Pakistan conducts successful test launches of 4 x Nasr missiles 05 Nov, 2013

[Roybot]

I fail to see the point of battlefield short range nukes. A nuke is a nuke, and the retaliation from India would be the same and massive, whether Pakistan nukes New Delhi or some Army formations near the border.

Think about it, its not like India is gonna say, hey Pakistan lobbed only a small nuke so lets cut them some slack and hit back with a small nuke too. Nuclear weapon is supposed to be the last resort, so any retaliation from India would be to give a death blow.

All Nasr has done is made South Asia perhaps the most dangerous place on the face of the earth.

 

[kurup]

lets see if you can find out do not put your brain on something which overheats it and finally it may catch fire ... so take a pill and chill out

So why don't you simply explain to us what your post meant so that we will not have to overheat our brain .

 

[erwineugene]

how should we see this test in the light of india launching mars mission?! every time india/pakistan tests a missile there were counter tests from other country ....how can we see this action...a counter test or as just another missle test

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

What does that even mean ??

Tht means its not an MLRS ... nor will be used as one.. for tht role we have MLRSs like A-100,KRL-122,Grads and Abdalis ... 

how should we see this test in the light of india launching mars mission?! every time india/pakistan tests a missile there were counter tests from other country ....how can we see this action...a counter test or as just another missle test

Its just a test nothing to counter or give any statements.

 

[Armstrong]

On second thought, it cannot be entirely about testing the "full" system, because if one missile can be launched without damaging the neighbouring canisters, then all of them can be launched safely too.

In my opinion, probably 4 missiles were tested against a designated "area" rather than a "target"...so that enemy forces over several square kilometers can be obliterated by a single launcher.

Can you kindly answer a few questions for me :

(i) Do you think we'd be able to come up with a high-enough yield conventional explosive to be carried by the Nasr Missile that is enough to obliterate everything (or most things) in a 3-400 meter (m) radius to be used as an effective conventional weapon against command posts & Forward Areas etc ?

(ii) How far does the ability of being able to successfully manufacture the missile, the canisters & the transport vehicle that can carry it, contribute towards us having the technical know-how of being able to come up with an effective & efficient rocket artillery system of an indigenous kind ?

(iii) How far is the technical know-how gained in this project transferable to other areas like perhaps ATGMs, Tank or Self-Propelled Artillery Barrels or even a rudimentary Surface to Air Defense System that uses SD-10Bs on a platform/delivery vehicle built by us !

Thank You, much obliged !

' @Oscar - I'd appreciate it if you can pitch in as well !

 

[kurup]

Tht means its not an MLRS ... nor will be used as one.. for tht role we have MLRSs like A-100,KRL-122,Grads and Abdalis ...

I clearly don't think that is what he meant .

 

[Leviza]

So why don't you simply explain to us what your post meant so that we will not have to overheat our brain .

think and re-think or leave it as its above your level...

 

[Alpha1]

Official Indian Nuclear Doctrine - That regardless of the size of a nuclear attack against India, be it a miniaturised version or a "big" missile, India will retaliate massively to inflict unacceptable damage.

First deal with this : Higher Range ,Better accuracy and 6X to deal with

so for the loss of a few thousand soldiers(which were involved in invading pakistan) you people will risk millions of lives in the sub continent?

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Sir if we are the first one to use it Sir than we would use in so many numbers that their would be no one in India left to respond Sir

Oh c'mon now; where the hell are you gonna pull out so many missiles from?
Outta your "fundamental orifice" where the sun don't shine?
You are thinking to obliterate a sub-continental sized land-mass with sub-kiloton warheads!!!!!

 

[Alpha1]

On second thought, it cannot be entirely about testing the "full" system, because if one missile can be launched without damaging the neighbouring canisters, then all of them can be launched safely too.

In my opinion, probably 4 missiles were tested against a designated "area" rather than a "target"...so that enemy forces over several square kilometers can be obliterated by a single launcher.

4 missiles a kiloton each will be more effective than a single detonation(8 kt) double the combined yeild in a particular area

 

[Capt.Popeye]

so for the loss of a few thousand soldiers(which were involved in invading pakistan) you people will risk millions of lives in the sub continent?

Yes; precisely. Bluff will meet Bluster head on.
There is only "just so much" that you can do with Sub-Kiloton Nukes!

 

[Kompromat]

Yes; precisely. Bluff will meet Bluster head on.
There is only "just so much" that you can do with Sub-Kiloton Nukes!

TNWs are considered as precursor to a strategic attack, thats why we call them 'The weapons of deterrence'.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

TNWs are considered as precursor to a strategic attack, thats why we call them 'The weapons of deterrence'.

No Aeronut Dude; they are WLR or Weapons of Last Resort. The ultimate way of Jihad, the last suicide weapon, the final means of "Har-Kiri". Simple as taht.

 

[Kompromat]

No Aeronut Dude; they are WLR or Weapons of Last Resort. The ultimate way of Jihad, the last suicide weapon, the final means of "Har-Kiri". Simple as taht.

I have studied Pakistan's military doctrine a little bit. These are 'war preventive weapons' - just like nuclear subs and so on in a scenario where the 'strategic balance of power' is present. Same weapons can be taken as offensive hara kiri weapons if one state has nukes and the other doesn't.

 

[erwineugene]

I have studied Pakistan's military doctrine a little bit. These are 'war preventive weapons' - just like nuclear subs and so on in a scenario where the 'strategic balance of power' is present. Same weapons can be taken as offensive hara kiri weapons if one state has nukes and the other doesn't.

I beg to differ with you.even if both TNW and sub based nukes provide deterrence, TNW are primarily offensive in nature while sub based n weps are defensive doctrine wise .