PRALAY: India’s New Under Development Conventional Strike Surface-to-Surface Missile

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

Are the modified Agni 1P, Agni III and IV in production yet? If we already have the sanctioned number of Agni III and IV in stock, than we will not see the improved variant inducted until the first batch of missiles is beyond its shelf life.

There is no sanctioned number of missiles. We keep making more as needed. Since there is a real threat in neighbourhood, no limits exist.

Also, the missiles have to be produced regularly to maintain expertise, supply chain and infrastructure. A small hint about missile production capacity of India can be revealed when ISRO said that 50-60 launches per year of SSLV is to take place and it will cost only 1 tenth of PSLV launch (comes to 15-20 crore). If SSLV can be made in 50-60, then other missiles can be made in much larger quantity. So, a large number of missiles are continually made. And as technology improves, the missiles get an upgrade and new technology is used in newer production batches

 

[Adioz]

There is no sanctioned number of missiles. We keep making more as needed. Since there is a real threat in neighbourhood, no limits exist.

Also, the missiles have to be produced regularly to maintain expertise, supply chain and infrastructure. A small hint about missile production capacity of India can be revealed when ISRO said that 50-60 launches per year of SSLV is to take place and it will cost only 1 tenth of PSLV launch (comes to 15-20 crore). If SSLV can be made in 50-60, then other missiles can be made in much larger quantity. So, a large number of missiles are continually made. And as technology improves, the missiles get an upgrade and new technology is used in newer production batches

Any source? Or is this mere conjecture based off of ISRO's projection of costs of a yet to be launched rocket?

Everything in every inventory in the world has a sanctioned strength. The Agni series of missiles are meant to loft nuclear warheads. How many nuclear warheads do we have? 130. How many missiles are needed to carry 130 nukes? 130. How many dummy missiles can we need for deception? 130X5? So all in all, there is an upper bound to the number of Agni missiles we require in our inventory.

 

[ezsasa]

Anybody has video or pics of what a payload of 300, 500 and 1000 kg on warhead (non-Brahmos) blast looks like?

Foren maal bhi chalega.......

I just want to see what the impact looks like.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

How many nuclear warheads do we have? 130.

Who told you that India has 130 nuclear warheads? Is it some useless foreign agencies which make arbitrary conjectures? Did Govt ever disclose the number of nuclear bombs to anyone?

 

[scatterStorm]

Anybody has video or pics of what a payload of 300, 500 and 1000 kg on warhead (non-Brahmos) blast looks like?

Foren maal bhi chalega.......

I just want to see what the impact looks like.

I found a vid of 2000 pounds = 900Kg sub sonic AGM 158 cruise missile explosion video.
Considering Pralay to have more kinetic velocity it will be able to impart more damage and initial shockwave.


A more comparable blast, as these are guided bombs.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

Anybody has video or pics of what a payload of 300, 500 and 1000 kg on warhead (non-Brahmos) blast looks like?

Foren maal bhi chalega.......

I just want to see what the impact looks like.

Here is minuteman ICBM test with dummy concrete warhead striking Kwajalein base:

 

[ezsasa]

I found a vid of 2000 pounds = 900Kg sub sonic AGM 158 cruise missile explosion video.
Considering Pralay to have more kinetic velocity it will be able to impart more damage and initial shockwave.


A more comparable blast, as these are guided bombs.

So basically when we talk about missiles like pralay, we should actually be talking about how many pralays can be sent at a time not just about individual missile. if 5-6 jdams are required to takeout one compound, similiar number if not more pralays are required to take out a compound of similar size.

it boils down to mass production of said missiles, not just technology.

 

[scatterStorm]

So basically when we talk about missiles like pralay, we should actually be talking about how many pralays can be sent at a time not just about individual missile. if 5-6 jdams are required to takeout one compound, similiar number if not more pralays are required to take out a compound of similar size.

it boils down to mass production of said missiles, not just technology.

Yes, but I think Pralay won't be for saturation purposes like these JDAMS or MLRS or carpet bombing stuff, if we take an example of AGM 158 it's best suited for destroying those enemy bunkers, terrorist outpost and forward post for the first initial wave.

Anything to saturate, we have those 450 Kg Sudarshan LGB's. Here's a impact video of 2 LGBs below:

 

[Chinmoy]

So basically when we talk about missiles like pralay, we should actually be talking about how many pralays can be sent at a time not just about individual missile. if 5-6 jdams are required to takeout one compound, similiar number if not more pralays are required to take out a compound of similar size.

it boils down to mass production of said missiles, not just technology.

This is a picture of one BCES warhead effect of Prithvi. Same would go into Pralay. With a warhead like this, one missile is capable enough to take out half of a airstrip or one compound.

 

[ezsasa]

View attachment 27688

This is a picture of one BCES warhead effect of Prithvi. Same would go into Pralay. With a warhead like this, one missile is capable enough to take out half of a airstrip or one compound.

if that was the case surely americans would have used a similar muniton in the video posted by @scatterStorm .
there must be a tactical reason for them to use 5-6 JDAMs.. it cannot be the case americans do not have such munitions in their arsenal.

 

[Chinmoy]

if that was the case surely americans would have used a similar muniton in the video posted by @scatterStorm .
there must be a tactical reason for them to use 5-6 JDAMs.. it cannot be the case americans do not have such munitions in their arsenal.

Reason is simple....... Cost and precision. With JDAM you have a cheap but more effective weapon then a missile. Accuracy of JDAM are pinpoint whereas a missile could be in single digit, but not pin point.

US could afford JDAM because of complete air dominance in a battle field. But India would be wanting in such a scenario. So these kind of missile based warhead is a better bet for us. Moreover when SRBM is concerned, US has stopped the production of their ATACMS. Under the life extension of their ATACMS they are moving to unitary warhead rather then bomlets for safety reason.

The TACMS (formerly ATACMS) modernization process disassembles and demilitarizes previous-generation submunition warheads, which do not comply with the 2018 international treaty, replacing them with new unitary warheads. The modernization process also resets the missile’s 20+ year shelf life, effectively creating a new missile for a fraction of a new missile’s cost.

http://armyrecognition.com/septembe...ernized_tacms_missile_to_us_army_5290916.html

So its not like they didn't have. But they have their own sweet reason to move away from it. As far as JDAM is concerned, India too have its parallel in form of Guruthma. But again precision is the key in it too.

 

[scatterStorm]

@ezsasa as mentioned by @Chinmoy it's true that only complete air dominance is required condition. However this won't be the case where an entire nations army, navy and airforce is fighting us. Thus we need missiles to achieve precision strike during first wave. Our enemy isn't fighting with just an AK, IED and mule, it's a full blown nuclear weapon state.

But I am confident that IAF has the capability to achieve air dominance if required even though our main stay of force is still the Indian Army and army needs missiles, MLRS and Field guns to saturate our enemy positions. Hopefully with the new Joint services command we might see more tactical distribution of roles for each forces properly laid out.

Oh and another video of what could be another weapons to saturate enemy positions. It's the DRDO SAAW with a 120 KG warhead.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

@ezsasa as mentioned by @Chinmoy it's true that only complete air dominance is required condition. However this won't be the case where an entire nations army, navy and airforce is fighting us. Thus we need missiles to achieve precision strike during first wave. Our enemy isn't fighting with just an AK, IED and mule, it's a full blown nuclear weapon state.

But I am confident that IAF has the capability to achieve air dominance if required even though our main stay of force is still the Indian Army and army needs missiles, MLRS and Field guns to saturate our enemy positions. Hopefully with the new Joint services command we might see more tactical distribution of roles for each forces properly laid out.

Oh and another video of what could be another weapons to saturate enemy positions. It's the DRDO SAAW with a 120 KG warhead.

There is no shortcut or simple solutions in war. The air dominance is not an easy thing when you speak of things like SAM, missile etc. Air power is not absolute either. A plane can carry limited ammunition and can travel limited distance which limits its ability to strike rapidly.

Missiles are very much important to cripple the enemy in the first move. Destroying enemy airbase, ammunition depot, ports etc are very important to contain the enemy immediately. There the missiles come into picture.

 

[no smoking]

Agni III which has declared Weight of 48 tons is now reduced to only 23 tons. This is the level of changes new technologies have bough in missile technology. So when you talk of any missile, it is always a new version.

No, you won't be able to reduce the weight of missile from 48 tons to 23 tons without changing the engine and fuel. But if you do that, you have to re-design the whole missile.

This is a tricky word. Low cost compared to what? It is certainly not low cost compared to Agni but certainly Cheaper than Brahmos.

Dude, the cost of BMD technologies will definitely make the missile far more expensive than Brahmos. The technologies used to build Brahmos are all from last 80s and 90s, quite mature. On the other hand, most of the BMD technologies are newly developed after 2000.

The question here is that why not use Agni I instead of Pralay? Because it can not strike like a cruise missile and has not the survival capability of Pralay. Pralay can be used for precision strike with around 800 KG payload. So this is a highly specific missile and hence the development was done on priority basis.

The tactic missiles don't need to fly like cruise missile. They are two different weapons for different scenarios.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

The tactic missiles don't need to fly like cruise missile. They are two different weapons for different scenarios.

Obviously you do not know anything about the new category of missile to which Avinash chandra termed as shaped trajectory missiles. They are some what similar to boost glide vehicles. If you educate yourself why our armed forces put forward an urgent requirement of Pralay inspite of Agni I P in service, you will get your answer.

No, you won't be able to reduce the weight of missile from 48 tons to 23 tons without changing the engine and fuel. But if you do that, you have to re-design the whole missile.

NOW Read This Straight From Hourse's mouth.

Ms. Thomas said that while the two-stage Agni-III missile capable of hitting targets up to 3,000 km away weighed 50 tonnes, the team was able to bring down the weight of the missile to 22 tonnes.

https://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/agniv-vital-tessy-thomas/article5191824.ece

 

[no smoking]

Obviously you do not know anything about the new category of missile to which Avinash chandra termed as shaped trajectory missiles. They are some what similar to boost glide vehicles. If you educate yourself why our armed forces put forward an urgent requirement of Pralay inspite of Agni I P in service, you will get your answer.

Ok, obviously, you don't know anything about these 2 different technologies.

Generally, the shaped trajectory we talking about is that missile relies on liquid engine or rudder to change its flying posture to change its trajectory. However, the trajectory is set before launch. The boost glide vehicles are new technology, it is using the special aerodynamic shape and controllable during the flight. Two completely different things. The former has been used in many ballistic missiles of today. The latter, however, is still a technology in development.

NOW Read This Straight From Hourse's mouth.

Ms. Thomas said that while the two-stage Agni-III missile capable of hitting targets up to 3,000 km away weighed 50 tonnes, the team was able to bring down the weight of the missile to 22 tonnes.
https://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/agniv-vital-tessy-thomas/article5191824.ece

Looks like you don't have basic knowledge to under what she said and what I said.

Firstly, you missed the words she said:"It saw several technological enhancements and we had to redesign the entire system, use maraging steel and composite motor rocket." So, just I pointed out, they have to re-design the whole system instead of simply replacing some parts;

Secondly, in any rocket, the majority of its weight comes from fuel. So, by simply replacing shell and engine material won't bring 28 tongs reduction. The only way to do that is change the fuel which means you have to RE-DESIGN a NEW missile.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

Generally, the shaped trajectory we talking about is that missile relies on liquid engine or rudder to change its flying posture to change its trajectory. However, the trajectory is set before launch. The boost glide vehicles are new technology, it is using the special aerodynamic shape and controllable during the flight. Two completely different things. The former has been used in many ballistic missiles of today. The latter, however, is still a technology in development.

That is why I told that they are some what similar and not same. In both the vehicles, trajectories varies as per the requirement and unlike traditional Ballistic trajectory. Please comprehend my post properly and do not write what you want to write in response.
Now everybody know that without redesign, weight can not be reduced less than Half and I precisely argued the same in in my previous post. Your problem is that you just want to argue without understanding what others are saying. Read here what I wrote.

Agni III which has declared Weight of 48 tons is now reduced to only 23 tons. This is the level of changes new technologies have bough in missile technology. So when you talk of any missile, it is always a new version.

 

[scatterStorm]

There is no shortcut or simple solutions in war. The air dominance is not an easy thing when you speak of things like SAM, missile etc. Air power is not absolute either. A plane can carry limited ammunition and can travel limited distance which limits its ability to strike rapidly.

Missiles are very much important to cripple the enemy in the first move. Destroying enemy airbase, ammunition depot, ports etc are very important to contain the enemy immediately. There the missiles come into picture.

And that's why I mentioned how critical is the role of army and these missiles as well. It's all about synergy and that could only come if the tri services put aside who has got more 56inch chest and who's uniform looks more pretty.

A tri service command under Joint chief of staff will go miles for us in the long run, if we want to defend our nation or dominate in the region as well.

Good news: We already have started working over it, cyber and space defence will also be included however I believe army would take up these roles in Joint command of operations as well.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

And that's why I mentioned how critical is the role of army and these missiles as well. It's all about synergy and that could only come if the tri services put aside who has got more 56inch chest and who's uniform looks more pretty.

A tri service command under Joint chief of staff will go miles for us in the long run, if we want to defend our nation or dominate in the region as well.

Good news: We already have started working over it, cyber and space defence will also be included however I believe army would take up these roles in Joint command of operations as well.

I never said that triservice integration is not needed. I too support triservice integration. Moreover, you are posting off topic posts in pralay missile thread

 

[Mikesingh]

I thought this was worth a read so posting it here for your info and comments.

INTRODUCTION :

Pakistani establishment has the habit of staying in a fool’s paradise that it will always have its deterrence alive against numerically and weapons-wise superior Indian Military. Every few years it raises a new bogey from its closet that it has found a counter to India’s Cold Start Doctrine. And in the garb of this subterfuge it continues to stoke fires of separatism in Kashmir and other places uninterrupted by funding and fueling them from across the border. In fact this speciousness suits Pakistani military as it serves two purposes simultaneously. On the one hand, the Pakistani Army or so called Deep State can keep its relevance in Pakistan’s already tottering political-economic set-up, and on the other it serves to psychologically dissuade Indian Military from launching an all out offensive against Pakistan.

THREAT FROM PAKISTAN :

A cocksure, self-confident Pakistan hedges its bets mainly against three missiles that it believes would see it through in case hostilities start with India. First is Hatf IX or NASR which is a tactical ballistic missile with a range of 60km that can be armed with conventional or tactical nuclear warheads against advancing units of Indian Army. However it will take some time before Pakistan manages to manufacture in sufficiently large numbers. Primary threat therefore -both then and now-stems from 80 solid-fuelled single-stage Hatf III or Ghaznavi (M-11/CSS-7 Mod 1/DF-11) 280-km range Tactical Ballistic Missile (TBM) and 60 liquid-fuelled single-stage IRBM’s (Intermediate-range ballistic missiles) Hatf V or Ghauri-1 (Nodong-1 of North Korean origin). The Pakistan Army deploys two Missile Groups each of the Ghauri-1 and Ghaznavi (grouped under two separate Artillery Brigades).

During hostilities with India, all these missiles will be armed with conventional HE (High Explosive) or FAE-based (Fuel Air Explosives) warheads. Each such Missile Group comprises 18 Ghaznavi Transporter Erector Launchers (TELs) each with one ready-to-fire missile and two reloads, and 18 Ghauri-1 TELs each with two ready-to-fire missiles and two reloads. A Group can also be divided into three Batteries (with six Ghaznavi TELs and six missiles plus two reloads and six Ghauri-1 TELs with 12 missiles and 24 reloads).

INDIA’S THEATRE MISSILE DEFENCE :

Though the Indian Air Force had decided to acquire Theatre Missile Defence (TMD) assets way back in 1996, it was the Ministry of Defence-owned Defence Research and Development Organisation that first got into the act of proposing a homegrown solution, for which it initiated the development of the PAD/PDV family of exo-atmospheric interceptor missiles and AAD family of endo-atmospheric interceptor missiles. For target acquisition-cum-engagement, two EL/M-2080 ‘Green Pine’ active phased-array L-band long-range tracking radars (LRTR) were ordered in late 1998 from Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), along with two THALES-built Master-A MFCRs, and a TMD simulation testbed from Israel’s Tadiran Electronic Systems.

Unfortunately, despite 19 years of R & D effort, the DRDO was finding it difficult to offer a fully functional TMD system, leave alone a networked TMD network. The main problem had been the DRDO’s inability to develop hypersonic interceptor missiles and their internally-mounted Ka-band active phased-array radars for terminal guidance. Only homegrown X-band and Ku-band radar seekers have been designed and tested.

And that is precisely the reason why, in 2013, when a combined team from Israeli Aerospace Industries and Russia’s JSC Almaz-Antey MSDB made an unsolicited presentation to the IAF on an improved version of the S-400 ‘Triumph’ LR-SAM (a generation ahead of what has been sold to China) that would make use of IAI’s latest EL/M-2090U UHF-band active phased-array LRTR, the IAF began making hectic plans for procuring such a system for TMD within the foreseeable future.

Presently, the S-400 makes use of four different types of supersonic endo-atmospheric interceptor missiles (top speed of 4.8km/second): the 40N6E, the 9M96E2, the 48N6E3 and the 48N6E2, all of which are armed with HE-fragmentation warheads. What Russia has proposed for the IAF are two HYPERSONIC missiles, the exo-atmospheric 77N6-N and the endo-atmospheric 77N6-NI, having top speeds of 7km/second and also being the first SAMs of Russian origin to possess INERT warheads, i.e. warheads that do not contain any explosives and instead, are ‘hittile’, meaning they will destroy inbound TBMs, IRBMs or MRBMs (Medium Range Ballistic Missiles) by sheer force of impact.

The most revolutionary element of the 77N6-N and the 77N6-NI hypersonic LR-SAMs will be their on-board nose-mounted, Ka-band millimeter-wave active phased-array radar seekers and their real-time discrimination algorithms required for fire-control and guidance of hit-to-kill interceptors. To this end, the radar seekers have been designed with a rigid mount and narrow beam to provide precise angle metric accuracy. The combination of metric accuracy, wide bandwidth, and high Doppler-resolution capabilities makes them excellent sensors for real-time discrimination, for they can provide extremely accurate identification-processing estimates of motion differences caused by mass imbalances on real and threat-like targets.

The 300-tonne EL/M-2090U ULTRA C-22 LRTR features an array of 22 UHF-band transmit-receive modules (TRM) in a single clustered unit that has been designed so that modules can be easily swapped. Using UHF, rather than the higher frequency bands, has particular application at long ranges since it suffers from less signal loss in the atmosphere. A discriminating innovation of the ELM-2090U is the digitisation of the signals at the TRM-level, which allows more flexibility in beam-forming and shaping. For TMD along a sectoral footprint, IAI has developed the EL/M-2090U’s ULTRA C-6 version, which has six TRM clusters. Each cluster can electronically steer its beam through +/-60 degrees in azimuth and across a 40-degree sector in elevation. In all cases, the array can be mechanically tilted through 30 degrees in elevation to provide a total elevation coverage of 70 degrees. The larger C-22 version comes mounted on a rail assembly that can be mechanically slewed through +/100 degrees to give 320-degree coverage.

As per the IAF’s projections, there existed a requirement for 12 Batteries of the S-400 (each Battery using four TELs each housing four cannister-encased LR-SAMs), plus 12 C-6 LRTRs and two C-22 LRTRs. In other words, as per the IAF’s appreciation, a total of 11 strategic sectors are required to be protected against inbound TBMs, IRBMs and MRBMs.

INDIA’S STANCE VIS-A-VIS PAKISTAN :

Interestingly India had officially decided not to field a new generation of solid-fuelled tactical ballistic missiles—be they conventionally armed or nuclear-capable—for replacing the liquid-fuelled Prithvi-1 NLOS-BSMs of 1990s vintage. What this essentially meant, was that unlike Pakistan, India will not use ballistic missiles of any type that are conventionally armed, since such weapons have zero counter-force/counter-strike value. Pakistan, on the other hand, views conventionally armed ballistic missiles as weapons that can be employed as ‘terror weapons’ against civilian targets like large Indian cities as part of an effort to demoralise the civilian population residing in cities that are either India’s financial hubs, or technological hubs.

Therefore, if Pakistan wants to secure the deterrent value of its strategic Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD arsenals) against an Indian Theatre Missile Defence shield, it can only do so if it formally adopts a ‘no first-use’ doctrine with universal applicability, at least for its strategic WMD inventory, if not for the short-range Tactical Nuclear Warheads (TNWs) that are presently intended for use only in battlefields within Pakistan.

However despite coaxing by USA since the term of President Obama, Pakistan has refused to abide by the ‘No First Use of Nuclear Weapons.’ In this scenario only two options remained for India. One was to procure Hypersonic anti-missile systems and neutralise the threat of Pakistan’s WMDs and delivery systems. Other is to join forces with like-minded democracies like USA, UK, Afghanistan and possibly Iran and physically confiscate or destroy Pakistan’s entire arsenal of WMD’s.

HOW PRALAY, PRAHAR AND S-400 ARE SIGNIFICANT :

It was in response to China’s People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force (PLARF) fielding a sizeable inventory of conventionally armed BMs in Tibet like Dongfeng 12 (DF-12), that Indian Army felt the need of an effective counter that could defeat the TMDs of the adversary and hit high value targets. Besides Pakistan had begun to flaunt series of short range missiles like Hatf 2 “Abdali”, Hatf 9 “Nasr”, Hatf 8 “Ra’ad”.

Earlier the only means for the IA to strike targets at distances of close to 500 km was the Brahmos supersonic cruise missile (CM), which though deadly accurate, can carry a payload of only about 200 kg or so, besides being somewhat expensive. Therefore DRDO in 2015 was tasked to develop a new mobile short-range ballistic missile dubbed “Pralay” which has the ability to carry several different conventional warheads.

Conventional warheads that can be equipped on the Pralay include cluster warheads, fuel-air explosives, bunker-busters, and electromagnetic pulse (EMP) warheads. Pralay can also carry nuclear warheads up to 800 kg and employs a maneuverable re-entry vehicle (MaRV) and decoys to defeat theater missile defense systems. Even with a payload of 1000kgs the missile will have a range of 350km. With a lighter payload of 500kg Pralay will be able to hit a target as far as 400km.

Pralay Missile system will also be getting a Canister Mobile Launcher based aboard an 8×8 truck chassis. This system uses on-board inertial navigation system (INS) and will carry a warhead weighing under 800kgs with a circular error probable (CEP) of less than 10 meters. Pralay will also have unconventional flight profile and will have the ability to change directions to make it more unpredictable and raise difficulty level for Air Defence Systems. Further, mobility of the launch platform also makes a launch difficult to prevent.

Prahaar is another solid-fuelled TBM (with a range of 150 km) developed by DRDO which is expected to replace the Prithvi-I short-range ballistic missile. It has superior hardware components and better accuracy than Prithvi series of missiles which were developed in 1990s.

DRDO is also developing Pakistan-centric nuclear missile called Agni-1P which will replace Prithvi and Agni-1 and will have a range of 300 to 700 kilometers. Agni-1P will be a two-stage, solid propellant missile with relatively latest technology which will vastly improve its accuracy but relatively will be reserved for High-value targets. Then to replace Prithvi-III missile Indian Navy is getting Dhanush surface-to-surface missile with a range of around 350km.

While these are some among many attacking options for Indian Army, Pakistan’s offensive if any would be thwarted by India’s TMD studded with S-400 launchers. For securing high value targets, India has put in place layered defence of indigenous systems like Akash Missiles and Barak air-defence systems developed in highly cherished collaboration with Israel.

HOW WAR AGAINST PAKISTAN WILL PLAY OUT :

When push comes to shove, India will order planned invasion of Pakistani territory in Rajasthan, Punjab and Jammu & Kashmir. Marching Indian Units will be protected by fully mobile Akash-2 and Barak-8 anti-missile systems. Pakistani Army vaingloriously claimed that Pakistan’s Nasr missile which is to be used on advancing Indian troops inside Pakistani territory has put paid to India’s Cold Start Doctrine. With that end in view, Pakistan has invested heavily in miniaturized tactical nuclear weapons. But it would be foolish to believe Indian troops are going to invade Pakistani territory unguarded. Nor is Indian Army wanting in answers to Pakistan’s 60km range NASR missile.

Indian MBRL PINAKA-II alone strikes 75km away and its range is being further augmented. Research in guided and possibly manouverable shells as in developed countries is at an advanced stage. That apart, use of TNWs inside Pakistani territory will also have a collateral damage. And in this case bearing the brunt will be Pakistan’s own innocent population which will further serve to demoralise already stressed Pakistani government machinery.

Bamboozled by the initial outcome Pakistan will resort to launching its Hatf series of missiles targetting Indian cities and key installations. With first few launches subsumed by S-400, the Pakistani Launchers will give itself away to Indian AEWACS (Airborne Early Warning and Control Systems). Foregone that immediate reprisal from 3 arms of Indian Military using PRALAYA, PRAHAR & naval DHANUSH TBMs will be huge. Already shoddy Pakistani Arsenal suffering from want of spares since decades will hold little water against India’s Brahmos and Nirbhay Cruise missiles.

There is going to be enormous loss of life on Indian side as well, that is given, but Pakistan as it is known today will simply cease to exist. Post-war there would be reorganisation of Pakistani territory under the overarching umbrella of United Nations. Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir will finally be united with the state of Jammu and Kashmir.

A country that is fomenting terrorism and holding not just India but whole world hostage to its nuclear arsenal since long, would eventually have been brought to book. And we shall get to breathe once more in a free and secure world

Some inputs from trishul blog

https://globaldefencewatch.com/with...cxUH8eD0078Qywf0aaXhnudWmqRFaY6C9UZGWVA0VkWpE