NASR : SHORT RANGE TACTICAL NUCLEAR WEAPON!

[black-hawk_101]

Will NASR going to have some other versions like Shaheen Missiles; having NASR-I, NASR-II and NASR-III with greater ranges?

 

[SQ8]

You seem to be among the more intelligent and wiser types here. Nukes are of dubious utility anyway, while TacNukes are even more infinitely so.
With such a short range, the defenders using these as defensive weapons will anhilate themselves along the adversary, not to mention that they will also wipe out the people/citizens that they are tasked to defend!! Some Defensive tactic that is intended to be.......

Talk about being suicidal! This takes Nihilism to a whole new level. But the Guys who cooked up this policy are solely obsessed with booking their place in that El Paradiso that they forever dream of..... so what is new? The mind-set is identical to that of the Nut-Cases who go around detonating their "Suicide-Bomber" jackets. Now, that is some delicious irony!
What goes around, comes around.

Getting blind to nationalism wasnt one of your traits, but I guess people give into it from time to time.
If your logic had even the slightest basis to it, I guess these people were dumb.

 

[Psychic]

Getting blind to nationalism wasnt one of your traits, but I guess people give into it from time to time.
If your logic had even the slightest basis to it, I guess these people were dumb.

Can TNW be armed on babur or raad missiles?

 

[SQ8]

Can TNW be armed on babur or raad missiles?

Could be, no need for it.

 

[Psychic]

Could be, no need for it.

what if we want to take out one of their airbase. or attack a battlegroup far away from the front.
It could prove useful don't u think?

 

[SQ8]

what if we want to take out one of their airbase. or attack a battlegroup far away from the front.
It could prove useful don't u think?

We already have ballistic systems for that.

 

[Didact]

We already have ballistic systems for that.

Using BMs (non veg warhead or veg warhead) on a static location like an airport is undoubtedly a fairly straightforward enough task, almost morbidly simple. However I'm not buying the idea of using a BM on a mobile formation, that too positioned far away from the fighting

Firstly, why on earth would anyone want to call in a nuke strike on a non-deployed formation? That'd be absurd, bordering on insanity.

Second, given the confusion reigning amongst even the most adept of Intelligence agencies in the fog of war, I'd absolutely avoid calling in a nuke strike on a target beyond the range of my ISR assets. The last thing a general would want is to nuke a civilian location, thus resigning the fate of his country to an assured nuke counter strike.

 

[SQ8]

Using BMs (non veg warhead or veg warhead) on a static location like an airport is undoubtedly a fairly straightforward enough task, almost morbidly simple. However I'm not buying the idea of using a BM on a mobile formation, that too positioned far away from the fighting

Firstly, why on earth would anyone want to call in a nuke strike on a non-deployed formation? That'd be absurd, bordering on insanity.

Second, given the confusion reigning amongst even the most adept of Intelligence agencies in the fog of war, I'd absolutely avoid calling in a nuke strike on a target beyond the range of my ISR assets. The last thing a general would want is to nuke a civilian location, thus resigning the fate of his country to an assured nuke counter strike.

Whether you do it or not, the post was in reference if you can; whether you may or may not is a different question.

 

[Didact]

Whether you do it or not, the post was in reference if you can; whether you may or may not is a different question.

BM strike on a mobile formation beyond the range of ISR assets? You'd be relying on a map and some intelligence agent. You'd have no eyes or ears (biological or othrwise) to do BDA, or to even ascertain if the said location is actually correct or if the force is even present.

In short you'd have no idea what you're hitting. I'll venture out and say it's can't be done.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Getting blind to nationalism wasnt one of your traits, but I guess people give into it from time to time.
If your logic had even the slightest basis to it, I guess these people were dumb.

They were DUMB now, were'nt they? After all they junked all that $hit, without using it. So, has it crossed your mind that there must've been a good reason WHY they junked it, is'nt it?

If that was "God's Gift to Warfare", then it would still be around just waiting to be used, no?

 

[The SC]

They are completely useless. India has made it clear that I holds right to retaliate with nukes even in case of tactical nukes, even if used inside pak border against our forces. So, if Pak uses tacnucs, it will have to face obliteration by our nukes. This leaves only other option for pak, if it wants to use nukes, it must use strategic nukes to try to take out India so battlefield nukes become useless again...

"even in case of tactical nukes, even if used inside pak border against our forces"
That alone can cause obliteration of India by Pak strategic nukes, whether you like the tactical ones or not.

Dont we have a numerical disadvantage with China ?

Nop, you have technological gaps with China, not in boots on the ground.

When Pakistan knows a tactical nuke would invite the same response from India as a strategic nuke- massive retaliatory strike, then why not use strategic nuke straight away instead of a small tactical nuke on Pakistani soil itself ?

They will be used behind your lines i.e; inside India, to cut out any Indian troops that had advanced inside Pakistan territory.

Its called MAD, and its achieved very well with strategic nukes. So the question asked by bangalore remains, what does tac nuke achieve?

Someone in pak security establishment coming up with a intellectual idea is generally a bad thing, as history suggests.

"what does tac nuke achieve?"
Any chance -as small as it might seem- to stop the advance if not the war, and prevent total MAD.
Take them as warning shots before real MAD.
When the decision to use tactical nukes would be reached, you can be sure that a decision for strategic nukes use has been reached also.

 

[SQ8]

They were DUMB now, were'nt they? After all they junked all that $hit, without using it. So, has it crossed your mind that there must've been a good reason WHY they junked it, is'nt it?

If that was "God's Gift to Warfare", then it would still be around just waiting to be used, no?

They never "Junked" it. They ended it via treaties. Otherwise till the late 90s almost every NATO member was developing new Tactical weapons. Such as the french hades system.
As I said before Cap'n, dont let nationalism get in the way of those cogs whirring away.

 

[Sneaker]

"even in case of tactical nukes, even if used inside pak border against our forces"
That alone can cause obliteration of India by Pak strategic nukes, whether you like the tactical ones or not.

Huh!!??!!

 

[SQ8]

BM strike on a mobile formation beyond the range of ISR assets? You'd be relying on a map and some intelligence agent. You'd have no eyes or ears (biological or othrwise) to do BDA, or to even ascertain if the said location is actually correct or if the force is even present.

In short you'd have no idea what you're hitting. I'll venture out and say it's can't be done.

Depends on the flight time. It is a difficult prospect but this was thought out during the cold war as well. Although I would not do anything beyond ISR assets unless its a present target on the local equivalent of "snapcount"(by that time, civilians wont matter at all)

 

[SipahSalar]

They were DUMB now, were'nt they? After all they junked all that $hit, without using it. So, has it crossed your mind that there must've been a good reason WHY they junked it, is'nt it?

Get off your high horse friend. They only retired them after they gained conventional superiority over Russia. We will do the same when the time arrives. Till then they are an insurance policy.