this is boosted fission or fusion. Or that missile filled with liquid fuel or solid?

Start to think about it, thats why start to do some research before banging your head.

 

[cerberus]

Looks like you have comprehension problem. Liquid fuel propulsion can hardly be used as true nuclear deterrent. What does your space rocket got to do with your nuclear deterrent?

So Do you You Trying to Became Champion or Technical Which you Not ?
Like My Above Post the SLV are Used For Both As Space Launch & as ICBM Both Soviet and American Done Same In Past

Technology is Same We can Easily Covert SLV into ICBM in Silo's Like In Cold War


Here you See China First ICBM Launch Of China DF-5 Is Derivative of SLV Technology

This photo shows a rare view of a Dongfeng 5 inside the underground missile silo

 

[Beast]

Lol, you saying Liquid fuel ICBM is not possible for deterrence or MAD. So what is Minuteman 3? Unable to grasp your own argument?

Or an explosion above 10 KM from ground in Shanghai distinguish this is boosted fission or fusion. Or that missile filled with liquid fuel or solid?

Start to think about it, thats why start to do some research before banging your head.

I did not say not possible. I say' hardly'. You shall go bang your own head.

Sure you can but its not credible and your enemy will not respect you especially in 2016 while rapid strike and knocking out your installation is a reality. Liquid fuel ICBM still has some threat in 80s but as technology advance and missile shield is more sophisticated. Long range solid ICBM with MIRV is the way to go.

So Do you You Trying to Became Champion or Technical Which you Not ?
Like My Above Post the SLV are Used For Both As Space Launch & as ICBM Both Soviet and American Done Same In Past

Technology is Same We can Easily Covert SLV into ICBM in Silo's Like In Cold War


Here you See China First ICBM Launch Of China DF-5 Is Derivative of SLV Technology

This photo shows a rare view of a Dongfeng 5 inside the underground missile silo

That is in the 80s and you still want to talk about liquid fuel ICBM? We are into 2016, my friend.

If you have no credible long range solid fuel ICBM with MIRV hydrogen warhead. You gained no respect like North Korea if you want to brag about nuclear capabilities