Stage set for longer range Surya

[heisenberg]

though this is off topic but i want to ask is there any website where we can watch online tv channels live specially star sports

yaar,tu jab dekho off topic baatein karta rehta hai...

though this is off topic but i want to ask is there any website to watch online live tv channels specially star sports

 

[Penguin]

@Penguin - Think of it this way we all know that even Louis Van Gaal can take Bayern Munich to the Finals of the Champions League, were he coaching them but we all want Franz Beckenbauer in our dream team !

So are you a PSG, Ajax or a Feyenoord fan ?

Go Ahead Eagles

 

[Penguin]

No country is planning to attack Netherlands right now.....why the Netherlands maintains an army??

That is comparing apples and oranges: the Dutch army / military do no qualify as WMD against which there is little or only very limited defence. The Dutch military has tasks beyond national defence e.g. international humanitarian assistance and crisis response. Can balistic missiles perform such tasks?

We need long range missiles with decent payloads to deter enemies equipped with the same from using such stuff against us.

I'm pretty sure to perceived opposite side would argue exactly the same

 

[Penguin]

Well put
@dekho> Germany produces one of the world's best MBTs and conventional subs, it has a giant economy, while same is not case Russia; their economy is barely half of the german one.

Still Russia is regarded as great power which has global influence

Her influence stems from two facts; one of which is UNSC seat and the 2nd fact is its Massive, Sophisticated ICBM arsenal

Do you understand the importance of ICBMs now?

Flawed logic: Germany since WW2 has not been seeking to be a great power, nor would that have been allowed. Germany could well produce ballistic missiles and nuclear warhead, if it so chooses to do (they have or can fairly quickly develop the technologies).

Germany’s space industry und space research institutes are among the world leading players. They cover a wide range from basic research to application orientated research, innovative production and large scale system engineering.

Research in Germany - Space Technology

Like other countries of its size and wealth, Germany has the skills and resources to create its own nuclear weapons quite quickly if desired. The Zippe-type centrifuge was, indeed, invented by captured Germans working in the Soviet Union in the 1950s, and URENCO operates a centrifuge uranium enrichment plant in Germany. There are also several power reactors in Germany that could be used to produce bomb-grade plutonium if desired. Such a development is, of course, highly unlikely in the present benign security environment. In 2007, former defence secretary Rupert Scholz stated that Germany should strive to become a nuclear power.[8] In September 2007 the French president Sarkozy offered Germany to participate in the control over the French nuclear arsenal. Chancellor Merkel and foreign minister Steinmeier declined the offer however, stating that Germany "had no interest in possessing nuclear weapons".[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

 

[janon]

I'm pretty sure to perceived opposite side would argue exactly the same

They will, and they do. So then it becomes a matter of capability - which side can actually make the weapon in question, how quickly, and how far ahead one side is in the game. That will go on as long as there are "sides".

One could have asked whether India needed nukes, in the 80s. But if we had not developed the capability, would the other side have decided not to?

We can't control what the other side does, only what we can do. So we do the best we can within our resources and ability, and hope that our best is better than the other side's - or at least enough to deter them.

Hence we began a ballisitic missile program in the 90s, and step by step we reached where we are today, and aim farther for tomorrow.

 

[IND151]

Flawed logic: Germany since WW2 has not been seeking to be a great power, nor would that have been allowed. Germany could well produce ballistic missiles and nuclear warhead, if it so chooses to do (they have or can fairly quickly develop the technologies).


Research in Germany - Space Technology


Germany and weapons of mass destruction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not possible even if the "concerned" parties have no objection

Missile development is tricky, time and resource consuming process

 

[IND151]

It is often not realised that the Regiment of Artillery of the Indian Army is also its strategic arm as it mans the nuclear-tipped Prithvi, Agni-I and Agni-II ballistic missiles and will soon be equipped with the Agni-III. Surely when the Surya project is completed and India gets its first ICBM, the honour of manning that too is likely to go to the Gunners.


..:: India Strategic ::.. Indian Army: Artillery Modernisation is Gathering Momentum

 

[faithfulguy]

Why make more enemy, already trapped with enemy because of fate geography and stupid foreign policy. It will be preposterous decision.

In the future, India could have enemies in Europe, US or Russia. Depends on which side India choose to ally with. Both Russia and US has the ability to obliterate India. And India cannot touch either one of these two countries.

 

[Oldman1]

No immediate threats beyond China. But when engaging with all major military powers of the world
in both economic and military-related aspects in a big way, it's only advisable to have deterrence
against all of them.

The major players out there are US, Russia, France, UK and China.

Beijing is already covered by Agni-4. Moscow is covered by Agni-5, yet Russia did not give out
any erratic response towards the test of A-5, which means they trust us as a responsible
missile power.

I don't see why France wouldn't give a similar, controlled response, since it's quite obvious we
are not looking to start hostility with anyone.

UK may not be too happy with India having a missile that can reach London, but I don't think post-2020,
UK would be much of a power to worry about.

Only thing is US, who's reaction to such a development could be unpredictable. But if their reaction to
testing of Agni-5, which can hit several important US military installations, is anything to go by, we
can always work a way around any differences.

We have this. Most recent test.
Aegis Ballistic Missile Test with USS Lake Erie (CG 70) - YouTube

 

[IND151]

The length of the three-stage missile would be around 17 metres and diameter about 2.5 metre which would help storing different sizes of nuclear Multiple Independently Targetable Re-entry Warheads (MIRVs). The missile’s launch weight would be 60 to 70 tonne.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/278562-stage-set-longer-range-surya.html#ixzz2fcjMFfjk

I guess The Agni 6 will be have length of 19 metres and diameter of 2.4 Meters

 

[Gessler]

We have this. Most recent test.
Aegis Ballistic Missile Test with USS Lake Erie (CG 70) - YouTube

Everyone is developing BMDs and anti-missile shields. US, Russia, Europe, India and China...and some
smaller countries are buying missile shields from others.

But you know what they say, no system can completely nullify the effect of advanced ICBM-class missiles, especially if they come with multiple independently targeted RVs and furthermore maneuvering RVs.

 

[IND151]

Everyone is developing BMDs and anti-missile shields. US, Russia, Europe, India and China...and some
smaller countries are buying missile shields from others.

But you know what they say, no system can completely nullify the effect of advanced ICBM-class missiles, especially if they come with multiple independently targeted RVs and furthermore maneuvering RVs.

Exactly

And unlike ICBMs, interceptor can't deploy multiple warheads

It was advent of MIRV that turned tide in favor of ICBMs, as before that chances of interceptor defeating ICBMs were high (as they then carried single warhead) and maintaining and producing interceptor was cheaper than producing.

It became opposite after advent of MIRV.

 

[Dash]

Exactly

And unlike ICBMs, interceptor can't deploy multiple warheads

It was advent of MIRV that turned tide in favor of ICBMs, as before that chances of interceptor defeating ICBMs were high (as they then carried single warhead) and maintaining and producing interceptor was cheaper than producing.

It became opposite after advent of MIRV.

I guess that was the idea that propelled people for alternate laser interceptors, which might be shelved for now but has some future.

 

[Oldman1]

Everyone is developing BMDs and anti-missile shields. US, Russia, Europe, India and China...and some
smaller countries are buying missile shields from others.

But you know what they say, no system can completely nullify the effect of advanced ICBM-class missiles, especially if they come with multiple independently targeted RVs and furthermore maneuvering RVs.

You are assuming that the interceptors cannot maneuver as fast as other maneuverable warheads. As well as launching only one interceptor. But if thats the problem, then the Russians wouldn't be complaining about such systems if they have ballistic missiles to counter the missile defense system.

 

[Gessler]

You are assuming that the interceptors cannot maneuver as fast as other maneuverable warheads. As well as launching only one interceptor.

They can be intercepted in head-on mode if the maneuver is done at high altitude and in a predictable direction.

If maneuver is done within earth's atmosphere in an unpredictable direction (i.e. the other way from where
the interceptor is angled), the incoming RV will go over & beyond the interceptor, making it a tail-chase
mode where the interceptor cannot keep pace with the RV.

But if thats the problem, then the Russians wouldn't be complaining about such systems if they have ballistic missiles to counter the missile defense system.

Then why is US complaining about Iran and North Korea testing long range missiles? Surely, you have the
systems to shoot them down, don't you?