Pakistan's Neutron Bomb

[It.is.all.mudi's.fault]

The moment your PM will be informed by your security forces that:

1 - they can neutralize our atomic power;
2 - they can shoot down our AWACS;
3 - Indian air force is better that PAF; and
4 - they have addressed all the other risks posed by a 600 + strong and highly trained army

that day will be the first day of the next war between India and Pakistan...

1. Atomic power could be neutralized. A decade ago, if someone talked about BMD, it was laughed off. Today, at least a dozen BMD systems are capable of shooting down IRBMs with range upto 3500-4000 Km. Only ICBMs are difficult to intercept ,and in another decade even they won't be. Technology of interception has wind on its back and is progressing much faster than Missile technology, which anyway has plateaued. With advent of rail guns and Energy weapons, Missiles and even fighter Airplanes may become obsolete very fast.

This is the reason that USA, Russia , India, and China are designing Hypersonic glide vehicles (which have depressed trajectory).

2. This is nothing new. India already had AWACS killers capable of being fired from Su30MKI. Only new thing that S-400 brings to table is that it could shoot down AWACS from ground ,this it could not be intercepted by your Airforce easily, and the fact that it is a proven mature technology.

3. Indian Airforce is better than PAF for a good 25-30 years now (both Quantitatively and Qualitatively).

4. That is only sector where you could match India.

Fire one fake in a S-400 protected area
If the system is working
Send 50 more fake (or until India goes to Russia to beg for more)



No need to fire empty NASR. Old HATF inventory is enough.

Ballistics missiles are not cheap. Each one of them cost from 10s to 100s of millions of dollars. Even USA, Russia, And China have very few Ballistic missiles (less than 100). Raining 50 missile at once is such a costly fantasy for which Pakistan would have to sell itself.

Who said that David Sling is cheap?
"While the new system is designed to save lives the cost of deployment remains quite high. It has previously been estimated that one interception using the David's Sling system costs Israel $1 million."
Israel test-fires ‘David’s Sling’ missile defense system — RT News

I have read sometime back that David Sling would costs $700,000 per missile (probably inflation has now pushed it close to $1 million) and have stated as such:

BDavid Sling and Patriot III, who could shoot down a tactical ballistic missile like Russian Iskander (A technologically superior missile to Nasr) cost nearly $700,000 and $130,000 per interceptor respectively. This makes them cost inefficient for intercepting MLRS, but still cost efficient than Tactical ballistic missiles.

Even at million a pop ,David sling is still cheaper than Tactical ballistic missiles which it would be intercepting.

 

[django]

We have both uranium and plutonium based weapons, fission boosted warheads, DO WE HAVE neutron bombs?

 

[BABA AGHORI]

Many including some Pakistanis think that TNWs are only option against cold start, while that is not true, there several other conventional measures which are implemented to tackle treat on eastern border.

Use of TNW is last option and Pakistan's military leadership know its consequences so all appropriate measures are taken. They know that use of TNWs can trigger MAD, that is why clear message is conveyed to India, in which it was clearly conveyed what are thresholds? If crossed TNWs will be used.

Cool... so you understand threshold .. I can also expect you to know the thrushhold of the adversary. it's up to you TNW or SNW .... the response would b same...
India very well knw the thrushhold and capabilities of it's adversary and will take appropriate action when and where required.

 

[DavidSling]

1. Atomic power could be neutralized. A decade ago, if someone talked about BMD, it was laughed off. Today, at least a dozen BMD systems are capable of shooting down IRBMs with range upto 3500-4000 Km. Only ICBMs are difficult to intercept ,and in another decade even they won't be. Technology of interception has wind on its back and is progressing much faster than Missile technology, which anyway has plateaued. With advent of rail guns and Energy weapons, Missiles and even fighter Airplanes may become obsolete very fast.

This is the reason that USA, Russia , India, and China are designing Hypersonic glide vehicles (which have depressed trajectory).

2. This is nothing new. India already had AWACS killers capable of being fired from Su30MKI. Only new thing that S-400 brings to table is that it could shoot down AWACS from ground ,this it could not be intercepted by your Airforce easily, and the fact that it is a proven mature technology.

3. Indian Airforce is better than PAF for a good 25-30 years now (both Quantitatively and Qualitatively).

4. That is only sector where you could match India.





Ballistics missiles are not cheap. Each one of them cost from 10s to 100s of millions of dollars. Even USA, Russia, And China have very few Ballistic missiles (less than 100). Raining 50 missile at once is such a costly fantasy for which Pakistan would have to sell itself.




I have read sometime back that David Sling would costs $700,000 per missile (probably inflation has now pushed it close to $1 million) and have stated as such:




Even at million a pop ,David sling is still cheaper than Tactical ballistic missiles which it would be intercepting.

Depends, maybe the arrow system is better suited for some of those missiles

 

[Defender@@]

But the pickle here is that Iron dome, David Sling, Patriot III, and even S-300 we already have are cheaper than Nasr, a battlefield tactical ballistic missile.

For example, Iron dome's interceptor cost nearly $50,000 (per interceptor) . This is half of what a MLRS rocket costs. Tactical ballistic missiles costs even higher. David Sling and Patriot III, who could shoot down a tactical ballistic missile like Russian Iskander (A technologically superior missile to Nasr) cost nearly $700,000 and $130,000 per interceptor respectively. This makes them cost inefficient for intercepting MLRS, but still cost efficient than Tactical ballistic missiles.

In this scenario , India (even if we assume that resources of India and Pakistan are equal) could field multiple batteries , outnumbering and overwhelming Nasr. As of now, India could transfer S-300 from strategic duty of defending cities (this would be taken over by S-400) to battlefield for intercepting Nasr.

It is due to this simple economic logic that India, South Korea, and Singapore are interested in Iron dome, even though they have pretty good SAM systems already. Iron dome may be costly for intercepting $500 worth pallywood rockets, but is very cost effective when intercepting military grade MLRS and short range Tactical Ballistic missles, if it prove capable to intercept them as Israelis claim.

Nice analysis... Go tell this to usa and russia who wasted much more expensive cruise missiles on iraq afghanistan and syria ... I wish someone like u became top decision maker in india and replace all its assets with air defence missile ... Somebody tell this kid that each asset has its own purpose... Its not the cost of the wepon... Its objective of the weapon ...

 

[PakSword]

Depends, maybe the arrow system is better suited for some of those missiles

Salesman is here as well

Good going man!

 

[It.is.all.mudi's.fault]

Depends, maybe the arrow system is better suited for some of those missiles

Yes , but if you need Arrow system to shoot down a ballistic missile, it is probably a long range strategic ballistic missile.

Correct me if I am wrong , but Arrow II/III could shoot down all missiles that David Sling could. I think that David sling was designed for reducing cost of interception of Theater ballistic missiles.

Nice analysis... Go tell this to usa and russia who wasted much more expensive cruise missiles on iraq afghanistan and syria ... I wish someone like u became top decision maker in india and replace all its assets with air defence missile ... Somebody tell this kid that each asset has its own purpose... Its not the cost of the wepon... Its objective of the weapon ...

What are you rambling about?

Cruise missiles are cheap ,and have always been cheaper and easier to shoot down. And USA could have used world war relic B-17s to bomb Afghanistan and Iraq, as these countries never had any interception capabilities.

 

[I S I]

Haha Neutron ka reaction.

@Zibago @MaarKhoor @DESERT FIGHTER @Mughal-Prince


Btw this video also debunks the myth of long term nuclear radiation after Nasr attack.

 

[DavidSling]

Yes , but if you need Arrow system to shoot down a ballistic missile, it is probably a long range strategic ballistic missile.

Correct me if I am wrong , but Arrow II/III could shoot down all missiles that David Sling could. I think that David sling was designed for reducing cost of interception of Theater ballistic missiles.




What are you rambling about?

Cruise missiles are cheap ,and have always been cheaper and easier to shoot down. And USA could have used world war relic B-17s to bomb Afghanistan and Iraq, as these countries never had any interception capabilities.

You're wrong, David sling is designed against airplanes,drones,cruise missiles, and medium range missiles.
Arrow 2 is designed to take out long range missiles.
And Arrow 3 is designed to take out missiles outside the atmosphere.
It's like saying David Sling is intend to take Iron Dome targets.
Or that Iron Dome can take out Iron beam targets.
Israel built a multi-layer interception systems - from the single tank(trophy) or naval ships (Barak 8) to close range-medium range-long range-and so on.
Each system excel in it's role

 

[Wolf]

Brilliant and very informative video.

 

[Burhan Wani]

We have both uranium and plutonium based weapons, fission boosted warheads, DO WE HAVE neutron bombs?

Oh yes.

 

[django]

Oh yes.

@Jonah Arthur Has it been confirmed or is it an educated guess, I do know we have some very smart folks working at our labs, so it would not surprise me at all, according to a Pakistani professor of physics (Noor M Butt) at Birmingham university, it would take about 6 years for Pakistan to make such a device, this was back in 99.kudos

 

[Burhan Wani]

@Jonah Arthur Has it been confirmed or is it an educated guess, I do know we have some very smart folks working at our labs, so it would not surprise me at all, according to a Pakistani professor of physics (Noor M Butt) at Birmingham university, it would take about 6 years for Pakistan to make such a device, this was back in 99.kudos

There are many secret projects, our defence personnel donot wants to disclose publically.
I have not any information regarding this kind of warhead either it is operational or under development.
But one thing is confirmed we have a ability to design very sophisticated weopans because our nuclear scientists can surprise the world.

 

[django]

There are many secret projects, our defence personnel donot wants to disclose publically.
I have not any information regarding this kind of warhead either it is operational or under development.
But one thing is confirmed we have a ability to design very sophisticated weopans because our nuclear scientists can surprise the world.

They can produce a new weapons design in a time period of a few months. I feel safe knowing that we have such talented engineers and physicists.

 

[Burhan Wani]

They can produce a new weapons design in a time period of a few months. I feel safe knowing that we have such talented engineers and physicists.

Man my Final year project supervisor was linked to KINPOE and MS Electrical Gold medalist from PIEAS.
These men are very unique and most talented people of Pakistan.