Indx-techs
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2016
- Messages
- 493
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
In the end, you didn't. I asked for industrial capabilities and you went on citing other selected capabilities where even only Pakistanis believe it to be so.
I'm repeatedly saying, Pakistan doesn't have a proper industrial sector to produce third revolution goods.
Demonstrating carrier vehicle doesn't make you test MIRVs. Pakistan never demonstrated RVs on it.
MIRV tech involves satellite navigation, spin stabilized boosters, thrust vectoring systems, miniaturized computer sets wiup advanced seekers for individual warheads and so on.
There 94 defined missile technologies and India produces 90+ out of them.
The reason why India doesn't have MIRV production yet is doctrinal which is same as that of China. USA, USSR and France had massive stockpiles and could ramp up production to produce hundreds of nukes (France had capacity but didn't produce thousands). There is no point in having MIRVs if launching a few finish your stockpile.
China had MIRV tech since 80s and India had since early 90s. China meanwhile inducted it only a decade ago because it's very recent that China can produce thousands of thermonuclear weapon.
India may only after a decade once nuclear centrifuges are high. We have right now problem with holding material just like France had. Brits told them how to do it who in turn were told by Americans. Soviets to told to PRC. But India isnt that lucky and we are trying to find out for past 21 years. Even if India gets it, Indian government will never reveal it directly. But India will test a 10k-15k kilometers range MIRVed ICBM.
Countries like Pakistan and North Korea on the other hand a kind of suicide doctrine where they say tumko bhi radiation lag jayega. They don't make large strategic warheads to finish the war but rather to blow huge enemy armed forces. They won't survive after enemy chooses to nuke them.
60% of Pakistani GDP falls in range of Indian heavy artillery systems and India can win a nuclear war without using nukes at all.
For a max 5kt warhead (max 5kt warhead on Nasr which is between 1 to 5 kt)
– Blast and fireball radius 500m or approx < 2 sq km
Integrated Combat Group frontage < > 10 km with two combat teams up. Depth < > 5 km. Total area covered approx 50 sq km.
How many nukes would be required to 'destroy' one CG? - 25.
Initial strike with 10 -15 combat groups simultaneously. Total area covered < > 500 sq km.
Minimum battlefield nukes needed to 'destroy' the CGs > 250 Nasrs! (Most A vehicles would be M-kills and thus repairable in situ).
That’s a hell of a lot of Nasrs required! Remember, all tanks and personnel carriers are protected from nuclear radiation. There will be no infantry out in the open. And then, most armored vehicles affected would be M-kills and not K-kills.
So, going a step further, 250x5 kt =1250 kt ie, equal to the yield of 65 Hiroshima atom bombs on Pakistani territory (as these will be employed only after the CGs have penetrated deep into Pakistan and would be used as a last resort!!) What would be left of Eastern Pakistan? It’s like cutting off your nose to spite your face!
And do they have that many Nasrs? Highly doubtful. Have they been tried and tested? Nope! Will they work? Allah knows! And most of all, before they can fire off their second Nasr, the Pakistanis will have a whole lot of Indian-made mushroom clouds to contend with!!
This is the difference between a credible nuclear deterrence and nuclear bluff!!
Your own government knows it much better than even me and that's Shah Mehmood Qureshi and rest of Pakistani leadership always runs around to internationalise India Pakistan conflicts rather than engaging one on one like true arch rival of India and a regional power (LOL) in "South Asia".
Debates of India Pakistan issues among most experts aren't about edge. India will be the winner of war by default. Debates are about how much loss India will have to incur. Even pro Pakistani sources do all their assessment assuming India won't retaliate at all.
Pakistani defense industry isn't the name of a complete national ecosystem full of government PSUs and private companies, vendors etc. which not only themselves work to fulfill more than half of requirements of one of world's largest armed forces at home but export quality goods to NATO allies, Latin America and Africa just on government's freedom to do so unlike India.
India defense industry and exports aren't at their real pace yet. India doesn't export strategic weapons as it needs for it's own. Within two decades, India will be self sufficient in most of military technology and will have strategic partners too, defense exports will be $20 billions+ at today's exchange rates.
This device upon detonation the high explosive will drive the pusher plate into the tamper, which will then begin linear implosion of the fissile mass which will not only compress the plutonium but will push it inward and away from the control rods the same time, the lip on the outside of each control rod will "catch" a small portion of the force from the explosive.
Now these devices will not give more than 10% efficiency without testing which Pakistan has not , so Pakistan's triad will not be useful for countervalue targeting .
It's only India outside P5 capable of producing all kind of nuclear weapons as we demonstrated in our reactors. ITER sent an invitation to India and not Pakistan, North Korea or Iran.
Cold Start Doctrine is simply irrefutable as India also has nuclear weapons. Let's see how many times Pakistan bombs itself to push back Indian troops and gets bombed even more India in response. Or how many slaps it will get if it doesn't stick to it's doctrine.
Simply, Pakistan can compete with India only in limited attrition warfare. Once India makes up its mind to thwart international pressure, India can open wars on every front making it hell for Pakistan.
Anyways, as for cold start doctrine, I've been studying few assessments by foreign experts. I will put some pages here when I have tithose
Let's agree to please you once.
Small UCAV tech isn't something India can't make. It's not a tech either something to boast off. We don't even need Chinese CH-4 platform to design drone on or import foreign engine for such a small toy unlike you. We have made and scrapped lot lot of designs.
We don't have super strong insurgencies unlike those in Northwest Pakistan. So, we chose to get them directly high quality from Israel and Lakshya & Abhyas ourselves.
Real UCAVs which would be useful for war would be like Rustom and AURA/AUCA that could fight in place of fighter aircrafts. I'm yet to see any large UAV like Rustom from Pakistani side.
For "few countries", in India's context it is much much bigger than Pakistan will have in next 20-30 years.
Having large navies, air force and army, anti ballistic missiles, advanced exo atmospheric interceptors, hypersonic vehicles, aircraft carriers, DDGs and FFGs, massive corvettees, making advanced fighter planes, advanced composites, seekers and complex electric circuits & chips (yeah semiconductor chips but not on industrial scale), large launch vehicles, space tug, extra terrestrial probes, FBWs, AESA Radars, TR modules with GaN, ASAT missiles, very high resolution reconnaissance satellites, own satellite navigation systems, advance AAMs, ramjets & scramjets, nuclear submarines, turbofans and so so on.
India is yet to export big strategic assets like US, Russia, China and France.
He said something to catalyse motivation and you are getting goosebumps here. The stats of exports actually sum up all things in general.
I'm repeatedly saying, Pakistan doesn't have a proper industrial sector to produce third revolution goods.
Yes India has & Pakistan doesn't.
Demonstrating carrier vehicle doesn't make you test MIRVs. Pakistan never demonstrated RVs on it.
MIRV tech involves satellite navigation, spin stabilized boosters, thrust vectoring systems, miniaturized computer sets wiup advanced seekers for individual warheads and so on.
There 94 defined missile technologies and India produces 90+ out of them.
The reason why India doesn't have MIRV production yet is doctrinal which is same as that of China. USA, USSR and France had massive stockpiles and could ramp up production to produce hundreds of nukes (France had capacity but didn't produce thousands). There is no point in having MIRVs if launching a few finish your stockpile.
China had MIRV tech since 80s and India had since early 90s. China meanwhile inducted it only a decade ago because it's very recent that China can produce thousands of thermonuclear weapon.
India may only after a decade once nuclear centrifuges are high. We have right now problem with holding material just like France had. Brits told them how to do it who in turn were told by Americans. Soviets to told to PRC. But India isnt that lucky and we are trying to find out for past 21 years. Even if India gets it, Indian government will never reveal it directly. But India will test a 10k-15k kilometers range MIRVed ICBM.
Countries like Pakistan and North Korea on the other hand a kind of suicide doctrine where they say tumko bhi radiation lag jayega. They don't make large strategic warheads to finish the war but rather to blow huge enemy armed forces. They won't survive after enemy chooses to nuke them.
60% of Pakistani GDP falls in range of Indian heavy artillery systems and India can win a nuclear war without using nukes at all.
For a max 5kt warhead (max 5kt warhead on Nasr which is between 1 to 5 kt)
– Blast and fireball radius 500m or approx < 2 sq km
Integrated Combat Group frontage < > 10 km with two combat teams up. Depth < > 5 km. Total area covered approx 50 sq km.
How many nukes would be required to 'destroy' one CG? - 25.
Initial strike with 10 -15 combat groups simultaneously. Total area covered < > 500 sq km.
Minimum battlefield nukes needed to 'destroy' the CGs > 250 Nasrs! (Most A vehicles would be M-kills and thus repairable in situ).
That’s a hell of a lot of Nasrs required! Remember, all tanks and personnel carriers are protected from nuclear radiation. There will be no infantry out in the open. And then, most armored vehicles affected would be M-kills and not K-kills.
So, going a step further, 250x5 kt =1250 kt ie, equal to the yield of 65 Hiroshima atom bombs on Pakistani territory (as these will be employed only after the CGs have penetrated deep into Pakistan and would be used as a last resort!!) What would be left of Eastern Pakistan? It’s like cutting off your nose to spite your face!
And do they have that many Nasrs? Highly doubtful. Have they been tried and tested? Nope! Will they work? Allah knows! And most of all, before they can fire off their second Nasr, the Pakistanis will have a whole lot of Indian-made mushroom clouds to contend with!!
This is the difference between a credible nuclear deterrence and nuclear bluff!!
Your own government knows it much better than even me and that's Shah Mehmood Qureshi and rest of Pakistani leadership always runs around to internationalise India Pakistan conflicts rather than engaging one on one like true arch rival of India and a regional power (LOL) in "South Asia".
Debates of India Pakistan issues among most experts aren't about edge. India will be the winner of war by default. Debates are about how much loss India will have to incur. Even pro Pakistani sources do all their assessment assuming India won't retaliate at all.
That isn't our concern, it may be rising.
Pakistani defense industry isn't the name of a complete national ecosystem full of government PSUs and private companies, vendors etc. which not only themselves work to fulfill more than half of requirements of one of world's largest armed forces at home but export quality goods to NATO allies, Latin America and Africa just on government's freedom to do so unlike India.
India defense industry and exports aren't at their real pace yet. India doesn't export strategic weapons as it needs for it's own. Within two decades, India will be self sufficient in most of military technology and will have strategic partners too, defense exports will be $20 billions+ at today's exchange rates.
We know Pakistanis didn't test Plutonium warheads which are needed for miniaturization rather they tested HEU implosion type warheads to be replicated in plutonium type pit as New Labs facility at PINSTECH only came online.in may 1998 . So Pakistanis have not tested a Plutonium spherical implosion device but a Linear implosion device. Anything more is out of question.
This device upon detonation the high explosive will drive the pusher plate into the tamper, which will then begin linear implosion of the fissile mass which will not only compress the plutonium but will push it inward and away from the control rods the same time, the lip on the outside of each control rod will "catch" a small portion of the force from the explosive.
Now these devices will not give more than 10% efficiency without testing which Pakistan has not , so Pakistan's triad will not be useful for countervalue targeting .
It's only India outside P5 capable of producing all kind of nuclear weapons as we demonstrated in our reactors. ITER sent an invitation to India and not Pakistan, North Korea or Iran.
Cold Start Doctrine is simply irrefutable as India also has nuclear weapons. Let's see how many times Pakistan bombs itself to push back Indian troops and gets bombed even more India in response. Or how many slaps it will get if it doesn't stick to it's doctrine.
Simply, Pakistan can compete with India only in limited attrition warfare. Once India makes up its mind to thwart international pressure, India can open wars on every front making it hell for Pakistan.
Anyways, as for cold start doctrine, I've been studying few assessments by foreign experts. I will put some pages here when I have tithose
"One of few coubtries" LOL
Let's agree to please you once.
Small UCAV tech isn't something India can't make. It's not a tech either something to boast off. We don't even need Chinese CH-4 platform to design drone on or import foreign engine for such a small toy unlike you. We have made and scrapped lot lot of designs.
We don't have super strong insurgencies unlike those in Northwest Pakistan. So, we chose to get them directly high quality from Israel and Lakshya & Abhyas ourselves.
Real UCAVs which would be useful for war would be like Rustom and AURA/AUCA that could fight in place of fighter aircrafts. I'm yet to see any large UAV like Rustom from Pakistani side.
For "few countries", in India's context it is much much bigger than Pakistan will have in next 20-30 years.
Having large navies, air force and army, anti ballistic missiles, advanced exo atmospheric interceptors, hypersonic vehicles, aircraft carriers, DDGs and FFGs, massive corvettees, making advanced fighter planes, advanced composites, seekers and complex electric circuits & chips (yeah semiconductor chips but not on industrial scale), large launch vehicles, space tug, extra terrestrial probes, FBWs, AESA Radars, TR modules with GaN, ASAT missiles, very high resolution reconnaissance satellites, own satellite navigation systems, advance AAMs, ramjets & scramjets, nuclear submarines, turbofans and so so on.
No, its $1.6 billion between 2017-18 only at 2019 MER. In 2017 MER, its already more than $2 billions. However, exports aren't high enough. Ammunition, aircraft parts, subsystems like scopes for guns and military vehicles form most part of it.
India is yet to export big strategic assets like US, Russia, China and France.
Last edited:
