Agni V Missile

[Kshithij]

NFU generally means minimum deterrence which means there are quite a lot systems which you don't need, such as 24-7 surveillance system, early warning system, long hours patrolling strategic bombers, etc;



The member sayareakd once mentioned that Prithvi only got around 120 shoots until 2018. If his figure is right (it matches some online figures), barely 4 times per year, considering India has 4 missile groups armed with this weapon, that means each group got only one shooting chance. That is barely enough to check the quality of a short-range missiles in stock. In the meantime, US carried out more than 160 times tests for her ICBM trident 2.


You can also look at the tests of India's missile in development: Agni-5, from 2012 to today, only 5 tests in 6 years, even Chinese DF-41 has 10 tests from 2012, not to mention the R&D speed of the two nuclear war fighting countries.


Just like China, India's warheads are stored separately from missiles and in a disassembled state.

India does not tell where its warhead is stored and how.

120 tests if India vs 160 of USA is comparable and not something that can be made a fuss off. Also, Agni5 has been tested 6 times sijce 2012, not 5 times.

NFU doesn't mean minimum deterrence
It just means nukes won't be used first. There is no limit to deterrence ability. NFU is a declaration of intent, not of capability

 

[indus]

NFU doesn't mean minimum deterrence
It just means nukes won't be used first. There is no limit to deterrence ability. NFU is a declaration of intent, not of capability

Agree. NFU and deterrence are two different things. Deterrence is what stops an adversary from firing first. If it fires it means deterrence has failed. While NFU simply states that we wont fire first but will give a massive retaliation in case somebody nukes us first. That gives us the right to retaliate without any moral baggage. The word Credible Minimum Deterrence or CMD was put in for China. Since China is a large country and has many high value targets, India needs a mimimum level of stockpile and delivery systems below which China is not deterred at all. With A5 we have achieved our CMD.

 

[Chinmoy]

Guys.... I believe we should discuss NFU in some other dedicated thread. Lets not derail this thread.

 

[indus]

Guys.... I believe we should discuss NFU in some other dedicated thread. Lets not derail this thread.

Yes. And which one is it..........

 

[Chinmoy]

Yes. And which one is it..........

I just created one for that.

https://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/indias-no-first-use-policy-and-its-implications.81079/

Please enter a message with at least 30 characters.

 

[sayareakd]

The game hasn't changed because all of the weapons in your list haven't entered service or patrolling with nuclear warhead.



To the fanboy like you, nuclear war is just another TV game, isn't it? India doesn't even have the necessary systems in place to put your weapon on hair trigger.


Yes, typical fanboy thinking: one Chinese guesses Agni-5 maybe 8000km, every Indian fanboy jumps up, "Now, Chinese acknowledge Agni-5 is a true ICBM". Sorry to wake up your dream, no, Chinese doesn't think the range of this missile is 8000km and it is outdated.

you want us to test the Agni 5 on China with 8000 kms range and that too with thermo nuke. If we can reach Mars and Moon, surely 8000 kms is no big deal. BTW what is the farest, China has reached in space ???
That will show how far China can go, if you want di*k measuring contest.

 

[WARREN SS]

you want us to test the Agni 5 on China with 8000 kms range and that too with thermo nuke. If we can reach Mars and Moon, surely 8000 kms is no big deal. BTW what is the farest, China has reached in space ???
That will show how far China can go, if you want di*k measuring contest.

Lol you are spot on mate propobably these asshole don't know how ICBMs came into existence

The first ICBMS of Soviet and Americans were Space launch vechiles

The rocket concept is same in many generation of US and USSR ICBM missiles

We can make PSLV's as Long Range ICBMs in silo lauch facility

Who knows we have not done that already

The only reason we not showing our true capibilities is because of our international commitment and Nuclear trade

 

[Kshithij]

Lol you are spot on mate propobably these asshole don't know how ICBMs came into existence

The first ICBMS of Soviet and Americans were Space launch vechiles

The rocket concept is same in many generation of US and USSR ICBM missiles

We can make PSLV's as Long Range ICBMs in silo lauch facility

Who knows we have not done that already

The only reason we not showing our true capibilities is because of our international commitment and Nuclear trade

PSLV is an overkill. We don't need the ability to reach GTO with 1.5tonne payload or LEO with 3tonne payload. Also, these rockets are liquid fuel which wdds to problems of storage.

The Agni 5 itself is 50tonne in weight. By all international standard, if the weight if warhead is reduced to 500kg, the range should be easily 12000km. Agni 5 is being fired in depressed trajectory due to various reasons

 

[TheVarun]

India probably feels it doesn't need to test Agni-5 10-20 times before operationalising it. They could be confident in its effectiveness from 5-6 tests, having confidence in its design. Computer simulation also helps. As another poster said, India ultimately has to do what is right for itself, not what is right for the US, China, Russia or Madagascar.

 

[happylion]

Generally modern ICBM's are solid fuelled as it can be camistet8zed and rapilybdeployed though Russians and Chinese have used liquid filed ones but hypergols are difficult to maintain,take time to fuel and need contained silos to avoid detecting feeling. A6 in all lik oh good will just have to replace first stage with composites and very likely A5 itself has an underreported range . If one notes A3 suddenly became lighter and shorter.
Once K4 is officially inducted A5 and A6 range may be officially increased

 

[Chinmoy]

India probably feels it doesn't need to test Agni-5 10-20 times before operationalising it. They could be confident in its effectiveness from 5-6 tests, having confidence in its design. Computer simulation also helps. As another poster said, India ultimately has to do what is right for itself, not what is right for the US, China, Russia or Madagascar.

Yes.... A5 is based on a tested and proven design. Any new advancement would be tested on the test bed before incorporating in A5.

 

[TheVarun]

you want us to test the Agni 5 on China with 8000 kms range and that too with thermo nuke.
That will show how far China can go, if you want di*k measuring contest.

I have noticed a pattern of behaviour among Chinese on the internet. When they are not viciously abusing India and Indians( check out the Shashi Tharoor video where he comments on Africa, China and India, for some real beauts), they are denigrating, condescending and cajoling toward anything India does in the 'strategic sphere', particularly if the achievement is comparable to China, or surpasses it.

 

[no smoking]

India does not tell where its warhead is stored and how.

Well, there is lot of way to find out, such as:
watching the way of training & drill;
the movement of regular maintenance;
the electricity supplies;
the transportation between the production factories and nuclear forces;
India's related industrial capability and production activity;

You may only get very limited information from each of them, but when you put all things together after 20 years, you will get pretty much the truth.

Keep this in mind: you get hundreds of thousands people involved in for decades, it is really to keep this kind of things as secret.

120 tests if India vs 160 of USA is comparable and not something that can be made a fuss off.

Well, there are big difference: one is SHORT-RANGE missile and another one is ICBM. The short-range missile is supposed to carry more test each year than ICBM because the battle environment of the former is far worse than later.

Also, Agni5 has been tested 6 times sijce 2012, not 5 times.

Sorry, I missed the one of June.

NFU doesn't mean minimum deterrence
It just means nukes won't be used first. There is no limit to deterrence ability. NFU is a declaration of intent, not of capability

No, you get it wrong way. It is because somehow you don't have enough resources or you don't want to spend resource to build a nuclear force with enough number for a nuclear war fighting policy. So, the logic is: you can only afford a minimum deterrence like India and China, so you declare yourself a NFU country.

People believe your NFU policy not because you claim yourselves are but you keep a minimum nuclear force.

 

[no smoking]

India probably feels it doesn't need to test Agni-5 10-20 times before operationalising it. They could be confident in its effectiveness from 5-6 tests, having confidence in its design. Computer simulation also helps. As another poster said, India ultimately has to do what is right for itself, not what is right for the US, China, Russia or Madagascar.

The question is what make Indian more confident on their designs?

Because they designed far more missiles than P5? Or they produced far more missiles than P5? Or their scientists and workers are simply far better than the counterparts in P5?

Or simply Indian missiles have lower quality standard?

 

[mayfair]

You crapping all over this thread is enough to tell us that our missiles are making the 5 Maowaadis and their masters sit up and take notice.

 

[no smoking]

The first ICBMS of Soviet and Americans were Space launch vechiles

That is simply wrong. The US and USSR's space launch vehicles were SIMPLIFIED ICBMs.

The rocket concept is same in many generation of US and USSR ICBM missiles

The concept is the same. The details are different, such as material, electronic, etc.
It is like the diesel engine, during the cold war, the Japanese diesel engine could beat crap out of Soviet products in civilian market, but in the field of military usage, Japanese products were nothing comparing to Russian engine.

 

[Chinmoy]

The question is what make Indian more confident on their designs?

Because they designed far more missiles than P5? Or they produced far more missiles than P5? Or their scientists and workers are simply far better than the counterparts in P5?

Or simply Indian missiles have lower quality standard?

Reason is simple. If you look at Indian Missile test, you would notice that the designer trial and user trial is somewhat in ratio of 5:1. Among every 5 trials, only one would be user trial whereas others would be undertaken under DRDO supervision. And I am not talking about under development systems, but for the commissioned system.
The reason for this is simple. With each and every test India incorporates and test one new development at a time in its system. The same goes for BM as well as for its CM. For India its continuous development rather then being in stagnant water.

 

[no smoking]

Reason is simple. If you look at Indian Missile test, you would notice that the designer trial and user trial is somewhat in ratio of 5:1. Among every 5 trials, only one would be user trial whereas others would be undertaken under DRDO supervision. And I am not talking about under development systems, but for the commissioned system.

I have a news for you: American, Russian, Chinese undertake more tests on both stages.

The reason for this is simple. With each and every test India incorporates and test one new development at a time in its system. The same goes for BM as well as for its CM. For India its continuous development rather then being in stagnant water.

Sorry, but that is totally BS: Missile is such a complicated system, its performance as a whole is the result of integration of sub-system. A new development or new sub-system will probably impact other sub-systems and then the whole missile's performance. So, once you add in a new development, there is a good chance that the missile has to go through the series of test from beginning.

So, once missile design is frozen and each sub-system is tested independently, you will not change any system unless the sub-system keeps failing the test as a whole.

If you have a new development on certain sub-system, leave it to the future variant.

 

[captscooby81]

Sir we humbly accept that our missiles are not a great threat to china as ours are not tested like the P5 members neither we have the know how to make a perfect missile with just 5 test ..so let us live in our own Utopian world and you be least bothered about our claims and rebut back here . Please ignore the fanboys here and their claims who are just draining your energy..Danke

I have a news for you: American, Russian, Chinese undertake more tests on both stages.



Sorry, but that is totally BS: Missile is such a complicated system, its performance as a whole is the result of integration of sub-system. A new development or new sub-system will probably impact other sub-systems and then the whole missile's performance. So, once you add in a new development, there is a good chance that the missile has to go through the series of test from beginning.

So, once missile design is frozen and each sub-system is tested independently, you will not change any system unless the sub-system keeps failing the test as a whole.

If you have a new development on certain sub-system, leave it to the future variant.

 

[no smoking]

Sir we humbly accept that our missiles are not a great threat to china as ours are not tested like the P5 members neither we have the know how to make a perfect missile with just 5 test

That is where Indian members here failed to understand: Indian missile doesn't need to test that many tests because India's adversaries (Pak and China) are much weaker than China's adversaries (Soviet and US). The more test you do, the more reliable your missile will be. During cold war, it was estimated that US missiles had around 16-18% failure due to its own quality issue, the figure of Soviet was around 22%, Chinese was probably around 33%. So, if China shoot 100 missiles to Soviet, there will be only 66-67 missiles getting close to the target. Then considering the level of soviet anti-missile system, let's say 20% of them will be shoot down. Finally, around 53 missiles hit the target.
Now, let's look at India. If we say India's missile reliability is 55% hypothetically, then 55 of 100 missile will launch successfully. But Chinese defense network can't match Soviet, if we say 10% destroy rate, then 50 India missile will finally hit the target. See, with less money, India gets the same achievement.

..so let us live in our own Utopian world and you be least bothered about our claims and rebut back here . Please ignore the fanboys here and their claims who are just draining your energy..Danke

It gives me great pleasure to wake up fanboys from their dream because I had the same problem when I was young. Now I can turn the favor.