Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 31 Jul 2011 12:25

If a column of tanks - maybe 50 of them, with supporting vehicles - attacked across a broad 10 km wide front what would a Nasr do? Subkiloton tactical nuclear devices of 1 kt or even 0.2 or 0.5 kn will hardly produce a destruction radius of 500 meters. Tanks and armored vehicles will move through relatively unscathed. That is IF the Pakis actually have a miniaturized device - which I personally doubt. Miniature nukes are relatively heavy on fissile material and you may waste a Delhi destroying amount of material on a few duds that don;t work or don't stop the takns as advertised.

If they launch a hatf with a nuke (which they first have to miniaturize to <30 cm diameter - no mean task in itself) they are asking for massive nuclear retaliation. They are saying in effect "We will launch one or two piddly nukes, and we invite you to batter the shit out of us in exchange"

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 31 Jul 2011 13:07

^^ What is the probability of Nasr batter getting within 60 km of a tank column protected by a Prahaar battery using Cartosat/Heron/Searcher/Nishant/LOH imagery @ 150 km range? Minimal.

Even if it launches a salvo, WLR can direct counter battery fire.

IAF, IN & IA are undertaking extensive networking, so any detection will resulted in the networked air/sea/land asset responding, and not just the unit being attacked. AWACS can receive WLR data via the network and can retask any airbourne fighters via datalink to attack.

Subkiloton is BS. The Chinese wont donate given the chances of rogue nukes affecting Chinese fringe elements sharing the same religion based ideology. And we've sufficient NBC countermeasures for dealing with dirty nukes.

And any Pakistani nuke use would invite massive retaliation. The second strike would be the only and ultimate strike.

vishnu.nv · Post by **vishnu.nv** » 31 Jul 2011 13:30

The Paki army psychology is to inflict major damage to IA, for which they have to take a few nukes on the TSP is acceptable for them. Their existence is based on the hatred against Indians. So i guess they won't hesitate to launch a attack against our tank columns.

Now if they have miniaturized Nukes is something i also doubt. But lets assume that they have what we can do to protect our strike corps.
1) Train our forces more to fight in a NBC Environment.
2) procure Iron DOM/ David Sling kind of protection systems which can move along strike corps.
3) Advance attacks using Prahar/Prithvi/Bhramos on missile batteries.

Tsarkar u beat me in posing this..

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 31 Jul 2011 13:36

brvarsh wrote:They have reserved all their failures for the war time

God Willing !!

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 31 Jul 2011 14:01

Singha wrote:americans seem to have made the jump directly from this primitive looking honest john system to the modular MLRS system without a intermediate product like the Katyusha rocket? soviets had katyushas working in WW2 already...my commando comic memories do not show a equivalent american or british rocket system. mostly the americans were shown using 8" howitzers and the british either the 25 pounder or dragging pack howitzers through the burmese jungle.

http://www.olive-drab.com/images/id_m39 ... 03_700.jpg

US Army had the Lance surface to surface missile which could also carry nukes. This would be somewhere between Honest John and MLRS. Lance (non nuke i suppose) was also used by many other countries. Lance was the successor of the Sergeant missile.

France also had their Pluton surface to surface missile which could also carry nukes.

K

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 31 Jul 2011 16:26

the pakis like everyone else will likely find it cheaper to attack moving columns with tube artillery, direct LOS fire from ground forces and air attack.

the Nasr is likely intended to attack any static concentration of vehicles, or command HQ camps or logistical storage sites they are able to pinpoint. at points where canals and rivers have been crossed with pontoon bridges there will be a thick concentration of forces on indian side and on other side before they spread out again...such beachead areas can also be targeted with nasr/ws1 type 'area' weapons.

vasu_ray · Post by **vasu_ray** » 31 Jul 2011 20:37

if they add rubber tracks to the rear quad and front quad of the tatra trucks, can they use it for terrains where the T-72 chassis hosting Akash missiles is supposed to go? the trucks seem air transportable vs t-72 in addition to holding six canisters ala Prahaar

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 31 Jul 2011 20:53

vishnu.nv wrote: 1) Train our forces more to fight in a NBC Environment.

Our armored columns are routinely equipped to fight in a NBC environment.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 31 Jul 2011 21:03

why this sudden fascination with irondome and similar systems ? it is need by israel because of its unique geography, where much of its civilian population lives within range of rocket systems. a moving army does not require these type of systems.

manum · Post by **manum** » 31 Jul 2011 21:05

The Paki army psychology is to inflict major damage to IA, for which they have to take a few nukes on the TSP is acceptable for them. Their existence is based on the hatred against Indians. So i guess they won't hesitate to launch a attack against our tank columns.

I might be bashed for saying this...but I'll say it anyways...

Pakistani's don't live like a nation...they live like a race on a piece of land...while Indians live like a nation, everything about us is to do with India the nation, if its not there, we don't exist, its a basic psychological difference...

Pakistani's don't care what happens to the land they live...all they have to do is extend its false cause, whatever it may cause and anyways Jannat is always there to receive them. This is why we'll have to be tactical with them, they cant be trusted at all...

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 31 Jul 2011 21:28

shiv wrote:If a column of tanks - maybe 50 of them, with supporting vehicles - attacked across a broad 10 km wide front what would a Nasr do? Subkiloton tactical nuclear devices of 1 kt or even 0.2 or 0.5 kn will hardly produce a destruction radius of 500 meters. Tanks and armored vehicles will move through relatively unscathed. That is IF the Pakis actually have a miniaturized device - which I personally doubt. Miniature nukes are relatively heavy on fissile material and you may waste a Delhi destroying amount of material on a few duds that don;t work or don't stop the takns as advertised.

If they launch a hatf with a nuke (which they first have to miniaturize to <30 cm diameter - no mean task in itself) they are asking for massive nuclear retaliation. They are saying in effect "We will launch one or two piddly nukes, and we invite you to batter the shit out of us in exchange"

The greatest fear of Pakistan is their irrationality regarding the lives of their own people. There are hundreds / thousands / million people out there eagerly waiting for their 72 nubiles, up there. They have no qualms about sacrificing their X nos of people if they can kill say even 0.1 X of kafirs / infidels / Indians.

This situation did not exist in the Cold War. Though US and USSR were prepared send each other to the stone ages, none of them were not prepared to take casualties. This was the basic concept of MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction.

Unfortunately this is not so in India Pak politcs. Pakistan is prepared to sacrifice its citizens. Anyway the Pak citizens do not have any say in their lives!!! This makes Pakistan much more dangerous than even China. China wants to be THE power. If they have a nuclear exchange with say India, even if they inflict a greater damage it will put back their grandiose plans by 50 years or for ever. China will make Pakistan do thier dirty work. And Pakistan (at least some of the elements) hates India so much that they would not hesitate to do China's dirty work even at the expense of their citizens lives

K

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 31 Jul 2011 21:41

There seems to be another scam.
Just watch this. Don't know whether this report is a mere propaganda or is true.
India in talks to buy Iron Dome, David's Sling
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 ... 20,00.html
Indian Defense Ministry source says negotiations being held with Israeli government for over six months
Procurement of David's Sling or the Iron Dome would be a "pleasure". "Defense News" reports that India is in talks to buy Israel's ground-based rocket and missile interceptor systems Iron Dome and David's Sling.

David's Sling, designed to intercept medium-range missiles (70-240 kilometers range), is being developed by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd. and Raytheon Company.

Indian Ministry of Defense sources told "Defense News" negotiations between the Israeli and Indian governments on a deal for David's Sling had been going on for more than six months.
The sources added that Israel was open to sales of David's Sling, but that it would not transfer the system's technology as part of a deal.

An Indian Ministry of Defense official said that neither its aging Russian-built air defense systems nor the PAD system can serve as the country' sole line of defense against potential missile threats from Pakistan or China.

He said that the procurement of David's Sling or the Iron Dome would be a "pleasure".

Who is this official. And why is PAD compared as an equivalent to DS or ID. What about something called the AAD?
Just look out, there seems to be another scam brewing.
One news that I found very interesting about DS is this
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/ap ... ile-system
Anti-missile system hailed as a 'technical revolution' has recently shot down nine rockets but failed to stop 11 others (success rate less than 45 percent), says army
Critics point out that each Iron Dome missile costs about £25,000, while the rockets they eliminate are worth less than a few hundred, which could allow militants to wage economic warfare against Israel. Others suggest it would be easy to fool missile-defence systems with decoys.
So if we are acquiring the ID, than is it better to have AAD's which may cost far less that these system (ID) that still fails.
This procurement being pushed need to be closely watched. This may be pushed as a counter to AAD.
What's the name for Israeli lobby? Natasha being Russian.
Also nowadays the Israeli lobby is doing more harm to India by supplying substandard military stuff like the UAV's and also more interested in the money rather than ideology etc. So it's time we think more of India's benefits rather than the ones who would be pleased by such deals.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 31 Jul 2011 22:31

ever since the "shadow in the clouds" report came out, it was clear that India was interested in iron dome.

Iron dome and david's sling urf magic wand are needed for making sure that our forward air bases facing the chinese are not taken out by long range MLRS and SRBMs. The IAF is the biggest deterrent against Chicom and if bases such as Hashimara remain operational during a falreup then chicom has no chance along the LAC.

saje · Post by **saje** » 01 Aug 2011 16:07

Why this sudden obsession with the Rabbi's dome & sling? How hard is it for the DRDO chaps to do a desi jugaad with an AK-630 system mounted on a tatra truck & trailer setup? I'm shocked to see that they haven't even given it a try yet!

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 01 Aug 2011 16:14

[Self Deleted]

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 01 Aug 2011 16:16

the iron dome looks irrelevant to indic needs as our airbases are further back. the davids sling overlaps with our PAD/AAD and looks too half-cooked and american funded to be of much use.

in matters like this better to buy any bits and pieces of technology but do exactly what we are doing - control the radars and missiles ourself.

even the oerlikon skyshield type system can detect and target incoming missiles of the MLRS kind and air launched missiles/PGM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... eld_AA.jpg

so whatever leaks through the pad/aad can be targeted by such guns and spyder missiles.

koti · Post by **koti** » 01 Aug 2011 16:22

saje wrote:Why this sudden obsession with the Rabbi's dome & sling? How hard is it for the DRDO chaps to do a desi jugaad with an AK-630 system mounted on a tatra truck & trailer setup? I'm shocked to see that they haven't even given it a try yet!

It is very dangerous for a system like AK 630 to be installed in populated areas. (Debatable)
The 30 mm shells can create havoc when they land on ground.
However this can be a good idea for the forward positions though.

What’s of significance here is that it would have been easier for the IAI to design a customized Phalanx solution. However, they took to a missile based solution.
I missiles can also have a good chance against faster and smarter projectiles.
Also, a gun based system will be easily overwhelmed by multiple projectiles.

They might have had the thought that they can identify the sources with their WLR and destroy it quickly enough to justify the costs or something.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 03 Aug 2011 12:55

Iron Dome and David's Sling are designed for Israel. If needed as intermediate, existing Akash system can double-up as primitive C-RAM system. Akash system can be further modified with improved AESA radar and other inexpensive missiles like Trishul and slaved AK-630 as dedicated C-RAM system.

AAD at the engagement altitude of 15 km can tackle all these long range rocket systems like Smerch BM-30. IAF Barak-LR missile in development also have anti-missile/rocket capability. Infact all SAM in development and in future will have anti-missile capabilities.

John · Post by **John** » 03 Aug 2011 17:34

Kanson wrote:Iron Dome and David's Sling are designed for Israel. If needed as intermediate, existing Akash system can double-up as primitive C-RAM system. Akash system can be further modified with improved AESA radar and other inexpensive missiles like Trishul and slaved AK-630 as dedicated C-RAM system.

Better off using Spyder or even Astra for that purpose (can engage large number of targets) as opposed command guided missile such as trishul/barak.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 03 Aug 2011 21:59

Of course we can have them too. Up against cheaper rockets like Qassam or anything thrown at, we must have to check whether Spyder and Astra will be cost effective counter weapon.

Being modular, the system is able to accommodate different type of missiles and from the expertise we gained in developing PAD/AAD systems, the system will be intelligent to choose missiles as per the threat. But to start with, to be cheaper, we can have AESA radar combined with cheaper but accurate missile like Trishul. Being AESA, it can tackle many more targets simultaneously than PESA.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 03 Aug 2011 23:19

Is there a wide target area target acquisition system, that uses live terrain mapping and radar imaging, and identification of individual targets with in the area, by a combination or image reading (image to signature), signature classification by shape, symbols, radiation sensor, and other electro-optics, etc.. all fused live on a mission, so that say 50 nags can be launched simultaneously attack each of the 50 identified targets, under one mission control?

John · Post by **John** » 04 Aug 2011 01:19

Kanson wrote:Of course we can have them too. Up against cheaper rockets like Qassam or anything thrown at, we must have to check whether Spyder and Astra will be cost effective counter weapon.

Being modular, the system is able to accommodate different type of missiles and from the expertise we gained in developing PAD/AAD systems, the system will be intelligent to choose missiles as per the threat. But to start with, to be cheaper, we can have AESA radar combined with cheaper but accurate missile like Trishul. Being AESA, it can tackle many more targets simultaneously than PESA.

Hmm correct me if i wrong but integrating trishul with something other than TMX tracker (current FCR) to provide command guidance won't be easy a task. Also Trishul itself is not vertically launched missile.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 05 Aug 2011 10:20

John wrote:
Kanson wrote:Of course we can have them too. Up against cheaper rockets like Qassam or anything thrown at, we must have to check whether Spyder and Astra will be cost effective counter weapon.

Being modular, the system is able to accommodate different type of missiles and from the expertise we gained in developing PAD/AAD systems, the system will be intelligent to choose missiles as per the threat. But to start with, to be cheaper, we can have AESA radar combined with cheaper but accurate missile like Trishul. Being AESA, it can tackle many more targets simultaneously than PESA.
Hmm correct me if i wrong but integrating trishul with something other than TMX tracker (current FCR) to provide command guidance won't be easy a task. Also Trishul itself is not vertically launched missile.

Sir, Trishul cannot be used as drop-fit into new system. It needs modification. I think it is easier to modify than to develop new missile of such caliber. Does the threat scenario warrants a VLS? Is Iron Dome, in discussion, a VLS?

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 05 Aug 2011 10:46

In these pages i have read that Indian missiles have a low CEP. This means that collateral damage from our missiles is going to be limited (?)
But if the enemy uses missiles with higher CEP, then there is higher risk to civilian life in india.
I wonder if having a higher CEP is better from a psychological fear creation in the enemy?

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 05 Aug 2011 11:04

AdityaM ... u should be expelled from BR for this comment of urs..that a high CEP is better !!

Nick_S · Post by **Nick_S** » 05 Aug 2011 11:06

AdityaM wrote:In these pages i have read that Indian missiles have a low CEP. This means that collateral damage from our missiles is going to be limited (?)
But if the enemy uses missiles with higher CEP, then there is higher risk to civilian life in india.
I wonder if having a higher CEP is better from a psychological fear creation in the enemy?

"psychological fear" may only occur if there were huge numbers of missiles under production. That is not the case wrt Pak.

Also, the main point is to destroy the actual target, but having a poor CEP, Paki missiles will miss their intended high value target.

jai · Post by **jai** » 05 Aug 2011 12:19

Those in the know in the land of the pure already fear what we have and what we can do. They also know that the game is going away from them very rapidly now thanks to the lizard motivating our force modernization - and that in a few years from now they will loose all chance whatsoever of any hope of standing against us - you can actually feel the "dhoti Shiver" on the other sides of the border by the kinds of false bravado reflected in the cheap gimmicks - PNS Ba(r)bar being a case in point.

IMVHO, the way things are going, the grass eating days are not too far away for them, forget psychological fear !! In fact, we may end up with a refugee problem for all we know akin to the east in 71.

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 05 Aug 2011 12:31

manjgu wrote:AdityaM ... u should be expelled from BR for this comment of urs..that a high CEP is better !!

I am not saying that High CEP is better.
I am talking from collateral damage point of view.

A paki missile with a higher probability of missing its mark also has a higher probability of damaging civilian life... something that Pakis will relish anyways!

Dont be in a hurry to expell me.. I havent abused a Mod as yet

anyusharma · Post by **anyusharma** » 05 Aug 2011 13:27

Aditya sir, while a high CEP inherently has a higher probability of damaging civilian life; you are right in suggesting that loss of Indian civilian life will be relished by Pakis. However, hurting enemy civilians just for the hell of hurting them speaks against some morals. We Indians should hold ourselves to higher standards.
In case of outbreak of hostilities our objective should be neutralizing enemy armed forces. Strategically Collateral damage wouldn't help us win the war any faster or more efficiently and we would be stooping down to the level of Pakis.

koti · Post by **koti** » 05 Aug 2011 13:51

Kanson wrote: Sir, Trishul cannot be used as drop-fit into new system. It needs modification. I think it is easier to modify than to develop new missile of such caliber. Does the threat scenario warrants a VLS? Is Iron Dome, in discussion, a VLS?

It is not. However, it is pertty steep.

Yogi_G · Post by **Yogi_G** » 05 Aug 2011 15:51

AdityaM wrote:
manjgu wrote:AdityaM ... u should be expelled from BR for this comment of urs..that a high CEP is better !!
I am not saying that High CEP is better.
I am talking from collateral damage point of view.

A paki missile with a higher probability of missing its mark also has a higher probability of damaging civilian life... something that Pakis will relish anyways!

Dont be in a hurry to expell me.. I havent abused a Mod as yet

My 2 cents. The knowledge that Indian missiles have lower CEP is very very beneficial to us. The Pakis need to know that within few hours of outbreak of war the Indian AF and Army will take out all high value targets within Pakistan with high precision. With command centres, fuel depots, telecommunication networks and power grids all lost quickly in succession to low CEP missiles raining in, the war is essentially lost to Pakis who do not have strategic depth in terms of cities and population centres with all these fully functioning to fall back upon.

Aditya ji, you would definitely know that the Paki RAPE class is hardly bothered about the mango Abdul. If collateral damage brings in high death rates of mango Abduls how does it matter to them. In the end its all numbers to them. They still have their command centres and other infrastructure intact so the war will only prolong. Same thought lines for the Chinese who do not mind slaughter of "waves". Unlike Indian generals who care about the aam jantaa the Pakis and the Chinese generals only care about their own well being and toeing to the state's ideology.

A low CEP missile which can take out all infrastructure and spare the aam Abduls is what gives the Paki generals sleepless nights. Let them live with that. But I like your idea, we could do a Al-Taqiya on them and say our SDRE missiles are so-high CEP onlee and have them on our borders after which they can be conveniently dispatched to Djinn territory with its oh-so-bliss 72.

The only collateral damage the Paki generals will be worried about is when the high CEP missile lands in Abbotabad and all the related terrorists and 4 sets of wives are slaughtered.

John · Post by **John** » 05 Aug 2011 22:32

Kanson wrote:
Sir, Trishul cannot be used as drop-fit into new system. It needs modification. I think it is easier to modify than to develop new missile of such caliber. Does the threat scenario warrants a VLS? Is Iron Dome, in discussion, a VLS?

Yes Iron Dome uses vertically launched missiles, as for whether you need VLS it depends on the size of missile (a small missile like RAM won't need VLS). The size of missile will limit the speed at which the launcher can rotate and fire at its targets (reducing response time).

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 06 Aug 2011 01:23

anyusharma wrote:Aditya sir, while a high CEP inherently has a higher probability of damaging civilian life; you are right in suggesting that loss of Indian civilian life will be relished by Pakis. However, hurting enemy civilians just for the hell of hurting them speaks against some morals. We Indians should hold ourselves to higher standards.
In case of outbreak of hostilities our objective should be neutralizing enemy armed forces. Strategically Collateral damage wouldn't help us win the war any faster or more efficiently and we would be stooping down to the level of Pakis.

This I see continuously in fellow bharatvasis the higher moral standards expected from country as a whole even against genociding blood-thirsty porkis, while in personal life we come to blows over small matters of somebody parking vehicle in our parking space, no big heart there for fellow citizens.

Humphrey Hawksley in his novel "Third World War" captures this when porkis have nuked 20 Indian cities and Indian PM is sitting in bunker under Raisina Hill talking to british PM saying "I can't do it to them what they have done to us for the fear of killing innocent people in pakistan" thus not retaliating yet.

We have to be prepared to attack the densest population centeres otherwise these people left over would come to loot and destroy indic civilization. Tit for Tat, that's the only answer, no higher shyer standards. It's not just the question of country but survival of Indic civilization.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 06 Aug 2011 07:14

koti wrote:
Kanson wrote: Sir, Trishul cannot be used as drop-fit into new system. It needs modification. I think it is easier to modify than to develop new missile of such caliber. Does the threat scenario warrants a VLS? Is Iron Dome, in discussion, a VLS?
It is not. However, it is pertty steep.

Expected trajectories of Rockets/shells are steep too and/or the system could have been tested in close proximity condition.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 06 Aug 2011 07:25

John wrote:
Kanson wrote:
Sir, Trishul cannot be used as drop-fit into new system. It needs modification. I think it is easier to modify than to develop new missile of such caliber. Does the threat scenario warrants a VLS? Is Iron Dome, in discussion, a VLS?
Yes Iron Dome uses vertically launched missiles, as for whether you need VLS it depends on the size of missile (a small missile like RAM won't need VLS). The size of missile will limit the speed at which the launcher can rotate and fire at its targets (reducing response time).

Tamir missile of Iron Dome weighs 90 kg. 20 missiles per launcher amounts to 1800 kg.
Akash which can swivel and fire has the of weight ~700kg per missile and 3 missiles per launcher is ~ 2100 kg. It not VLS
Patriot-2 missile weighs 700 kg and 4 missiles per launcher is 2800 kg is not a VLS.

Your reasoning is not applicable in the case of Iron Dome.

Tamir tests show the missile is not launched in Vertical position.

May be one should ask, Is VLS is a necessity for such system? VLS is determined by threat horizon. Threat horizon in our case is limited to one particular arc for such system.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 06 Aug 2011 07:35

Humphrey Hawksley in his novel "Third World War" captures this when porkis have nuked 20 Indian cities and Indian PM is sitting in bunker under Raisina Hill talking to british PM saying "I can't do it to them what they have done to us for the fear of killing innocent people in pakistan" thus not retaliating yet.

Oh please do not go 'fly by night writers' like Hawksley who wrote the novel part time by chatting here and there.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 06 Aug 2011 08:06

anyusharma wrote:Aditya sir, while a high CEP inherently has a higher probability of damaging civilian life; you are right in suggesting that loss of Indian civilian life will be relished by Pakis. However, hurting enemy civilians just for the hell of hurting them speaks against some morals. We Indians should hold ourselves to higher standards.
In case of outbreak of hostilities our objective should be neutralizing enemy armed forces. Strategically Collateral damage wouldn't help us win the war any faster or more efficiently and we would be stooping down to the level of Pakis.

anyusharma ji,

This is a part of their doctrine. What do you think that they have been doing in India setting off explosives in public places??

Be prepared to do what ever you have to do to counter this strategy.

Do not hobble yourself before hand with some high sounding moralistic ideas that are impractical.

Your enemy should fear you. The pakis must understand that any nuclear exchange WILL result in the complete anhilation of pakiland, collateral damage be damned.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 06 Aug 2011 08:18

AdityaM wrote: I am not saying that High CEP is better.
I am talking from collateral damage point of view.

A paki missile with a higher probability of missing its mark also has a higher probability of damaging civilian life... something that Pakis will relish anyways!

There are jokes surrounding Paki missiles. IN on learning that Ghauri missile was launched at Colaba, mumbai, rather than moving their officers to underground bunkers it orders the naval ships surrounding the area to safer zone. Such is reputation of Ghauri missile.

Collateral damage is something which you not intend to. But do you think Pakis have the conscience of modern societies. Today Towns/Cities have a radius of atleast few kms. So hig CEP or lower there will be collateral damage. In higher CEP case, there is chance you can escape without any major damage like that of Scud.

habal · Post by **habal** » 06 Aug 2011 09:39

low CEP is preferred in say population centres of NWFP, Baluchistan & parts of Sindh.

In Pakjab, low CEP high CEP doesn't matter, just finish all of them.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 06 Aug 2011 19:30

Army to test 2 Agni missiles
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/army-to-test ... 0-117.html