We can manager our backyard better if we have ICBMs and MT nukes. No power on earth will ever mess with a country with this deadly combo.
ICBMs are means of projecting power around the world, not backyard.
We don't need to threaten west at least for now. China is bigger threat.
First, Yes, ICBM is the weapon of ultimate power until we discover some space based continent destroying weapon.
ICBMs are just ballistic delivery systems mated with re-entry vehicles. The weapon you can put inside them is the challenge, not increasing their range.
We got already one upto the range we need ATM.
Second, India isn't actively developing an ICBM this is a fact.
India has been trying to develop ICBMs in 70s and failed back then is a fact. India again had a project to develop a 12,000-15,000 kms in 90s but later shelved due to geopolitical pressure is a fact.
India developed one with 5,500-8,000 kms range successfully after IGMDP in 2013 is also fact. India had designed a 10,000-12,000 kms range one upto 2017 and not willing test it for geopolitical reasons is also a fact.
BTW development is only a first stage we need to "Test" it and
We are far ahead, ahead by miles while producing 90+ out of 94 defined missile technologies. So, "development" part left is negligent. Doubling or tripling the range of missile isn't a challenge. Most of time will be consumed in testing and validation.
India's choice having a global range ICBM is only & only attributed to its choice of global posturing.
actively "deploy" it for world to take us seriously.
Against whom will you deploy it? Which country?
Take us "seriously" for what? We are much more relevant in diplomatic arena and we have never threatened to nuke anyone till date (except Pakistan recently). Who needs to take us "seriously" or what is the "serious problem" which will get solved by having ICBM?
Let me put to clear, you're "mentally sick".
You have an inferiority complex believing "WEST IS AHEAD" and here you have personally started to hate them & just want to "BEAT" them somehow. When you see western channels bashing China and North Korea, you get goosebumps. You start to believe that they are "POWERFUL" and you wish India to be "LIKE THEM".
Basically, you are asking for their "APPROVAL".
The similar instinct I have observed in Bangladeshi posters after watching Pakistanis badmouthing doing so.
Let me tell you something. I don't have any remedy for your syndrome. But you'll never get what you want. India will not be observed as aggressive or hostile. At best, few of such articles from mostly British and a couple of American tabloids will write bullshits like this:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/7...ttack-world-war-Narendra-Modi-Agni-V-missile#
that will give momentary joy to teens like you and foreign ministries of US & Canada will express some concern. But all will forget and move within few days.
India is neither a police state with dictatorship nor it has any anti western agenda. So, India will never be the top agenda of American international newspapers unlike China. No matter what it does.
And I'm not desperate and depressed to "beg for attention". Agni-5 covered both Europe and China. But EU itself ruled out observation of any hostility in official statement and said it "understands" for what this missile was.
Nukes without delivery system is useless pile of radioactive junk.
We are not without delivery systems. We are talking of the places we have to deliver it. We are even shifting to new delivery systems like hypersonic weapons.
ICBM is the reason USA couldn't do a regime change in China and
US can't dare to challenge regimes militarily in countries like Russia, China & India unlike Vietnam, Venezuela, Iraq or Iran. These countries are too big and they can only watch.
US couldn't do anything either when China didn't have nukes & ICBM.
they were forced to do business with Chinese which made China prosper.
Nobody forced US to trade with PRC.
After Sino Soviet split, US tried to help China as a balance to neutralize USSR. Relations with US further improved when Deng Xiaoping assumed power. To a great extent where US forwarded not only trade favors to China but willingly leaked technologies.
Heck, US helped China even in nuclear missiles.
February 15, 1996. A Chinese Long March 3B carrying a $200 million Loral satellite explodes 22 seconds after lilftoff.
March 14, 1996. President Clinton shifts control over regulating the export of communications satellites from the State Dept. which was primarily concerned with national security aspects of such exports, to the Commerce Dept., which is concerned with the economic benefits.
May 10, 1996. The Loral-led review commission investigating the February rocket explosion completes and passes on to Chinese officials its report, which according to the April 13, 1998 New York Times, discusses “sensitive aspects of the rocket’s guidance and control systems, which is an area of weakness in China’s missile programs.” The New York Times says that a Pentagon report concludes that, as a result of this technology transfer, “United States national security has been harmed”.
May 23, 1996. President Clinton calls for renewal of MFN for China, saying that renewal would not be “a referendum on all China’s policies,” but “a vote for America’s interests.”
June 8, 1996. China conducts an underground nuclear test.
July 21, 1996. Johnny Chung, according to the New York Times, brings Liu Chao-ying to two DNC fundraisers, including a $25,000 per couple dinner.Liu Chao-ying is a Lieutenant Colonel in the People’s Liberation Army and an executive at China Aerospace, which owns the Great Wall Industry Corp. that makes Long March rockets. Her father is the top commander of Chinese military forces. The New York Times says that Chung has told the Justice Dept. that Liu gave him the better part of $100,000 he contributed to the DNC in the latter part of 1996, and that the source of the money was the PLA.
July 29, 1996. China declares a moratorium on nuclear testing after conducting another nuclear test.
August 8, 1996. According to AP, Clinton meets again with Long Beach officials to advocate turning over the naval base to COSCO.
September 24, 1996. At the UN, President Clinton joins with the foreign ministers of China, France, Russia and Great Britain in signing the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty forbidding all testing of nuclear weapons.
November 5, 1996. President Clinton wins reelection. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the single largest Democratic donor during the election cycle was Loral CEO Bernard Schwartz, who gave $632,000 in ‘soft money’ to the Democratic Party between 1995 and 1996. The State Dept. issues regulations shifting responsibility for satellite launching licenses to the Commerce Dept.
January 1997. The Panamanian government awards the contract to operate the Atlantic and Pacific ports of the Panama Canal to a Hong Kong company, Hutchison Whampoa. China takes control of Hong Kong six months later. The United States, which is set to relinquish control of the canal next year, does not protest.
March 25, 1997. While in Beijing for a meeting with Premier Li Peng and President Jiang Zemin, Vice President Gore attends signing ceremonies for Boeing’s $685 million sale of five jetliners to China’s state-owned Civil Aviation Administration as well as a $1.3 billion joint venture between General Motors and China’s state-owned Shanghai Automotive Industry Corp.
May 1997. According to the April 13, 1998 New York Times, a classified Pentagon report reveals that Hughes and Loral scientists “had turned over expertise that significantly improved the reliability of China’s nuclear missiles” following the February 1996 rocket explosion. Hughes and Loral deny the New York Times report when it is published in 1998.
May 19, 1997. President Clinton announces that he will authorize MFN renewal for China.
October 1997. Chinese President Jiang Zemin makes a state visit to the United States. During the trip, he stops at a Hughes site to discuss satellites.
January 15, 1998. After China promises that it will no longer aid Iran’s nuclear program, President Clinton certifies that China is a reliable partner for nuclear technology exchange.
February 19, 1998. Despite opposition from the Justice Dept, President Clinton signs a waiver approving the launch of a Loral satellite from a Chinese rocket and reportedly authorizing the transfer of the same type of technology that the Pentagon said had “harmed” US security and that the Justice Dept. was investigation Loral and Hughes for their illegally transferring in 1996.
Right now Trump is hanging out with Kim Jong like his buddy. This the power of ICBM. Even the mighty will shake in their boots.
That's only a diplomatic approach. US hadn't attacked North Korea in around even in 60 years of it's existence when it didn't have nukes & missiles. All because of Russia & China.
Secondly, Trump's approach is about pulling USA out of conflicts. A symbolic action has little change in USA's long term economic policies.
Because of No Dong, NoKo is now 2nd country in Asia that can destroy USA mainland or anywhere for that matter. This is pure raw power.
Mera ghanta!!
"Destroy mainland"
Let's not account American anti ballistic capabilities, how much can North Korea produce to hit? Size of just one tactical nuke battalion of USA will bigger than entire North Korean nuclear stockpile.
Imagine if a single bomb hits American cities, Russia & China won't meddle in NoKo's favour while US will hit North Korea till its population comes down to zero. And they can do it in minutes & seconds.
This doctrine is same as that of pakis. YOU WILL BREAK YOUR LEG IF YOU TRY TO KILL US. And threaten world by posturing themselves as suicidal countries. But when conflict is at doors, they get back in their flavor.
SUPARCO's situation is different. They need small SLV for basic sat launch capabilities that can be easily achieved by turning BM into solid fueled SLV, given that they have figured orbital calculations.
Any BM can't be turned into orbital launch vehicle, how many times I got to state? Agni-5 can't put more than 50kg in 100kms orbit.
Addition of upper stages and stronger propulsion systems are needed. The stuff Pakistani uses are imported propulsion systems and stages based on foreign platforms. They haven't actually "worked" on it and can't do it because their technology is sourced from foreign countries.
In our case turning more complex liquid fueled GSLV into global range solid fueled ICBM is more difficult.
WTF?
No one will turn a liquid fueled rocket into a missile. India has much bigger solid rocket motors.
Biggest issue we will have with ICBM is navigation problem. Without it we won't have accuracy that is expected in modern BM.
How do you define a "modern BM"? From spin stabilized boosters to miniaturized warhead computers, we got everything except GINSS (Global Indian Navigation Satellite System). It will be our counterpart to GPS, GLONASS, BeiDou-2 and Galileo.
The project is under study yet.
Sure we can make a 60's BM based on pure calculations but in modern time a GPS like desi global system maybe required.
We have much more systems to make missiles more systems to be well ahead of USSR & USA of 60s in this context. North Korea would be more like this but they are being provided with everything from Russia.
Let me explain you basic rocket science.
The above reddened quote has told me already about your knowledge of rocket science.
You have earlier insulted yourself much more here.
With increase range complexity of mission (be it SLV or BM) increases many folds. Chances of errors are also high.
From IRBM to ICBM many new technologies will be required and much more testing will need to be done. We can't say because A-5 was developed in this much time so A-6 will be ready in...... Its childish.
Care to explain your statement. "Which new technologies?"
The calculated trajectory of missile which comes from general forumla of projectile motion is accurate in centimeters. So, doubling or tripling of range doesn't add even 1% of CEP of missile.
The problem goes with environment whose situation has to be assessed as per ranges and stages must get boost accordingly. As the environment is highly dynamic, assessment is made just before launch.
Now case is different every new missile incorporates some new technologies what previous hadn't.
Range of operational missile is 750 km unless you believe that K4 is ready.
We are talking capabilities here. Otherwise rule out North Korea first off the discussion where even "operational strength" of ICBM will be smaller in numbers against number of test units in other countries.
Every country who has capability and validated it can produce stuff in huge numbers in emergency.
Again, if operationalization is concerned, Agni-6 has zero use. How many numbers will have to be produced when there are little chances of using it for many decades?
Also you should know that sea based BMs are much harder to master compared to their land based counterparts. Calculations that are needed to fire BM from sub is much more different and also BM has to be compact to fit in tight space of a sub, meaning powerful but efficient motor.
I know it very well. And that's why I'm so convinced about Indian ICBM capabilities.
It's you who is enlengthening post by irrelevant points.
Developing global range SLBMs will be much harder for us compared to ICBMs.
We don't need to develop a global range one. 60-70% of big ICBM will be enough. Most other countries use same.
First we need A-6 now. We are already on verge of becoming a global power so we need power projection tool today.
A-6 will come when needed only.
BTW Washington and London are name of missions not Islands. However naming islands after cities and bombing them is also not a bad idea.
All it takes is guts.
Not guts, all it takes to be your brain located in @$$.
No. NoKo can destroy entire Yankee town (NYC) in one shot. We can't.
Ghanta!!
Soviet fell because of internal issues.
While you think that ICBM is solution to every problem, Soviet economy was sabotaged by USA along with its own stupid red policies.
Just before its collapsed, Soviet was also running around world for bailout what it didn't get. Internal issues wouldn't have arose if economy would have been doing right.
Their ICBMs did a good job keeping them toe to toe against a superpower.
Soviet was world's third largest economy and second largest military force. ICBM was just a small component of military forces.
Pakistan doesn't have ICBMs nor MT nukes so your point is moot.
Means you have trained your mind not to pick the context so stupidly. Pakistan can hit any point on India and nearby American military bases.
Germany has nothing for power projection. it will take decades upon decades for them to build a war ready military and a massive industrial base. Such country can't be P6.
Power projection isn't about military only. Germany is leader of world's largest economic entity.
Let me educate you about P5 countries.
These countries are those who "won" in WW2 using their military might.
P5 is about influential countries, not winners WW2. Case is different that winners of World war will be left most influential.
After shifting alliances in cold war era, they kept on adding friend in alliances. Germany is a part of P5+1 and has everything of them except veto power. Indeed India is more rightful but P5+1 is a reality.
Another reality is you didn't know about it.
Because of their massive military power they were literally unchallenged in post WW2 world.
No, it was only about winning side. China was sick back then.
Economy was never a factor for P5 countries.
Power is the ultimate factor of P5 and its base is always economy.
Eventually if P5 doesn't change, UNSC will lose its relevance in world.
Sure a big economy can help getting a big military but its not always the case.
It is always the case otherwise country collapses eventually.
No. NSG deal was to keep Indian nuclear ambition in check. Plain and simple.
No, NSG deal gave India access to stuff India wanted. No matter what you shout because you don't know anything about.
You made Ukraine a member of EU and West an ATM of India.
There is no need to waste precious uranium for power generation purpose in our country.
Power generation is wastage?
We can have that with solar, wind, hydro, etc.
No, they can't fulfill our needs. They are always smaller sectors and can only compensate.
Nuclear fuel is the ultimate replacement of fossil fuels.
Our uranium reserves should only be used for one thing.
You are a serious victim of radiation right in your fragile brain.
Everything else is a waste and display of short shortsightedness by our gov.
Making warheads of all fissile material and throwing it in reserves to get reduced and expire is actual wastage.
India can produce large number of nukes in conflict when needed.
display of short shortsightedness by our gov.
Care to explain your "farsightedness".
Leave alone that all, just tell whether you even have a sight.
You are Indian version of this moron.
https://defenceforumindia.com/forum...n-idiotic-musings.21193/page-568#post-1474363
