What's new

Possible Russian S-400 sale to India and Pakistan's Response.

@Ifrit please don't be harsh on @zebra7



Please read full thread carefully you will have your answer, it is discussed.

I have in-fact read, the full thread.

if you have a point, make it here ..so it can be countered.

Other wise no need to give such useless non answers, they just make it seem, you are running away from the conversation because, all you argument were countered.
 
O ChaddChadd year don't bug our Deterrent guy,he is a good poster.
Anyway can you plz post a link to the Shaheen missiles video you mentioned in this comment?


No it is not the silver bullet as long s ballistic missiles are concerned.
Nasr changes course all the way until it hits target, as it has fins attached to warhead and they are movable.
Previous version of Abdali too had movable fins on warhead


The video of surgical strikes using shaheen missiles were shown to foreign delegates in one of ideas conferences but not officially released so its not on web...


From wiki ... info is old because dorsal fins have been dropped in later models ....

Last para has a vague reference to same video

"This re-entry vehicle is unlike that of the Shaheen I in that it has four moving delta control fins at the rear and small solid/liquid-propellant side thrust motors, which are used to orient the re-entry vehicle after the booster stage is depleted or before re-entry to improve accuracy by providing stabilization during the terminal phase. This can also be used to fly evasive manoeuvres, making it problematic for existing anti-ballistic missile (ABM)systems to successfully intercept the missile. The Shaheen II warhead may change its trajectory several times during re-entry and during the terminal phase, effectively preventing ABM radar systems from pre-calculating intercept points. The re-entry vehicle is also stated to utilise a GPS satellite guidance system to provide updates on its position, further improving its accuracy and reducing the CEP.[5][6]

Foreign sources claim the missile to have an accuracy of 350 m CEP based on speculation that the design is the same or similar to one of several Chinese systems such as the DF-11or DF-25.[7][8]


However, according to a press video shown by NDC at the IDEAS 2004 defence exhibition in Pakistan, the missile can achieve "surgical precision". This has led to speculation that Shaheen II incorporates a satellite navigation update system and/or a post separation attitude correction system to provide terminal course correction, which "may indicate a CEP of much less than 300 m." According to Harsh Pant, reader of international relations at the Defence Studies Department of King's College London, "the current capability of Pakistani missiles is built around radar seekers." [9][10]
 
I have in-fact read, the full thread.

if you have a point, make it here ..so it can be countered.

Other wise no need to give such useless non answers, they just make it seem, you are running away from the conversation because, all you argument were countered.

Not interested in trolls.

@zebra7 please enlighten your countrymen. :)

dear @gambit your response on thread subject is requested. Please enlighten members with your knowledge.
 
Below is in addition to the Geneva Convention which both countries have signed.

India-Pakistan Non-Attack Agreement | Treaties & Regimes | NTI

India-Pakistan Non-Attack Agreement

I've always wondered why Pakistan/India's wars were just a gentlemanly fight on the border or in no mans land, and why civilian casualties were virtually non-existant. I knew there was an agreement in place, but thank you for the link. Remarkable to be honest. Look at how the Europeans butchered each other's civilian population, yet when the sub-contitent fought they took great care to avoid civilian deaths. This gives me great hope.
 
This would be especially true of Indian aircraft carriers that would become extremely vulnerable," he said.

From same article....

So basically putting a relaible gps system on same missile can result in some thing like df 21d
 
I've always wondered why Pakistan/India's wars were just a gentlemanly fight on the border or in no mans land, and why civilian casualties were virtually non-existant. I knew there was an agreement in place, but thank you for the link. Remarkable to be honest. Look at how the Europeans butchered each other's civilian population, yet when the sub-contitent fought they took great care to avoid civilian deaths. This gives me great hope.
it is really amazing the poster should be awarded + it is new for me waoo great we are more humane then the so called west they butchered millions of civilions in Afghanistan, iraq now in Syria.
 
I've always wondered why Pakistan/India's wars were just a gentlemanly fight on the border or in no mans land, and why civilian casualties were virtually non-existant. I knew there was an agreement in place, but thank you for the link. Remarkable to be honest. Look at how the Europeans butchered each other's civilian population, yet when the sub-contitent fought they took great care to avoid civilian deaths. This gives me great hope.

I am afraid the major credit goes to progenitor British army which instilled a sense of shared feeling of brotherhood among the early military commanders which carried forth in institutional memory.

In addition the objectives were always limited as per limited understanding - 1971 included. Both India and Pakistan have no realistic chance to hold on to any substantial enemy territory for a prolonged period due to myriad issues chief among deep hostility of civilian population towards the other side exception being Kashmir but then again operations by Pakistan in 1965 didn't exactly pan out as desired.

Europe during world wars lacked such mitigating circumstances plus that was a more brutal age which we skipped. The examples of Europeans made of themselves remains a stark reminder to all of us.
 
Last edited:
I am afraid the major credit to progenitor British army which instilled a sense of shared feeling of brotherhood among the early military commanders which carried forth in institutional memory.

In addition the objectives were always limited as per limited understanding - 1971 included. Both India and Pakistan have no realistic chance to hold on to any substantial enemy territory for a prolonged period due to myriad issues chief among deep hostility of civilian population towards the other side exception being Kashmir but then again operations by Pakistan in 1965 didn't exactly pan out as desired.

Fair enough I can understand that but why keep the treaty till this day? I think both countries forces are above these things.
 
Why? when you can use MAR-1 & AGM-88 HARM against them.

for a massive purchase , they will likely also get either Pantsir-S1 or TOR-M2 to protect S-400 units against small guided munition without having to waste expensive S-400 missiles on them.

exactly what Russia and Azerbaijan does to protect their S-400s/S-300 PMU2s

9K332_Tor-M2,_MAKS_2011_-04.jpg
 
Fair enough I can understand that but why keep the treaty till this day? I think both countries forces are above these things.

I sincerely hope you are right Sir, however I would like to point out more our people become alienated - greater the chances of Total War. I don't know much about Pakistan but in India the seeds of this otherness have started germinating.
 
Last edited:
@waz hello how r you, I make you one request earlier on, can you pls fulfill that

Thanks in advance
 
@waz hello how r you, I make you one request earlier on, can you pls fulfill that

Thanks in advance

Could you please put the request in the GHQ section. I've been advised by the senior management that this is how it should work. I hope you have a lovely time with your family.
 
Back
Top Bottom