Can it sink their aircraft carrier?
Regarding a nuclear payload, the lingering fallout they create and the Indian carrier, I did a post on that a few months ago in a different thread. It specifically relates to the lethality of fallout and ship NBC protection and protocols, but it's relevant in a discussion on nuclear weapons so I'll repost it here for everyone.
Original thread in case anyone wants some context -
https://defence.pk/threads/india-no...ly-sea-trade-route.452617/page-4#post-8755312
...
Depends on how close you are. NBC is for lingering or residual radiological contamination, not a full-on dose from an atomic detonation.
Take the 23 kiloton Able shot - an air burst device of the same type that was used on Japan.
At just half a mile away from the detonation, ships like USS Nevada, painted red here during nuclear weapons testing, actually survived the blast:
However, it received lethal doses of radiation:
Although the Able bomb missed its target, Nevada, by nearly half a mile, and it failed to sink or to contaminate the battleship, a crew would not have survived. Goat #119, tethered inside a gun turret and shielded by armor plate, received enough fireball radiation to die four days later of radiation sickness having survived two days longer than goat #53, which was on the deck, unshielded. Had Nevada been fully manned, she would likely have become a floating coffin, dead in the water for lack of a live crew. In theory, every unprotected location on the ship received 10,000 rems (100 Sv) of initial nuclear radiation from the fireball. Therefore, people deep enough inside the ship to experience a 90% radiation reduction would still have received a lethal dose of 1,000 rems.
Fast forward a few months to the Baker shot, and the damage is even worse. This time the explosion is underwater, rather then the airburst Fatman design that Able used:
Upon detonation, a primary shockwave crushed USS Arkansas to the point were it now appears to be lying top down underwater, which battleships often do as they are top heavy. In reality USS Arkansas is lying on its side, but appears to be lying top down because one half of the ship is gone, having been crushed to pieces.
USS Saratoga was sunk during the shot. She was an aircraft carrier:
Two ships down. But what about those that survived like USS Independence, which also survived the Able shot, as shown here?
The surge of the collapsing spray column painted the target ships with so much radiation that the USN was unable to decontaminate them and scuttled the ships:
As with Able, any ships that remained afloat within 1,000 yards (914 m) of the detonation were seriously damaged, but this time the damage came from below, from water pressure rather than air pressure. The greatest difference between the two shots was the radioactive contamination of all the target ships by Baker. Regardless of the degree of damage, only nine surviving Baker target ships were eventually decontaminated and sold for scrap. The rest were sunk at sea after decontamination efforts failed.
Modern CBRN measures have come along way such as positive pressure interiors, automated decontaminated systems, advanced filtration capabilities, but a nuclear detonation is a different game. USS Nevada would have doomed its crew, despite surviving the Able shot because the radiological contamination was so intense it seeped through the ships hull. No filtration system or scrubbers will stop that.
And keep in mind both Able and Baker were measured in tens of kilotons, at 23 kt each. Maker forbid you get hit with a multi-megaton device like Castle Bravo:
Radiological contaminants from Bravo travelled 300 miles and remained lethal within 100 miles. The Fireball itself was 7km across.
You'd likely not survive a 20kt blast if within a mile. Forget about surviving anything larger.
...
If nuclear armed, yes Babur will likely equal a kill against the Indian carrier, though that's dependent on the size of the warhead mostly. If conventionally armed it'll do damage, perhaps mission kill the carrier, but leave it afloat.
It could be finished off after.
ESSM, SM-2, Aster 30, and SM-6 were designed to take down fast moving Russian missiles like P-500 and P-800, this would also include Brahmos.
SM-6 has experience downing Coyote target missiles, which travel at Mach 3 at 15 feet above sea level.
http://breakingdefense.com/2015/08/sm-6-can-now-kill-both-cruise-and-ballistic-missiles/
Sure because the U.S has limited funds and space and they the European, Israelis or anyone else dont see the benefits of such a missile
It's mostly because Europeans and the Americans favor smart, slow missiles over fast, but largely dumb and unmaneuverable ones like Brahmos. Different philosophy and one is no more right then the other.
The Americans like brains, and so do we. It reflects in our missile development.
