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

[Secur]

Wrong, it is already defined as not to break the country or falling of big cities like Lahore. It is clear.

Nobody will take serious when you threat even for LOC fire.

Can you find me an authentic official source ? Where is it defined so clearly if I may know ? The official Pakistan Army's website or that of Govt of Pakistan ? Where ? Even the enemy overwhelming the conventional power of the army can be considered as a threshold which means that you cant decide which is it and what is the response if it is crossed , the reason for all the hesitation regarding the Cold war .

 

Which thread?

TF2's thread .

 

[The Deterrent]

The thing is war dont follow a logic .........no one calculates (at-least at the tactical level ) TNW s are not taken seriously on par with strategic weps so the mad theory dont apply to them ..atleast in the subcontinent where we can think of military casualties. i mean to say india will not hold back for the fear of tnw but if attacked by n weps(tnw or anything) then logically it has to retaliate with strategic weps

TNWs are taken seriously, but not AS seriously as going for a full scale retaliation. Nuclear exchange in response to a TNW has to be proportionate (even in terms of numbers, if not in terms of value), because if it isn't, the counter-response could be extremely large too, since Indian cannot guarantee a decapitation strike.

The MAD theory does indeed apply to TNWs, its just that it would be step-wise, and is controllable i.e. the proportionate nuclear exchanges can be stopped at earlier stages if both parties agree.

 

[erwineugene]

TNWs are taken seriously, but not AS seriously as going for a full scale retaliation. Nuclear exchange in response to a TNW has to be proportionate (even in terms of numbers, if not in terms of value), because if it isn't, the counter-response could be extremely large too, since Indian cannot guarantee a decapitation strike.

why do you think india cannot guarantee decapitaion strike? india has enough nuke weps,delivery platforms to cover whole pak for its small geographical area ,even pak doesnt have a declared nuclear triad.. 

The MAD theory does indeed apply to TNWs, its just that it would be step-wise, and is controllable i.e. the proportionate nuclear exchanges can be stopped at earlier stages if both parties agree.

there will e no stopping once a nuclear wep xchange takes place its all out war,

 

[The Deterrent]

why do you think india cannot guarantee decapitaion strike? india has enough nuke weps,delivery platforms to cover whole pak ,even pak doesnt have a declared nuclear traid..

It is not about "covering" the enemy's territory with mushroom clouds. The problem is, that Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is largely based on all-terrain mobile TELs, which means that they could be deployed any where (with respect to Indian knowledge) when the situation escalates. India cannot ensure that it can locate and destroy majority of those missiles pre-emptively. Concrete reinforced and hardened hideouts can easily protect the nukes from blasts even a couple of hundred meters away.
Also Indian SFC cannot exhaust all of its arsenal in that single blow, because if even 30% of Pakistani arsenal survives, it will be enough to cause unacceptable damage. In other words, India simply doesn not have enough resources yet to make a decapitation strike.

 

[Armstrong]

Of course there's no comparison - and the priorities are also different - the coorelation being that both happened on the same day, my observation on that being that both countries have different priorities.

And that is precisely what I'm talking about !

How does both of them happening on the same day, as if there is any relation between their nature & the dates that were selected for them in addition to there being any relation between the two dates to begin with, points towards anything pertaining to 'priorities' ?

You happened to launch a mission to Mars on the same day as we happened to test a battlefield missile as part of our annual Azm-e-Nau Exercises that have been happening for the past couple of years - Wheres the 'relation' between the two ?

It would be as absurd as saying that one gets an indicator about how different the two countries priorities are when Pakistan launched her PakSat-1R from China on the 11th of August, 2011 & India test-fired the Brahmos Missile on the 12th of August 2011 (One Day Later) !

SOURCE for the Dates - http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20110812/165738567.html & a myriad sources in the Wiki page for Paksat-1R http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paksat-1R#cite_note-dawn.com-6 !

 

[The Deterrent]

there will e no stopping once a nuclear wep xchange takes place its all out war,

No, no, that is not all true. It was debated during the cold war, that if the nuclear exchange begins from a smaller level, it can be stopped. Say, in response to a Pakistani TNW, India detonates a large nuke against Pakistani forces. Now, Pakistan can either reply with a larger yield nuke or pledge for a ceasefire. Similarly, Indian military would prefer to wait and see the Pakistani response instead of going for an all-out strike at once.

 

[Armstrong]

The yield of a TNW is more than that of a strategic nuclear weapon? How?

It is not necessary that Pakistan will use Nasr as soon as any Indian armored formation crosses into Pakistan. Say it is a Lahore which is the primary target, then the dense city will be advantageous for us instead, as guerilla warfare can be waged there. Point being, no need of using Nasr when conventional forces are enough for the situation.

You'd have my beloved Hometown - My piece of Heaven on Earth - turn into our very own Desi Stalingrad !

I can't fire a gun but I'm handy with my fists - Bhai sanmbhal leiii gaaa !

 

[The Deterrent]

New Pictures of today's test have been added in the first post!

 

[rockstar08]

its a nice system ... but now i think we need some long range BM and CM`s plus some good sam systems

 

[Umair Nawaz]

well do yopu know how many so called "tactical bettel field neukes" and low yeild neukes India has and of what size lolzzz still we are almost a genration ahead of pakistan in this term .....lolzzz pakistan is the onli country in the world who wants to blackmail the world by pointing a gun towards its own head

RSS Swami at his best.

 

[SQ8]

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 !

i) This is not a conventional yield system in the first place. However, it could be modified to carry a few sub-munitions or Mines but for that 4 missiles may not be enough.

ii) The answer is in your question; There is no issue in designing an effective MLRS. However, no development project is free of costs and its output needs to be seen. Whether inputting X for Y is useful when there is cheaper Y available for it.

iii) There is nothing transferable in terms of equipment or hardware. What is learnt are skills such as guidance and programming, machining skills. There is a lot less similarity between the systems that go into these various systems.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Hes talkin abt Abdali series... also exported to Turkey.... which produce it as "Yildirim" MLRS..

interesting i didnt knew that when did that happen?
@Neptune 

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.

The Nasr will be used in our territory against invading enemy formations. Even if u still believe that yr Country has right to respond after this in our territory then u can go ahead. But remember our retaliation will be even massive then yrs.

In short if we go down we will make sure yr the first ones to go in hell.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

India sends a Mars probe today and on the same day Pakistan tests one of it's battlefield missiles - kinda points of the direction and to the priorities of our nations.

u did that after our test.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Who made you Think tank?? As I said we have clear cut policy lol.Any attack on Indian forces (Chemical ,biological or nuclear ) in our land or in foreign land will be dealt with Massive nuclear attack to make sure there will no 2nd strike from enemy.

In such a case there will be even more massive retaliation from Pakistan which will make sure nothing is left in yr country to build its future again. We even have more nukes and they r more for a reason!

And BTW u cant annihilate us in yr first strike even if u drop 100s of them nor can we honestly. But given the development and infrastructure u have developed and the economy u have u will loose much much more then what we will loose.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

lets assume a scenario
1 some terrorist attack occurs
2 where india kick starts cold start doctrine starts attacking pakistan
3 pak uses nasr on a vanguard Indian formation.(on pakistani soil)
4.for the fear of :MAD and international pressure india backs down from retaliating.

The thing is, fallout per yield by a TNW is more than that of strartegic warheads.
In combat situations distance between the opposing sides is not big to evade this fall out (since the pak doctrine xpects the use of TNW in its own territory) once u attack the opposing side with a tnw. so in a sense pakistani nuclear doctrine should have assumed sacrificing some of army formations or population centers since u cant always xpect indan army formations in open thar desert to attack pakistan so that u could bring ur nasr's and fire at em . what would u do if they quickly grab population centers ...will u still fire u r nasr??

Nice assessment

BTW this is first time im saying this to an Indian.

Well the CSD is certainly going to be held in Desert Areas thats why u have new Army HQs in Jaipur, Rajistan India. And given the exercises u had been doing since 2004 on CSD r in deserts as the terrain of desert is open from all sides and its very hard to defend there as enemy can come from anywhere even from back. Where as in Punjab areas where there r soft fertile lands there r many obstacles specially for Tanks and MIBs like Canals, Rivers, Jungles etc etc its very very hard to surprise the enemy with IBG level attacks and also since 65 war Pakistan has massively fortified its positions in those areas and tell u the truth Punjab province has highest density of population in entire pakistan which has 90 million population out of 180 million.

In Punjab our top command is not worried as we have make sure there that we can defend our country there with full satisfaction. but the barren deserts where population is close to none r problem and the border areas of South East of Pakistan dont have any population as the small patches which were there already were shifted to other areas making it a complete battle ready centers. So if we nuke a barren desert which has no population nor there is any chance of human presence in future is a fair option in the sole purpose of defending our motherland.