Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

sugriva · Post by **sugriva** » 12 Oct 2009 14:13

Rahul M wrote:...

The IE article carries some more details
The missiles, testfired this morning, had different ranges. They have been designed to operate with both liquid and solid fuels, and were capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear payloads, they said.
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news ... ly/528034/

Added later : Some more information, from the article ....'added inertial' navigation systems....

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 12 Oct 2009 14:16

Prithvi-2 Proves Itself Again!
While details are still awaited from the Integrated Test Range (ITR) on India's South-Eastern coast, it is confirmed that the Prithvi-2 theatre ballistic missile was tested successfully today to near perfect accuracy again as part of trials with the user services. The 350-km range missile was tested last on May 23 this year with the Army and had achieved single digit accuracy. Congratulations to Prithvi director DS Reddy and his team, and wishing them much more success with the Prithvi programme.
This post will be updated as the details come in. Stay tuned.
Posted by Shiv Aroor at 12:22 PM

livefist.blogspot.com

rahulm · Post by **rahulm** » 12 Oct 2009 14:19

Reportedly the missile is some times used as a test bed for to be deployed technologies.

amit · Post by **amit** » 12 Oct 2009 14:49

sugriva wrote:
Rahul M wrote:...
The IE article carries some more details
The missiles, testfired this morning, had different ranges. They have been designed to operate with both liquid and solid fuels, and were capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear payloads, they said.
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news ... ly/528034/

Added later : Some more information, from the article ....'added inertial' navigation systems....

In relation to the discussions that have been going on in the Pokharan and Deterrence threads, I'd like to ask some gurus here whether it makes sense to put a nuclear bomb on top of a missile with Prithvi's stated range? Unless, of course the bomb is a tactical low yield kind of maal?

But then we seemed to have convinced ourselves that we don't have tactical stuff?

Is there something I'm missing? Would appreciate some gyaan. TIA.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 12 Oct 2009 14:54

sugriva wrote:
Rahul M wrote:...
The IE article carries some more details
They have been designed to operate with both liquid and solid fuels, and were capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear payloads, they said.

We will see many reports quoting the above.. which is basically likely to be repetetion of a single erroneous source..

When you read the "both liquid and solid fuels" part -- take it with a bag of salt... Esp for Prithvi as a SRBM.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 12 Oct 2009 16:17

Possible Missile intercept test- 5 minutes GAP between the 2 launches?

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 12 Oct 2009 16:59

Official PIB release

Two operationalised Prithvi (P-II) Missiles were successfully launched today within minutes of each other, by the Armed Forces as part of the operational exercises. The launches took place at 10.30 AM from the launch pad at Interim Test Range (ITR), Chandipur, Balasore, Orissa. The two missiles aimed at two different targets at 350 Kms from the launch point, met all the mission objectives.

Two Naval ships located at the targets, tracked and monitored both the missiles hitting the targets very accurately. All the Radars and other sensors along the East coast monitored the Missiles trajectory parameter.

Prithvi, the first missile developed under Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme programme, has the capability to carry 500 Kg of warhead, has a length of Nine metres with one metre diameter thrusted by Liquid propulsion twin engine (dont believe the DDM version of solid fuel version) It uses Advanced Inertial Guidance System with manoeuvring trajectory and reaches the targets with a few metre accuracy.

Both the missiles were from the stock of Armed Forces and the total launch activities were carried out by the Strategic Force Command.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Oct 2009 17:08

csharma wrote:Rahul M, can you explain what you mean by there's more to it. Thanks.

don't mean in this particular test but the numerous prithvi, lakshya and trishul tests have been used as smokescreens to test other things in the past, shaurya for example. this one does look like a regular user's trial.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Oct 2009 17:20

amit wrote: Is there something I'm missing? Would appreciate some gyaan. TIA.

The excuse I have heard is that it is Pakistan specific and bigger bomb = more fallout and more chances of it's blowing across the border.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Oct 2009 17:33

amit wrote:In relation to the discussions that have been going on in the Pokharan and Deterrence threads, I'd like to ask some gurus here whether it makes sense to put a nuclear bomb on top of a missile with Prithvi's stated range? Unless, of course the bomb is a tactical low yield kind of maal?

But then we seemed to have convinced ourselves that we don't have tactical stuff?

Is there something I'm missing? Would appreciate some gyaan. TIA.

it doesn't have to be tactical. prithvi has enough payload to carry normal bums and enough range so that the blast is far away from the missile crew.

that said, prithvi deployments to punjab during the various Indo-pak tensions in 90's were criticised as being 'escalatory'. we don't know what it carried but it should be remembered that prithvi were about the only deployed missiles in that period.

later it was concluded that prithvi, esp the 150 km army version is too short ranged to be of use strategically (needs to be based close to the border making it vulnerable to paki strikes) and therefore a decision was taken to develop the single stage agni-I of 700 km for strategic deployment against TSP.

it is likely that prithvi will be used in high value strikes like runway denial, against hardened shelters, C4I nodes and so forth.

Mayuresh · Post by **Mayuresh** » 12 Oct 2009 17:35

rakall wrote:Official PIB release

Prithvi, the first missile developed under Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme programme, has the capability to carry 500 Kg of warhead, has a length of Nine metres with one metre diameter thrusted by Liquid propulsion twin engine (dont believe the DDM version of solid fuel version) It uses Advanced Inertial Guidance System with manoeuvring trajectory and reaches the targets with a few metre accuracy.

Both the missiles were from the stock of Armed Forces and the total launch activities were carried out by the Strategic Force Command.

Is there any reason for us not developing Prithvi missiles with solid fuel, now that we have the technology to do it? Especially when the Prithvi may be used as a Battlefield Range Missile?

AFAIK, liquid fuel is cumbersome, needs to be pumped just before launch as you cannot store it inside the missile and is, generally, less preferred as compared to a solid variant.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Oct 2009 17:37

because they have already moved on to the better shaurya ?
that could be the reason for prithvi SF not being a priority.

Mayuresh · Post by **Mayuresh** » 12 Oct 2009 17:48

Rahul M wrote:because they have already moved on to the better shaurya ?
that could be the reason for prithvi SF not being a priority.

True, we may have moved on to a better missile (Shaurya), but is it a better battlefield tactical missile? Is it small enough to accompany a brigade / regiment?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 12 Oct 2009 18:11

Mayuresh wrote:
Rahul M wrote:because they have already moved on to the better shaurya ?
that could be the reason for prithvi SF not being a priority.
True, we may have moved on to a better missile (Shaurya), but is it a better battlefield tactical missile? Is it small enough to accompany a brigade / regiment?

Well because of the liquid engines, Prithivi's have CEPs which are lowest amongst peers AFAIK. Hence it will have an advantage in the conventional role as well, even if the liquid fuel is an issue.

One compromise could be to station the Prithivi's as a part of main Army Headquarters or groups around the Pakistani border.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 12 Oct 2009 18:16

Mayuresh wrote:
Rahul M wrote:because they have already moved on to the better shaurya ?
that could be the reason for prithvi SF not being a priority.
True, we may have moved on to a better missile (Shaurya), but is it a better battlefield tactical missile? Is it small enough to accompany a brigade / regiment?

Yes.. it is more compact, canisterized and more roadworthy & easily transportable compared to Prithvi..
Plus has a longer range..

Reg - why not develop a SF version of Prithvi.. It is really not as simple -- as remove the turbopumps, fuel containers etc and fill the volume with solid fuel.. For the SF-verision , the whole rocketmotor volume has to be combustion chamber with CG variation much different to that of LF-version.. and that is repeating the entire design process - you have to redesign the structure, re-write you control software etc etc.. The advantage of using the existing airframe translates to very little..

so they went ahead and gotten to a better SF-missile - i.e. Agni-1 first.. and later Shourya..

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 12 Oct 2009 18:40

Mayuresh wrote:AFAIK, liquid fuel is cumbersome, needs to be pumped just before launch as you cannot store it inside the missile and is, generally, less preferred as compared to a solid variant.

Wrong wrong wrong.
The Prithvi can be kept fueled for a period of upto 10 years without damage to the tanks.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 12 Oct 2009 18:46

Rahul M wrote:
amit wrote:In relation to the discussions that have been going on in the Pokharan and Deterrence threads, I'd like to ask some gurus here whether it makes sense to put a nuclear bomb on top of a missile with Prithvi's stated range? Unless, of course the bomb is a tactical low yield kind of maal?

But then we seemed to have convinced ourselves that we don't have tactical stuff?

Is there something I'm missing? Would appreciate some gyaan. TIA.
it doesn't have to be tactical. prithvi has enough payload to carry normal bums and enough range so that the blast is far away from the missile crew.

that said, prithvi deployments to punjab during the various Indo-pak tensions in 90's were criticised as being 'escalatory'. we don't know what it carried but it should be remembered that prithvi were about the only deployed missiles in that period.

later it was concluded that prithvi, esp the 150 km army version is too short ranged to be of use strategically (needs to be based close to the border making it vulnerable to paki strikes) and therefore a decision was taken to develop the single stage agni-I of 700 km for strategic deployment against TSP.

it is likely that prithvi will be used in high value strikes like runway denial, against hardened shelters, C4I nodes and so forth.

Thats what I was about to say.. it has been variously stated that nuke-role will move from Prithvi to Agni-1, and later on to Shourya..

So like Mayuresh asks -- Prithvi will take on battle-field tactical roles with its assorted warhead options.. (But ofcourse, we have Brahmos to do the same... except the warhead being lighter, it is probably more versatile, transportable, maintainence free etc.. )

But today's tests were specifically carried out by SFC - so there is a contradiction.. And it looks like Prithvi has not really been relieved of it's strategic duties YET.. may be still in transition.. Or will Prithvi continue to have a strategic role?

With the advent of Agni-1 & Shourya - I see a diminishing strategic role for Prithvi.. and with Brahmos etc - I see a diminishing tactical role too, without risking the lowering of nuke threshold.. (ofcourse, Prithvi can carry a heavier warhead compared to Brahmos.. thats about the only advantage prithvi has for similar range.. )

amit wrote:
But then we seemed to have convinced ourselves that we don't have tactical stuff?

.

Amit - can you elaborate? Did we convince ourselves that we dont have tactical stuff? The three sub-kiloton tests surely mean something !!!!

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Oct 2009 18:54

But today's tests were specifically carried out by SFC - so there is a contradiction.. And it looks like Prithvi has not really been relieved of it's strategic duties YET.. may be still in transition.. Or will Prithvi continue to have a strategic role?

counter force role may be without using nukes ? that would count as a strategic role.

although I can't see why the brahmos can't do the same as well.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 12 Oct 2009 18:56

rakall wrote:
With the advent of Agni-1 & Shourya - I see a diminishing strategic role for Prithvi.. and with Brahmos etc - I see a diminishing tactical role too, without risking the lowering of nuke threshold.. (ofcourse, Prithvi can carry a heavier warhead compared to Brahmos.. thats about the only advantage prithvi has for similar range.. )

How about (?)
1) Cost
2) Ranges higher than 300 KM (no MRTC)
3) Wider variety of munitions (say fragmentation bombs over airstrips)

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 12 Oct 2009 18:58

Rahul M wrote:
But today's tests were specifically carried out by SFC - so there is a contradiction.. And it looks like Prithvi has not really been relieved of it's strategic duties YET.. may be still in transition.. Or will Prithvi continue to have a strategic role?
counter force role may be without using nukes ? that would count as a strategic role.

although I can't see why the brahmos can't do the same as well.

That counts as a possibility, too..

The only other reason, I can think, is that they are keeping the Prithvi's until the Agni-1's (and later Shourya's) are inducted in large numbers.. the more the merrier.. until it becomes messier..

So until enough Agni-1's and Shourya's are in, the existing Prthvi's will probably maintain status-quo.

negi · Post by **negi** » 12 Oct 2009 19:02

Afaik only S-2 was the actual weapon/warhead equivalent test conducted under POK-II rest all were devices so the ambiguity about existence of tactical nukes is understandable. Also imo apart from the yield what sets apart tactical nukes is the constraint on the physical size of the nuke itself which is governed by the payload supported by the available delivery modes i.e. artillery shells,MBRLs or even TBMs.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Oct 2009 19:03

Sanku wrote:
rakall wrote:
With the advent of Agni-1 & Shourya - I see a diminishing strategic role for Prithvi.. and with Brahmos etc - I see a diminishing tactical role too, without risking the lowering of nuke threshold.. (ofcourse, Prithvi can carry a heavier warhead compared to Brahmos.. thats about the only advantage prithvi has for similar range.. )

How about (?)
1) Cost
2) Ranges higher than 300 KM (no MRTC)
3) Wider variety of munitions (say fragmentation bombs over airstrips)

which missiles are you comparing ? brahmos vs prithvi ?

if it's prithvi, it has a runway denial role too and a sub-munition warhead for that.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 12 Oct 2009 19:10

Sanku wrote:
rakall wrote:
With the advent of Agni-1 & Shourya - I see a diminishing strategic role for Prithvi.. and with Brahmos etc - I see a diminishing tactical role too, without risking the lowering of nuke threshold.. (ofcourse, Prithvi can carry a heavier warhead compared to Brahmos.. thats about the only advantage prithvi has for similar range.. )

How about (?)
1) Cost
2) Ranges higher than 300 KM (no MRTC)
3) Wider variety of munitions (say fragmentation bombs over airstrips)

1. Costs are not far off.. Prithvi was quoted to cost about 4-7crores.. Brahmos about 5-10crores.. I think the 10crore is for the most advanced version... if someone has more accurate figures - please pitch in.

But the amount of logisitics involved with Prithvi is far too much compared to the flexibility with Brahmos TEL operation.. training personnel in fuel loading, unloading etc is a huge drawback for Prithvi operations..

2. What MTCR?

Prithvi can do official 350km.. and for obvious reasons it has to be launched away from border.. whereas Brahmos can virtually go very close and fire-off.. that more than compensates for the 60km shortfall..

3. Brahmos can have warhead based on target.. Obviously i have already stated that the warhead weight is the advantage that Prithvi has compared to brahmos..

it boils down to the incremental advatages that prithvi has in terms of cost and/or warhead against the cumbersome logistics & operation, transportation, maintainence etc..

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 12 Oct 2009 19:16

rakall wrote: But today's tests were specifically carried out by SFC - so there is a contradiction.. And it looks like Prithvi has not really been relieved of it's strategic duties YET.. may be still in transition.. Or will Prithvi continue to have a strategic role?

Or in worst case, does it make Times of India report credible. TOI has been reporting since long that only BM which is fully and operationally inducted is Prithvi...

-Nitin

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 12 Oct 2009 19:34

Gagan wrote:
Mayuresh wrote:AFAIK, liquid fuel is cumbersome, needs to be pumped just before launch as you cannot store it inside the missile and is, generally, less preferred as compared to a solid variant.
Wrong wrong wrong.
The Prithvi can be kept fueled for a period of upto 10 years without damage to the tanks.

Although this is correct, the pre-fueled one can only be used in silo mode and not in transportable mode due to issues with liquid fuels like sloshing during transportation etc.

bhavani · Post by **bhavani** » 12 Oct 2009 21:01

I think there should not be any talk of one missile replacing other. We need lots of strike power, if we ever end up fighting the lizard. We have not even deployed sufficient number of P-II' s. We should add numbers to our arsenal.

All this talk of Brahmos replacing P-II is useless i think. We have not deployed in enough numbers anything as yet. Is the lizard replacing m-11's with those ding-dong cruise missiles. No. I think we need both the BM's as well as the CM's in lot more numbers.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 12 Oct 2009 21:41

rakall wrote: 2. What MTCR?

it boils down to the incremental advatages that prithvi has in terms of cost and/or warhead against the cumbersome logistics & operation, transportation, maintainence etc..

Missile tech control regime.

Yup, plus given that we already have some Prithvi's they are likely to continue till such time they have any life left.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 Oct 2009 22:32

While the Prithvi is not subject to the MTCR, the Brahmos in its current form is.

P1 - 150 Kms, PII - 250 Kms, PIII - upto 600 Kms. Prithvi can also glide to some extent.

So, although Brahmos can be used to replace Prithvi in some aspects, it can do so only below the 300 Km range.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 12 Oct 2009 22:37

Will A5 cover whole Australia from Andaman Nicobar islands?

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 13 Oct 2009 00:39

A casual look at the wikimapia and measure tool tells me that, a 9200 Km range will enable a missile to deliver love and affection from appropriate location within India to the farthest reaches of Eurasia, africa and australia. New Zealand, which so ingeniously initially dragged its feet on support to India at the NSG will need a 10,200 Km range when the A&N islands are used as the kick off point.

WRT the Agni-5, the payload will be said to be ~1500 - 2500Kgs for a 5500 or a 6000 Km range. If we assume the range of A-3 as per the charts prepared by 'the one who can't be named' for a 500kg payload, the A-3 can do most of this.
The A-5 should be able to easily do 10,000Km actually, this at the same time as having physical and electronic decoys, ability to survive EMP, use laser ring gyros, sat navigation and star sensors for accurate targetting, in addition to having a maneuvering RV, and finally a CEP that'll make any jingo ecstatic.
This should be a phenomenal system by any accounts and will rank amongst the top 4 missile systems in the world today, entirely in the league of the Trident D5, Minuteman-3, Topol, DF-31As (Although I would consider the A-5 to be more advanced than the chinese missile and the Minuteman-3)
JMT.

jai · Post by **jai** » 13 Oct 2009 01:28

Kudos !
The only thing now needed is wide scale deployment of A5 and eveything else we do not know about yet ! In this game, numbers fielded would be important in IMHO

What is stopping us from increasing Brahmos/other IGM's production multifold and its induction across all services in big numbers ?

Gurus - please do enlighten !

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 13 Oct 2009 01:28

As per multiple reports few months back, Prithvi production has been discontinued. The report talked about, quoting PSU sources, that only missile that were in assembly lines to be finished. No more new production.

If true than Prithvi is in the last leg of its illustrious life!

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 13 Oct 2009 09:42

Katare wrote:As per multiple reports few months back, Prithvi production has been discontinued. The report talked about, quoting PSU sources, that only missile that were in assembly lines to be finished. No more new production.

If true than Prithvi is in the last leg of its illustrious life!

Thats what I was getting to..
Can you please post links to any of those reports (if you have)

More details in this Hindu report

HYDERABAD: Two nuclear-capable, medium range surface-to-surface Prithvi-II missiles were successfully test-fired within a few minutes of each other by the armed forces from the Integrated Test Range (ITR), Chandipur, off the Orissa coast on Monday.

According to Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) sources, both missiles had a range of 350 km and were launched as part of the operational exercises by the Strategic Forces Command. The missiles were fired from two mobile launchers at the ITR around 10.30 a.m.

The successful test-firing established the Army’s capability to attack multiple targets simultaneously. Both missiles met the full mission objectives, the sources said.

The missiles were flight-tested against two targets, located 350 km away from the launch pads.

The advanced inertial guidance system of the projectiles enabled them to hit the targets within a few metres of Circular Error Probability (CEP).

Two naval ships anchored at target points tracked and monitored the missiles hitting the targets accurately, while the radars and electro-optical systems located along the east coast observed the flight path along the trajectory.

‘Major milestone’

“It is a major milestone for the ITR as it showed the capability for simultaneous tracking of two missile systems while they are flying,” the sources said. Both were in flight around the same time for a few minutes.

Prithvi-II is equipped with features of manoeuvrability to deceive the enemy defence systems. The missiles were picked from the stock of the Strategic Forces Command.

Nine-metre tall Prithvi-II is a single stage liquid fuelled missile and has a diameter of one metre. It is capable of carrying a 500-kg warhead

jai · Post by **jai** » 13 Oct 2009 10:25

Dear gurus any updates or information on Nirbhay and Shaurya ?

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 13 Oct 2009 11:21

nithish wrote:Road mobility gives Agni-5 global reach: Ajai Shukla
xtracts

The Advanced Systems Laboratory (ASL) in Hyderabad, which develops India’s strategic (long-range, nuclear-tipped) missiles, has dramatically increased the options for its forthcoming Agni-5 missile by making it highly road-mobile, or easily transportable by road.

The Agni-5 will be the first canisterised, road-mobile missile in India’s arsenal, similar to the Dongfeng-31A that created ripples during China’s National Day Military Parade in Beijing on October 1.
In many other respects, the Agni-5, which is scheduled to make its first flight in early-2011, carries forward the Agni-3 pedigree. With composites used extensively to reduce weight, and a third stage added on (the Agni-3 was a two-stage missile), the Agni-5 can fly 1,500 km further than the 3,500-km Agni-3.

“The Agni-5 is specially tailored for road-mobility,” explains Avinash Chander, Director, ASL. “With the canister having been successfully developed, all India’s future land-based strategic missiles will be canisterised as well”.

Canister technology was first developed in India for the Brahmos cruise missile. But it was the K-15 underwater-launched missile, developed here in Hyderabad for India’s nuclear-powered submarine, INS Arihant, which fully overcame the technological hurdles in canisterising ballistic missiles.

Another major technological breakthrough that will beef up the Agni-5 is ASL’s success in developing and testing MIRVs (multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles). An MIRV, atop an Agni-5 missile, comprises three to 10 separate nuclear warheads. Each warhead can be assigned to a separate target, separated by hundreds of kilometres; alternatively, two or more warheads can be assigned to one target.

A couple of observation on the article

1. Based on the fact that A-5 will be the first true Indian ICBM that will be canisterised -- it is likely that it will be the first SLBM with ICBM range...

We dont know how close/different A5 will be to A3 - whether it will be plainly adding a 3rd stage to A3 (most likely) or significantly different from A3 suit requirements of canisterisation..

So..I guess, the first line of Arihant with 12tubes will use an interim-SLBM capability with Shaurya/Sagarika missiles with 700+km range.. and the ulitmate evolution of Arihant will use the canisterised A5 as the SLBM..

2. Reading the comments section of AjaiShukla's blog for this post -- it is refreshing to see him going after a few unruly posters who commented against DRDO.. Much like some members on BRF went after him when he posted scathing comments on DRDO here..

rajeshks · Post by **rajeshks** » 13 Oct 2009 11:48

Rahul M wrote:
it is likely that prithvi will be used in high value strikes like runway denial, against hardened shelters, C4I nodes and so forth.

Rahulji, does Prithivi has that kind of accuracy ie: couple of meters accuracy? If it has then it can complement brahmos very well.

I read in BRF that in our eastern sector it will be a war btwn IAF and Chinese SRBMs. And we used to accuse Chinese SRBMs for their accuracy problems sothat they cant use it for runway denial against IAF bases in Assam. How do you rate Prithvi against chinese SRBMs?

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 13 Oct 2009 12:23

I don't think Prithvi in any manner can complement Brahmos. My reasons are not technical but political. While Brahmos will always be taken as conventional, nuke threshold will be very very low in case of Prithvi. The moment Prithvi launch is detected by the enemy it will be taken to have nuke warehead which will result in nuke catastrophe.

Prithvi can complement Brahmos only when used against nation that don't have nukes. Also with the kind of range it has this nation are our neighbours like Srilanka, Bhutan,Nepal, Bangladesh and others. I sincerely hope and believe we never have to fight a war with them.

-Nitin

rajeshks · Post by **rajeshks** » 13 Oct 2009 12:28

nrshah wrote:I don't think Prithvi in any manner can complement Brahmos. My reasons are not technical but political. While Brahmos will always be taken as conventional, nuke threshold will be very very low in case of Prithvi. The moment Prithvi launch is detected by the enemy it will be taken to have nuke warehead which will result in nuke catastrophe.

Prithvi can complement Brahmos only when used against nation that don't have nukes. Also with the kind of range it has this nation are our neighbours like Srilanka, Bhutan,Nepal, Bangladesh and others. I sincerely hope and believe we never have to fight a war with them.

-Nitin

Bangladesh... hmmm... Cant say ...

my qn was wrt china in using SRBMs for runway denial roles.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 13 Oct 2009 12:33

nrshah wrote:I don't think Prithvi in any manner can complement Brahmos. My reasons are not technical but political. While Brahmos will always be taken as conventional, nuke threshold will be very very low in case of Prithvi.

I am not sure why that would be the case, for one Brahmos can also carry nukes if needed, secondly we have a declared NFU and thirdly, Scuds etc have been used by powers possessing or said to possess NBC weapons.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 13 Oct 2009 12:51

Sanku wrote: I am not sure why that would be the case, for one Brahmos can also carry nukes if needed, secondly we have a declared NFU and thirdly, Scuds etc have been used by powers possessing or said to possess NBC weapons.

Of course Brahmos can carry nuke but then there is unsaid / undocumented perceived agreement with respect to nature of use BM and CM will be put to. Although, I know it is all conception / belief, the same is evident from when some body tests a CM there is no reaction but the moment a BM is test fired you will hear reactions from every corner of the world.

You will agree with me that reaction when we test fire Nirbhay with over 1000 Kms range will be nothing compared to what we will face when we test fire A-5 or K-XX

For that matter, even fighters can be used to deliver the nuke. But than in case of any intrusion it is not immediately taken as nuke delivery platform.

This is called threshold which is very low in case of BM compared to CM

rajeshks wrote: my qn was wrt china in using SRBMs for runway denial roles.

I won't risk a nuke war by launching Prithvi in runway denial role. The range this missile has, there are many other options available including CM / Fighter bombers etc which can as effectively do the mission without lowering threshold.. But as i mentioned earlier this is only political, though technically Prithvi can be used in runway denial missions...

-Nitin