WMD & Missiles Question Thread

[farhan_9909]

Pakistan needs to develop high yield thermonuclear warheads, in the 50-100 megaton range. Enough of the tactical nukes. Pakistan can either get serious about it's long term security or it will face serious trouble in future when dealing with rogue foreign powers.

50-100mt is out of reach.

even a 1mt yield warhead can destroy a kpk size province or a UAE size country

 

[A1Kaid]

50-100mt is out of reach.

even a 1mt yield warhead can destroy a kpk size province or a UAE size country

No it cannot, 1 megaton nuclear warhead cannot even destroy a city the size of Dubai let alone a country the size of UAE, You're badly mistaken and don't realize how much of a yield a nuclear warhead can actually damage.

Take a look at this screen shot, below it shows the detonation of 1 MT. It can barely destroy all of Dubai, let alone the entire UAE.

This is what a 50,000 kt = 50 mt detonation would look like. No where does a 50 megaton can destroy a country the size of UAE but it can destroy the entire size of a city the size of Dubai and surrounding areas.

This is why I said the development of a 50-100 megaton thermonuclear warheads is essential for the long term survival so that Pakistan have the capability to destroy entire cities with one delivery of a bomb. Our current nuclear weapon yield is very low and is more suitable for tactical strikes, it would take 10+ of our nukes to just destroy one large enemy city.

 

[A1Kaid]

Another example of a power of a 50 MT detonation.

This is kind of power Pakistan should possess.


This is the kind of power Pakistan currently possesses, a 12kt nuclear warhead max yield 1 detonation. At this rate it would take up to 8 or more nuclear warheads to destroy one large city.

 

[The Deterrent]

Pakistan needs to develop high yield thermonuclear warheads, in the 50-100 megaton range. Enough of the tactical nukes. Pakistan can either get serious about it's long term security or it will face serious trouble in future when dealing with rogue foreign powers.

No, this is insanity. Pakistan's nuclear weapons development is more focused on taking out counter-force targets than the counter-value ones, possibly in a first strike. 20-30kt warheads provide enough yield for counter-value retaliation, if extremely necessary. The after effects for these nukes are already devastating enough, there is no need of megaton giants.
Besides, since the counter-force targets are already based near considerably dense population, excessive collateral damage would be unavoidable.

P.S. Current economic situation does not allows for development of any adventurous project like that.

 

[A1Kaid]

No, this is insanity. Pakistan's nuclear weapons development is more focused on taking out counter-force targets than the counter-value ones, possibly in a first strike. 20-30kt warheads provide enough yield for counter-value retaliation, if extremely necessary. The after effects for these nukes are already devastating enough, there is no need of megaton giants.
Besides, since the counter-force targets are already based near considerably dense population, excessive collateral damage would be unavoidable.

P.S. Current economic situation does not allows for development of any adventurous project like that.

It's not insanity, if Pakistan is to be in a nuclear engagement then Pakistan should intend to win it. Stop this weakness "counter" this "counter" that, Pakistan needs offensive capability understand? With your ideas we will always be "countering" that is making the second move, not the first and last which is what I argue for. Besides, many of the major nuclear powers have megaton yields, Pakistan lacks this and possess lower yield warheads.

20-30kt warheads provide

We don't even have confirmation whether Pakistan possesses even 20-30kt yield, highest Pakistan has tested was apparently 12kt. If you think 20-30kt is enough considering the size of potential targets then you're very badly mistaken.

P.S. Current economic situation does not allows for development of any adventurous project like that

We will eat grass...

 

[The Deterrent]

It's not insanity, if Pakistan is to be in a nuclear engagement then Pakistan should intend to win it. Stop this weakness "counter" this "counter" that, Pakistan needs offensive capability understand? With your ideas we will always be "countering" that is making the second move, not the first and last which is what I argue for. Besides, many of the major nuclear powers have megaton yields, Pakistan lacks this and possess lower yield warheads.

To win a nuclear engagement (which is close to impossible because of the assured retaliation), annihilation of population centers is not required. And by "counter", I did not mean making secondary moves or weakness.

The counter-force strikes can very well be first strikes, aimed at decapitation of the enemy of its nuclear and conventional might. Targets could be air bases, missile bases, naval bases, hardened storage facilities and any other installations, which form an integral part of the enemy's nuclear strike/retaliation capability and conventional superiority.

The five major nuclear powers have had the luxury of excessive defence expenditure, and since one side had developed the megaton-range nuclear weapons, all the other parties focused on the same. As a result, annihilating the opponent's population became a major component of strategic deterrence (although the first strikes are still aimed at taking out the adversary's nuclear weapons and command and control centers).

Speaking in terms of nuclear weapons, Pakistan and India are still evolving. Just like both countries do not maintain any nuclear weapons on a ready-to-launch status (unlike the 5 major nuclear powers), it would not be advisable for them to develop megaton-range nuclear weapons, given that both countries are relatively small and have very dense population centers. Therefore, even ~50kt nukes would kill very high amount of people. Mere area of destruction is not the only parameter.

We don't even have confirmation whether Pakistan possesses even 20-30kt yield, highest Pakistan has tested was apparently 12kt. If you think 20-30kt is enough considering the size of potential targets then you're very badly mistaken.

We do have local estimates claiming the highest yield of 1998 explosions to be ~35kt.
As I mentioned, just the area of destruction is not the only parameter which determines the number of people killed. Both Pakistani and Indian urban centers are extremely dense.

We will eat grass...

By all means.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Pakistan needs to develop high yield thermonuclear warheads, in the 50-100 megaton range. Enough of the tactical nukes. Pakistan can either get serious about it's long term security or it will face serious trouble in future when dealing with rogue foreign powers.

dimagh kharab hai kya 3 mt if more than inoff
and how are you gonna deliver a 100mt bomb.............. sir

 

[IND151]

what is the maximum range of our cruise missile.

Range of babur is 700 to 900 KM

 

[IND151]

No dude, not by a long shot! The only thing that keeps India away is our proximity to them.



Cryogenic fueled engines is something that will take Pakistan multiple decades to understand, unless we get some help as India did. That is if we start looking for it right now!

with due respect friend, your post suggests you don't know the Glavkosmos saga.

 

[A1Kaid]

dimagh kharab hai kya 3 mt if more than inoff
and how are you gonna deliver a 100mt bomb.............. sir

You're afraid, Pakistan needs to have capability to destroy entire cities and surrounding areas with one strike. Three megatons will not fully destroy some large cities, though it may well cause 65% damage or more to a massive city. Pakistan should endeavor to acquire 50 megaton nuclear warheads, this nuclear power is necessary for future wars, kiloton scale is pathetic.

To win a nuclear engagement (which is close to impossible because of the assured retaliation), annihilation of population centers is not required. And by "counter", I did not mean making secondary moves or weakness.

The counter-force strikes can very well be first strikes, aimed at decapitation of the enemy of its nuclear and conventional might. Targets could be air bases, missile bases, naval bases, hardened storage facilities and any other installations, which form an integral part of the enemy's nuclear strike/retaliation capability and conventional superiority.

The five major nuclear powers have had the luxury of excessive defence expenditure, and since one side had developed the megaton-range nuclear weapons, all the other parties focused on the same. As a result, annihilating the opponent's population became a major component of strategic deterrence (although the first strikes are still aimed at taking out the adversary's nuclear weapons and command and control centers).

Speaking in terms of nuclear weapons, Pakistan and India are still evolving. Just like both countries do not maintain any nuclear weapons on a ready-to-launch status (unlike the 5 major nuclear powers), it would not be advisable for them to develop megaton-range nuclear weapons, given that both countries are relatively small and have very dense population centers. Therefore, even ~50kt nukes would kill very high amount of people. Mere area of destruction is not the only parameter.



We do have local estimates claiming the highest yield of 1998 explosions to be ~35kt.
As I mentioned, just the area of destruction is not the only parameter which determines the number of people killed. Both Pakistani and Indian urban centers are extremely dense.

By all means.

We do have local estimates claiming the highest yield of 1998 explosions to be ~35kt.
As I mentioned, just the area of destruction is not the only parameter which determines the number of people killed. Both Pakistani and Indian urban centers are extremely dense.

Seismic reports show Pakistan tested a nuclear warheads sub-12kt, locals reports I think may be exaggerated, no way did Pakistan test a ~35kt anywhere or anytime.

The five major nuclear powers have had the luxury of excessive defence expenditure, and since one side had developed the megaton-range nuclear weapons, all the other parties focused on the same. As a result, annihilating the opponent's population became a major component of strategic deterrence (although the first strikes are still aimed at taking out the adversary's nuclear weapons and command and control centers).

I am convinced for future wars we need nuclear warheads in the tens of megaton scale, 10-25 megaton will be a good start and work our way up to 50 megaton. I want Pakistan to possess this awesome power to be able to destroy entire cities with just a single bomb.

 

[alexx12lucyy]

tell us how many Babur Cruise Missile (in quantity) does Pak have?

hiiiii

tell us how many Babur Cruise Missile (in quantity) does Pak have?

 

[jupiter2007]

According to wikipedia Pakistan has HQ-10 and HQ-19 air defense system. Could someone please confirm it?

Pakistani missile research and development program - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

High altitude air defence system:

HQ-2B
Tariq HQ-10 named after Tariq ibn-Ziyad. An Umayyad Amazigh general, who swept Hispania with Muslim army.
Difah HQ-16
Tipu S-400 (SA-21) Chinese name HQ-19. Tipu Sultan. (1750–1799).also known as the Tiger of Mysore.
Muhafiz SA-15 – 15 in service
MIM-104 Patriot PAC 2

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Range of babur is 700 to 900 KM

it is now upto 1000 atleast.
check the latest test

 

[IND151]

^^ please give official source for claim

 

[Shadow_Hunter]

^^ please give official source for claim

You asked them to do the impossible.