Indian Missiles & Nuclear Development News and Discussions

[aaaditya]

Re: India plans ICBM's

well here is an interesting article on india's nuclear programme.

India's nuclear forces, 2005





By Robert S. Norris and Hans M. Kristensen
September/October 2005 pp. 73-75 (vol. 61, no. 05) © 2005 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

ndia is in the process of becoming a full-fledged nuclear power with a wide variety of weapon systems deployed within three branches of the armed services. India's emerging triad of nuclear forces consists of the army's land-based ballistic missiles, the air force's air-delivered weapons, and the navy's sea-based surface-launched ballistic missiles, which may soon be deployed on its warships. The government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh appears committed to continuing the policies of the previous government, which saw Pakistan and China as the main drivers for India's nuclear development, though national prestige may also be a factor.

The size and composition of India's nuclear arsenal is difficult to determine because all of its delivery systems can carry both nuclear and conventional warheads. The dual capability of its nuclear-capable systems has significant implications for crisis stability on the subcontinent. In a war, especially in the opening stages, the launch of Indian ballistic missiles with conventional warheads could easily be mistaken for a nuclear strike and trigger nuclear attack. Inaccurate or exaggerated claims by government and industry officials combined with unsubstantiated rumors in the media and expert community about weapon systems' capabilities contribute to uncertainty about India's nuclear forces.

The 2005 Defence Ministry annual report states that India's nuclear doctrine is "based on the principle of a minimum credible deterrent and no-first-use as opposed to doctrines or postures of launch-on-warning." This doctrine requires "a mix of land-based, maritime, and air capabilities, and a minimum credible deterrent to thwart the threat of use of nuclear weapons against it." The report further explains that India's nuclear policy includes a "rejection of an arms race or concepts and postures from the Cold War era." India has not yet explained how many nuclear warheads it believes a "minimum credible deterrent" requires or when it expects to achieve the necessary deterrent.

We estimate that India currently has a stockpile of approximately 40-50 assembled nuclear warheads, but this number is likely to increase over the next decade. An unnamed Defence Ministry source told Defense News in late 2004 that in the next five to seven years India will have 300-400 nuclear and thermonuclear weapons distributed to air, sea, and land forces (November 1, 2004). Whether the stockpile will reach that size or not, the need to control the country's rapidly developing nuclear forces led to the establishment of the Nuclear Command Authority and tri-service Strategic Forces Command in 2003. Over the next decade, according to Defence Ministry sources cited in Defense News, India expects to spend $2 billion a year to create a Strategic Forces Command infrastructure.

here is the link for the full article(army,navy and airforce projects)

http://www.thebulletin.org/article_nn.php?art_ofn=so05norris :coffee

 

[kashifshahzad]

Re: India plans ICBM's

Soo India has money to buy SU-30MKI's,126 MRCA's,Submarines from France,LCA,to develop MCA,upgrade its ageing fleets now also this $2billions a year .I didnt know that Indian economy was that much huge wouldnt they have trouble by having shortage in the foreign reserves Pakistan also have $12billion above but we dont do that much bullish purchasings.Dont your govt have brakes.

 

[aaaditya]

Re: India plans ICBM's

Soo India has money to buy SU-30MKI's,126 MRCA's,Submarines from France,LCA,to develop MCA,upgrade its ageing fleets now also this $2billions a year .I didnt know that Indian economy was that much huge wouldnt they have trouble by having shortage in the foreign reserves Pakistan also have $12billion above but we dont do that much bullish purchasings.Dont your govt have brakes.

well kashif here are some figures for you
india's foreign exchange reserves(146 billion dollars which is 12 times that of pakistan)
india's gdp(850billion dollars and expected to grow by 7.5%)
india's ppp(nearly2 trillion dollars)
no country spends from the foreign exchange reserves(this amount is kept for emergencies) on defence,the countries all spend from their gdp.
india also spends on defence from its gdp(850billion dollars)india spends about 3.5 % of this amount on defence (around 30billion dollars),as percentage of gdp this ia amongst the lowest in the world,lower than both pakistan and china.
india has already paid for su-30,and 126 mrca's will not be paid for immediately but after the deal is signed which may take another 4-5 years at this rate indian gdp would be more than(1.2trillion dollars by that time),the amount will not be paid in a singkle lump sum but will be paid as annual installments.this is a practice followed even by pakistan.
the 200 million dollars paid to russia is not for maintainence but for upgradation of indian warships and submarines.:coffee

 

[vrus]

Re: India plans ICBM's

That's put well aditya ! So I guess we don't need brakes ! By the way where did you get those figures from ?

 

[aaaditya]

Re: India plans ICBM's

That's put well aditya ! So I guess we don't need brakes ! By the way where did you get those figures from ?

i got the info from ndtv news,hindu,indian express and deccan chronicle newspapers,buisness india magazine .
by the way do you have any idea about when the astra missile will be tested not hearing much of it nowadays.:coffee

 

[Defcon 6]

Re: India plans ICBM's

I like India, but I'm wondering about it's current nuclear ambitions. Why is India building more nuclear weapons? European powers, the states and Russia all signed Nuclear limitating treaties. Is India going to sign one of those sometime soon as well to limit how many world devestating bombs they can build?

Besides, number of nuclear weapons doesn't mean all that much once you have a couple dozen. How about size of nuclear weapons? Is India going to build Megaton+ yield bombs?

 

[aaaditya]

Re: India plans ICBM's

I like India, but I'm wondering about it's current nuclear ambitions. Why is India building more nuclear weapons? European powers, the states and Russia all signed Nuclear limitating treaties. Is India going to sign one of those sometime soon as well to limit how many world devestating bombs they can build?

Besides, number of nuclear weapons doesn't mean all that much once you have a couple dozen. How about size of nuclear weapons? Is India going to build Megaton+ yield bombs?

has china or pakistan signed those treaties,afterall they are india's rivals hence india has to maintain its nuclear arsenal keeping pakistan and china under its threat perpective.:coffee

 

[webmaster]

Re: India plans ICBM's

aaaditya,

I think, the question Defcon 6 was trying to ask is why does India need ICBMs for China and Pakistan? The current Indian missile arsenal covers Pakistan and China, ICBMs are irrelevant in pak/china situation.

 

[aaaditya]

Re: India plans ICBM's

aaaditya,

I think, the question Defcon 6 was trying to ask is why does India need ICBMs for China and Pakistan? The current Indian missile arsenal covers Pakistan and China, ICBMs are irrelevant in pak/china situation.

icbm's may be irrelevent in case of pakistan ,but they are definitely relevent in case of china currently no indian missile can hit major chinese sities like beijing or hongkong etc.even with agni3 which has a claimed range of 3500kms india can at best hit a couple of major cities in southern china.also india needs to acquire a submarine launched ballistic missile system for added effectiveness and survivability of its nuclear arsenal.currently usa is very friendly with india,but usa cannot be trusted ,they were once friendly with china but now consider china as their opponents,suppose such a situation occurs between india and usa,maybe even a war then usa will think twice before launching a nuclear strike against india because they will be afraid of collateral damage(no government would want its people to get hurt),that is the reason why usa is currently treating china with caution.
you dont need to fire icbm's for them advantageous,just possessing them would be a tremendous psychological advantage to a country.:coffee

 

[Defcon 6]

Re: India plans ICBM's

gwar

icbm's may be irrelevent in case of pakistan ,but they are definitely relevent in case of china currently no indian missile can hit major chinese sities like beijing or hongkong etc.even with agni3 which has a claimed range of 3500kms india can at best hit a couple of major cities in southern china.also india needs to acquire a submarine launched ballistic missile system for added effectiveness and survivability of its nuclear arsenal.currently usa is very friendly with india,but usa cannot be trusted ,they were once friendly with china but now consider china as their opponents,suppose such a situation occurs between india and usa,maybe even a war then usa will think twice before launching a nuclear strike against india because they will be afraid of collateral damage(no government would want its people to get hurt),that is the reason why usa is currently treating china with caution.
you dont need to fire icbm's for them advantageous,just possessing them would be a tremendous psychological advantage to a country.:coffee

Thxs, webmaster, that is exactly what I was saying.

Okay, AAAditya, I'll explain the science of this. ICBM's even against China aren't very useful because of their proximity (closeness) to India. Even a 40 kt nuclear fission reaction can send radiation over 1000 miles. Not think of an ICBM, with multiple re-entry vehicles. Now you have twice the fission reactions.

If you hit Pakistan with a nuclear fission missile the radiation would float over into India within a week. If you used more than one nuclear bomb, the radiation would be bad enough to cause serious crop failure and radiation poisoning among people within 100 miles of the Pakistan border, and light radiation sickness up to 300 miles. And this is just considering low yield fission bombs of 40-60 kt, not 100-200 kt re-entry vehicles of half a dozen or more.

China on the other hand has more nuclear missiles and ICBM's,and they are also close enough that radiation will effect northern India. It's a scorched earth scenario. If your going to attack Pakistan or China you would want to use very low yield high penetration explosives. Like the kind you would mount on a cruise missile.

If your looking at a scenario like that you want to use Hydrogen Bombs. Using fusion reactions they produce higher yield and less radiation because they are cleaner than fission bombs. However you need a bomber to carry them, but considering the short distance to either pakistan or china a manned bomber is a reasonable option. Hydrogen bombs are too heavy for most missiles.

Also, talking about that is pointless. the U.S is working on interceptors against ICBM's, and furthermore the U.S still has the M.A.D doctrine in effect. It's a scorched earth policy. Now perhaps you understand, nuclear weapons are useless.

And further more, nuclear weapons won't detur a conventional attack. So, nuclear ICBM's are useless in a Pakistan China scneario.

 

[aaaditya]

Re: India plans ICBM's

gwar

Thxs, webmaster, that is exactly what I was saying.

Okay, AAAditya, I'll explain the science of this. ICBM's even against China aren't very useful because of their proximity (closeness) to India. Even a 40 kt nuclear fission reaction can send radiation over 1000 miles. Not think of an ICBM, with multiple re-entry vehicles. Now you have twice the fission reactions.

If you hit Pakistan with a nuclear fission missile the radiation would float over into India within a week. If you used more than one nuclear bomb, the radiation would be bad enough to cause serious crop failure and radiation poisoning among people within 100 miles of the Pakistan border, and light radiation sickness up to 300 miles. And this is just considering low yield fission bombs of 40-60 kt, not 100-200 kt re-entry vehicles of half a dozen or more.

China on the other hand has more nuclear missiles and ICBM's,and they are also close enough that radiation will effect northern India. It's a scorched earth scenario. If your going to attack Pakistan or China you would want to use very low yield high penetration explosives. Like the kind you would mount on a cruise missile.

If your looking at a scenario like that you want to use Hydrogen Bombs. Using fusion reactions they produce higher yield and less radiation because they are cleaner than fission bombs. However you need a bomber to carry them, but considering the short distance to either pakistan or china a manned bomber is a reasonable option. Hydrogen bombs are too heavy for most missiles.

Also, talking about that is pointless. the U.S is working on interceptors against ICBM's, and furthermore the U.S still has the M.A.D doctrine in effect. It's a scorched earth policy. Now perhaps you understand, nuclear weapons are useless.

And further more, nuclear weapons won't detur a conventional attack. So, nuclear ICBM's are useless in a Pakistan China scneario.

first of all let us not take pakistan into consideration,there is no point in wasting an icbm on them and i agree to that.
as far as interceptors are considered several countries are developing them including india and china(india is also working on airborne lasers and emi weapons).it's the very same mad(mutually acquired destruction) doctrine that iam talking about.not only usa but almost every nuclear power has based its nuclear arsenal on the mad doctrine,that is the reason why india declared no first use ,and development of the nuke triad(for better survivability of the nukes and the platforms in order to be able to launch a second strike).
once again i agree with you nuclear weapons do not deter a conventional atatck,but that is not the point here ,nuclear weapons deter nuclear attack afterall that is what the mad concept is all about,there was atleast one occassion when pakistan activated its missile systems against india and india against pakistan(but they didnt go forward,and in that case it also prevented a conventional war,the reason why kargil war did not expand into a full fledged nuclear war was because both the sides possessed nuclear weapons and hence had to calculate all their options).
what makes you think that china is very close enough?the very problem is that china is not close enough.most of the major chinese cities are atleast 5000 kms from the indian border(even a 3500km range missile is considered an icbm) and approximately 7000+miles from the indian coastline.
no matter how many nuclear weapons china or any other country has they will always hesitate to use them especially if their opponents have one too.the reason is that no country would want to lose millions of their people(the people will never forgive the government).let us assume that a nuclear war takes place between india and china and china has wiped out all indian cities whereas 10 indian nuke missiles have targetted 10 of the largest chinese cities (icbm's).the losses for china will also be phenomenal (both economic as well as humanitarian),china's economy which is amongst the fastest growing as of now will completely collapse leading to widespread unrest,people will question the rationale of war and the usage of nuclear weapons.they will never forgive their government,remember the citizens safety is any government's first priority.
if we go by your logic then what prevents usa from wiping out the chinese whom they consider to be their biggest threat,it is the fear of collateral damage which i mentioned above.
india has developed subkiloton nukes for use with their srbm's in a tactical role in order to take out enemy formations.:coffee

 

[Defcon 6]

Re: India plans ICBM's

first of all let us not take pakistan into consideration,there is no point in wasting an icbm on them and i agree to that.

as far as interceptors are considered several countries are developing them including india and china(india is also working on airborne lasers and emi weapons).it's the very same mad(mutually acquired destruction)

It's Mutually Assured Destruction

doctrine that iam talking about.not only usa but almost every nuclear power has based its nuclear arsenal on the mad doctrine,that is the reason why india declared no first use ,
and development of the nuke triad(for better survivability of the nukes and the platforms in order to be able to launch a second strike).
once again i agree with you nuclear weapons do not deter a conventional atatck,but that is not the point here ,nuclear weapons deter nuclear attack afterall that is what the mad concept is all about,there was atleast one occassion when pakistan activated its missile systems against india and india against pakistan(but they didnt go forward,and in that case it also prevented a conventional war,the reason why kargil war did not expand into a full fledged nuclear war was because both the sides possessed nuclear weapons and hence had to calculate all their options).
what makes you think that china is very close enough?the very problem is that china is not close enough.

It is certainly close enough for your geiger counter to start beeping.

most of the major chinese cities are atleast 5000 kms from the indian border(even a 3500km range missile is considered an icbm) and approximately 7000+miles from the indian coastline.

Actually no. 7000 miles could get you half way around the world. A km is less than a mile by about 2100 ft.

no matter how many nuclear weapons china or any other country has they will always hesitate to use them especially if their opponents have one too.the reason is that no country would want to lose millions of their people(the people will never forgive the government)

Thats my point. There won't be any people left. None.

.let us assume that a nuclear war takes place between india and china and china has wiped out all indian cities whereas 10 indian nuke missiles have targetted 10 of the largest chinese cities (icbm's).the losses for china will also be phenomenal (both economic as well as humanitarian)

A nuclear war would destroy vegitation and cause a collapse throughout all southeast asia.

,china's economy which is amongst the fastest growing as of now will completely collapse leading to widespread unrest,people will question the rationale of war and the usage of nuclear weapons.they will never forgive their government,remember the citizens safety is any government's first priority.

And so will India's economy and every other economy nearby.

if we go by your logic then what prevents usa from wiping out the chinese whom they consider to be their biggest threat,it is the fear of collateral damage which i mentioned above.

what exactly do you think my logic is? I said don't use them.

india has developed subkiloton nukes for use with their srbm's in a tactical role in order to take out enemy formations

Thats my point also, india should build more of those. or build a few country obliterating megaton bombs. A lot of people don't understand the concepts of the hydrogen bomb. One hydrogen bomb can wipe out an entire country as big as pakistan or iraq or those smaller type of countries, and maybe a third of India. But you would have one so whats the point.

 

[ashblackhawk]

Re: India plans ICBM's

Thats my point also, india should build more of those. or build a few country obliterating megaton bombs. A lot of people don't understand the concepts of the hydrogen bomb. One hydrogen bomb can wipe out an entire country as big as pakistan or iraq or those smaller type of countries, and maybe a third of India. But you would have one so whats the point.

Well the point is same as the reason of development of nuclear arsenal by US !! As simple as that, If US/China/Russia/France/UK have one and ability to use on anyone around the world, any other soveriegn nation on the earth could go for it...right this is what democracy is all about :coffee not about the big 5 having authority to develop and use it...

 

[Defcon 6]

Re: India plans ICBM's

Well the point is same as the reason of development of nuclear arsenal by US !! As simple as that, If US/China/Russia/France/UK have one and ability to use on anyone around the world, any other soveriegn nation on the earth could go for it...right this is what democracy is all about :coffee not about the big 5 having authority to develop and use it...

What are you talking about? I didn't even say that. I said India should build more useful nuclear weapons. Sounds like you didn't even bother to read my post. As simple as that.

 

[webmaster]

Re: India plans ICBM's

If people of sub-continent were not so emotional, we wouldn't have half of the problem facing that region today.

Lets pause and reflect.

Locking.

 

[aaaditya]

indian missile development and news thread-2

well here is some more news on the agni3 project.

Domestic industries show interest in missile programme


Our Bureau







Hyderabad , Sept. 21

INDIA'S ambitious missile development programme is drawing on the strengths of the domestic industry in developing critical parts, from an early stage, to accelerate the development to production cycle.

For example, in the long range Agni project, whose third variant (Agni-3) is set to be test flown towards the end of 2005, we have industries developing prototypes of rocket motor casings, explained Mr Avinash Chander, new Director of the Advanced Systems Laboratory (ASL), here.

One industry from Hyderabad and another from Vijayawada have helped in fabricating the prototype in around 18 months. A similar exercise done through `Concurrent Engineering' by the defence labs along with industry partners earlier took five years, he told newspersons on Wednesday.

A large number of Indian industries are being involved in the Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme, which has over the years developed five missiles, and has taken up the development of many more. The ASL, which is spearheading the Agni Project, is all set to conduct the third and final test of the rocket motor thrust in October, after which it will put Agni-3 on the long range path. "The first two tests done have been successful and we are confident that all the required capabilities will be in place soon," said Mr Avinash Chander.

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2005/09/22/stories/2005092203160900.htm

 

[aaaditya]

Re: Indian Missile Development and News

well here is some new info on agni3 missile(seems its range has now been increased to 6000kms).
http://deccanherald.com/deccanherald/nov232005/state19514320051122.asp
and is likely to carry a 250kt warhead(how much would that weigh in kilogrammes).

 

[aaaditya]

Re: Indian Missile Development and News

seems brahmos and other indian missiles are already finding a market,next month there will be demo firings of nag,aksh,trishul,prithvi and brahmos missiles for prospective customers(most likey indonesia,thailand and chile).
http://www.newsinsight.net/nati2.asp?recno=3561

Thailand, Indonesia seek BrahMos, Prithvi

23 November 2005: Thailand and Indonesia have expressed a desire to buy Prithvi surface-to-surface missiles and BrahMos cruise missiles on a fast track basis.

Though Thailand had shown interest a year ago, its enquiries were slow because of internal ASEAN politics, but Indonesia is actively seeking about twenty BrahMos on a free purchase agreement that has no post-sales user clauses.

Though India has not responded to the requests, a decision to sell BrahMos may be taken when the Indian PM, Manmohan Singh, meets Russian president Vladimir Putin next month.

So far, BrahMos production does not meet Indian or Russian demands, but foreign military sales made be prioritised, which would also give the BrahMos company some idea of the market, and gain it post-sales experience.

BrahMos is in high demand from several other countries due to its quality and price, while there is confusion about Prithvi’s role.

Some countries are convinced about the surface-to-surface capability of Prithvi, but want details about its navy and air force variant, but all three variants are successful here.

By the time of the defence exposition in Pragati Maidan in February 2006, the defence ministry could take a decision on the Thai and Indonesian requests, and accordingly accelerate mass production.


provided offcourse that the indian government clears these deals.

 

[kashifshahzad]

Re: Indian Missile Development and News

India Successfully Test Fires Supersonic Cruise Missile
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Thu, 1 Dec 2005, 00:26

Bhubaneswar: India on Wednesday successfully test-fired an army version of its supersonic BrahMos cruise missile that was jointly developed with Russia, a defence officer said.
The missile was tested from Indias Chandipur-on-sea site, 200 kilometres (125 miles) northeast of Bhubaneswar, the capital of the southeastern state of Orissa, the officer, who declined to be named, said.
"The flight trial met all the mission objectives, officer said. The missile has a range of 290 kilometers (181 miles) and can carry a 300-kilogram (660 pounds) conventional warhead and can be launched from land, ships, submarines and aircraft, the officer said.
The eight-metre (26-foot) missile weighs about three metric tonnes.
The missile, first tested in June 2001, is named after India's Brahmaputra River and Russia's Moskva River.

URL of this article:
http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/article_004317.php

This is not a short range missile it can be called a battlefield range missile it can only hit in the area where battle is taking place so this missile should be placed in the area where there are chances for battle to take place and if not then you will surely have to displace this missile to the loaction from where you want to shoot.But the A2G version which would be fired from an AC could be deadly there is no other A2G missile which can hit a target at that much distance,this cruise missile can do the Job.
The main difference between the Pakistani and Indian cruise missile is the range and the speed.Indian cruise missile has lesser range and can hit the target in shorter time because it is supersonic and on the other hand the Pakistani missile has greater range but has lesser speed but one thing is sure that both of the missiles would hit the targets because both of them cant be deceted by the radar.But i am optimistic about the deployment of Pakistani cruise missile on an AC but it can well do its job on the ground.

 

[vrus]

Re: Indian Missile Development and News

Which trial of the Brahmos land version is this? I thikn it already has been tested a few times before...
Similar to what kashif said, is there any chance of an Air to ground version ? Are they developing something on those lines?

Sorry if I'm deviating from topic a bit here mods, but what cruise missiles does pakistan have and what are their ranges, payload capacity and max. speed? A link would be great!

Any news on the Agni-III's trial?