No , we do not . But we do know that the simulated tests have a lot of variables which wont be known in real world are predetermined/selected , a luxury not available in reality . Here , you know where the missile originates from , what is its speed , where is it going to hit and what does it carry and that it doesn't have any counter measures , not at least from what I heard of Indian ABM system . Do you think you will know all this in an actual war scenario ?
How Effective Anti-Ballistic Missile Defense is Against Countermeasures? - Defense Update - Military Technology & Defense News
While the US administration openly stated confidence in its Ground Based Interceptors (
GBI), research analysts from the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) warn that such weapons may not be sufficient to protect from a deliberate attack launched by North Korea, since the current level of
missile defense technology has not matured yet to the level enabling the defense systems to engage realistic-complex targets, or discriminate between real
decoys and real warheads.
David Wright, co-director and senior scientist at UCS say it is likely that the US will face a ‘reactive enemy’ that will be able to develop and deploy
decoys and other
countermeasures to make it more difficult for U.S. defenses to defeat such missiles.“
None of the intercept tests conducted so far of the U.S. ground-based or ship-based systems has included realistic countermeasures that you should expect in a real-world attack from North Korea.” Wright stressed, “The Pentagon still doesn’t know how to solve this problem… That’s why the large difference in technical sophistication between the U.S. and North Korea does not automatically tip the balance in favor of the U.S. in this challenge.”
“People frequently downplay the countermeasures issue, in part because it makes the problem so difficult. But unfortunately it is real.” Wright concludes, “The bottom line is that it makes no sense to add interceptors and/or an east-coast deployment site until the system has been shown to be effective against a real-world threat.”
History of Russia's Anti-ballistic Missile (ABM) System (2002) | Union of Concerned Scientists
Despite the improvements, US military and intelligence reports say the Moscow system would still be relatively easy to defeat. The Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Strategic and Theater Nuclear Forces told the House Armed Services Committee in 1987 that although the Soviets had spent over 10 years and billions of dollars developing an ABM system, the United States could penetrate it with a small number of Minuteman ICBMs equipped with "highly effective chaff and decoys," he went on to say that, "if the Soviets should deploy more advanced or proliferated defenses we have new penetration aids as counters."2 The Department of Defense has said that the Soviet system is no more advanced than was the US Safeguard system, which was developed in the early 1970's, but deactivated as soon as it was deployed in 1975 because of its military ineffectiveness and high cost.3 A 1989 report on Soviet Military Power also concluded that "with only 100 interceptor missiles, the system can be saturated, and with only the single Pillbox radar at Pushkino providing support to these missiles, the system is highly vulnerable to suppression."
Main US anti-ballistic missile defence system appears to have less than a 50:50 chance of an interception - Hyperbola
The US Missile Defence Agency has admitted that its latest test of its anti-ballistic missile interceptor missile failed to strike its target. The test of the Ground-based Midcourse Defence System missile occured on 5 July. It involved launching a target “ballistic” missile from the Kwajelein Atoll launch site in the Pacific followed by the launch intereptor missile carrying an upgraded (Capability Enhancement 1) Exoatrmospheric Kill Vehicle from the Vandenberg Air Force base in California. Unfortunately the planned interception and destruction of the target missile failed to take place.
Now that should you give you more confidence , you can succeed every time like that since you set the " variables " and strike the target down , it isn't the same during the nuclear exchange . The whole world is focusing on a couple of relatively low tech enemies and even against that , it isn't confident but Indians are , that is what amazes me .
Pakistan has around 100-120 warheads ( ever increasing ) and hundreds of missiles ready to go " hot " in 15 minutes peacetime value ( estimation ) , the question is how many interceptors do you have , how much does one cost , what is their successful intercept probability and effectiveness ?