Agni & Prithvi Ballistic Missiles : News & Discussions

safriz

Well-Known member
Jan 1, 2018
1,717
616
UK, Pakistan
You asked me what was the smallest possible warhead, not reentry vehicle. The W87 which you gave as an example is also a warhead which is then fitted into a reentry vehicle. W87 is not a reentry vehicle by itself. You changed the topic from one statement to another by simply saying that these don't have shielding. Do you really think that shielding takes up so much space and is having thickness in feet? Again, Shaurya is 0.74m in diameter but the warhead weight can be varied by adding fillers into the reentry cone. The warheads of these tiny missiles can also be fitted inside appropriate reentry vehicle

Your theoretical assumptions fall flat as missiles are designed to have optimal size of warhead which can then be reduced in size by adding thermo-coal/foam fillers. Designing a warhead to have small warhead can be disastrous as they will never be able to mount bigger warheads when necessary. Missiles are made to be flexible and able to mount an many warheads as possible


There is practically no difference between conventional and nuclear missile. There is no reason to call them conventional
No. Warheads come as a whole package, along with heat shield. What you are saying is the canopy and warhead bus or Post boost vehicle which can be changed for different types of warheads and canopy keeps the missile aerodynamic shape intact while going up. On the way down there is no canopy and warhead's own heat shield has to work.,and it cannot be retrofitted on the spot. But yes, the actual "Atom Bomb is a separate structure residing inside the heat shield.
We saw this clearly in North Korean Hydrogen bomb press released? Kim is stood beside the actual nuke and the Heat sheild is the green thing in the foreground,also explained in the diagram hanging on the wall.
rtx3ehns-e1504400194352[1].jpg

Missiles are not general purpose vehicles as you put it. SLV are general purpose. Any misisle is bespoke made to carry a certain type of warhead.
No wonder India made missiles to carry nukes and didn't use SLV . Both are rockets and go to space,don't they?
Also look around. With every Missile you will see designated type of warhead. Not that it will carry any available warhead and the rest of the space in the canopy can be filled with Styrofoam as you put it.
For example W76 assigned for Trident 1
W88 and W76 assigned for Trident II
W78 , W87 for Minuteman-3
Likewise India or any country builds missiles for certain warhead not as general purpose missile.
However i agree that missiles can carry certain designated types of warheads , but in that case there is visible evidence.
EXample isMinuteman missile in different visibly differentiable configurations for carrying different numbers and types of warheads. (This is a Museum Display picture but depicts actual configuration)
Peacekeeper,_Minuteman_I_and_Minuteman_III_ICBMs[1].jpg




Have we seen any Indian Ballistic Missile in such visibly different configurations? (Except Shuriya K-15)
You are free to post any pics in this regard.
 

Arvind

The PoKeMon
Moderator
Dec 1, 2017
1,393
996
India
No. Warheads come as a whole package, along with heat shield. What you are saying is the canopy and warhead bus or Post boost vehicle which can be changed for different types of warheads and canopy keeps the missile aerodynamic shape intact while going up. On the way down there is no canopy and warhead's own heat shield has to work.,and it cannot be retrofitted on the spot. But yes, the actual "Atom Bomb is a separate structure residing inside the heat shield.
We saw this clearly in North Korean Hydrogen bomb press released? Kim is stood beside the actual nuke and the Heat sheild is the green thing in the foreground,also explained in the diagram hanging on the wall.
View attachment 1477
Missiles are not general purpose vehicles as you put it. SLV are general purpose. Any misisle is bespoke made to carry a certain type of warhead.
No wonder India made missiles to carry nukes and didn't use SLV . Both are rockets and go to space,don't they?
Also look around. With every Missile you will see designated type of warhead. Not that it will carry any available warhead and the rest of the space in the canopy can be filled with Styrofoam as you put it.
For example W76 assigned for Trident 1
W88 and W76 assigned for Trident II
W78 , W87 for Minuteman-3
Likewise India or any country builds missiles for certain warhead not as general purpose missile.
However i agree that missiles can carry certain designated types of warheads , but in that case there is visible evidence.
EXample isMinuteman missile in different visibly differentiable configurations for carrying different numbers and types of warheads. (This is a Museum Display picture but depicts actual configuration)
View attachment 1478



Have we seen any Indian Ballistic Missile in such visibly different configurations? (Except Shuriya K-15)
You are free to post any pics in this regard.

We are finding it hard to develop a multi caliber capable assault rifle and you are asking us building missiles which can carry different different warheads.... :ROFLMAO:
 

suryakiran

Team StratFront
Dec 1, 2017
782
963
Bangalore
There is practically no difference between conventional and nuclear missile. There is no reason to call them conventional

The reason to differentiate is to ensure the other side knows what is what, instead of triggering launches from both sides. There is a reason, why the BrahMos and Nirbhay are not designated as nuclear launch vehicles anywhere in the Indian official releases, but always as nuclear capable by our media. There is a nice discussion by @Hellfire somewhere on the forum. You could read that.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,552
8,789
India
There is practically no difference between conventional and nuclear missile. There is no reason to call them conventional

None at the technical level, but massive differences at the level you employ them.

You need to clearly demarcate weapons that will be used for nuclear warfare and for conventional warfare so that the enemy knows you are attacking them with nuclear weapons when the time comes. Or else the minute we launch one Brahmos for conventional use, the enemy will retaliate with nuclear weapons because they will assume it's a nuclear attack.
 

Arvind

The PoKeMon
Moderator
Dec 1, 2017
1,393
996
India
None at the technical level, but massive differences at the level you employ them.

You need to clearly demarcate weapons that will be used for nuclear warfare and for conventional warfare so that the enemy knows you are attacking them with nuclear weapons when the time comes. Or else the minute we launch one Brahmos for conventional use, the enemy will retaliate with nuclear weapons because they will assume it's a nuclear attack.

Is it applicable for nation having First use policy? They will surely bluff to get their first strike pass through.
 

Kshithij Sharma

Well-Known member
Dec 4, 2017
756
551
India
No. Warheads come as a whole package, along with heat shield. What you are saying is the canopy and warhead bus or Post boost vehicle which can be changed for different types of warheads and canopy keeps the missile aerodynamic shape intact while going up. On the way down there is no canopy and warhead's own heat shield has to work.,and it cannot be retrofitted on the spot. But yes, the actual "Atom Bomb is a separate structure residing inside the heat shield.
We saw this clearly in North Korean Hydrogen bomb press released? Kim is stood beside the actual nuke and the Heat sheild is the green thing in the foreground,also explained in the diagram hanging on the wall.
View attachment 1477
Missiles are not general purpose vehicles as you put it. SLV are general purpose. Any misisle is bespoke made to carry a certain type of warhead.
No wonder India made missiles to carry nukes and didn't use SLV . Both are rockets and go to space,don't they?
Also look around. With every Missile you will see designated type of warhead. Not that it will carry any available warhead and the rest of the space in the canopy can be filled with Styrofoam as you put it.
For example W76 assigned for Trident 1
W88 and W76 assigned for Trident II
W78 , W87 for Minuteman-3
Likewise India or any country builds missiles for certain warhead not as general purpose missile.
However i agree that missiles can carry certain designated types of warheads , but in that case there is visible evidence.
EXample isMinuteman missile in different visibly differentiable configurations for carrying different numbers and types of warheads. (This is a Museum Display picture but depicts actual configuration)
View attachment 1478



Have we seen any Indian Ballistic Missile in such visibly different configurations? (Except Shuriya K-15)
You are free to post any pics in this regard.
No, India rarely displays its missiles i public but keeps it a secret. Even the launch of missiles are not publicised in videos.

But Indian scientists have been very clear in saying that the warhead weight can be varied to increase range or increase payload for shorter range. This is a clear indication that the maximum size of warhead is limited by the size of the cone but the minimum size can be varied.

Warhead is the bomb.

This is a reentry vehicle, not a warhead:
1516618465663.png


This is a war head:
1516618558669.png


Warheads are never kept exposed but always covered with a cone. The cone can be toughened ones for ballistic missiles or a relatively weaker ones for cruise missiles.

Here is an official definition of warhead: What is a nuclear warhead? What is fissile material?

This is how reentry vehicles are fitted in nose cones:
1516619440870.png


Don't mistake nose cone for reentry vehicle. It is not necessarily true. Nose cone can be different from RV even if there is just 1 warhead. Generally this configuration is better to ensure that multiple sized warheads can be mounted as per needs without having to redesign the missile
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Bon Plan

Kshithij Sharma

Well-Known member
Dec 4, 2017
756
551
India
None at the technical level, but massive differences at the level you employ them.

You need to clearly demarcate weapons that will be used for nuclear warfare and for conventional warfare so that the enemy knows you are attacking them with nuclear weapons when the time comes. Or else the minute we launch one Brahmos for conventional use, the enemy will retaliate with nuclear weapons because they will assume it's a nuclear attack.
You are assuming that if India attacks with conventional weapons, the opponent will also respond conventionally. But, the whole point of war is that there is no rules towards enemies. Rules exist only between allies in war. So, there is no reason to make such assumptions. Gambling based on hopes is inappropriate. Either go all out or don't escalate beyond small arms and shelling
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Dagger

Kshithij Sharma

Well-Known member
Dec 4, 2017
756
551
India
The reason to differentiate is to ensure the other side knows what is what, instead of triggering launches from both sides. There is a reason, why the BrahMos and Nirbhay are not designated as nuclear launch vehicles anywhere in the Indian official releases, but always as nuclear capable by our media. There is a nice discussion by @Hellfire somewhere on the forum. You could read that.

If you fire a brahmos at pakistan, do you expect pakistan to make assumptions that it must have been conventional bomb because Indian media says so and hence we will only fire conventional missiles? Or do you expect Pakistan to take no chance and go all out firing all the missiles they have at India?
 

bonobashi

Well-Known member
Dec 3, 2017
887
413
Sir, he was saying that he knows more about Indian missiles than any Indian. Otherwise I am in no mood to ask any question to him.

Is he right, or is he wrong? If he is wrong, give him the facts to prove him wrong. It's not about your mood; park it before you enter a discussion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Superkaif

Kshithij Sharma

Well-Known member
Dec 4, 2017
756
551
India
Nuclear strike these days is equal to kids throwing candies at each other. o_O:ROFLMAO:
There is no fer of destruction once oil runs out which is happening soon. Nukes don't kill everything but merely destroys infrastructure and economic production which will come down anyways once oil depletes. So, what should one fear at all?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paro

Superkaif

Well-Known member
Dec 21, 2017
523
454
UK
Is he right, or is he wrong? If he is wrong, give him the facts to prove him wrong. It's not about your mood; park it before you enter a discussion.

One attempts to bring a "guest" with potentially a different and challenging perspective - maybe wrong, maybe right. It should increase interaction and create a healthy appetite for debate. However some find this a challenge and rather put down. What this leads to is 10 people with similar passions and beliefs thus numbing the nerves to create a debate or discussion.
Alas one will continue until the penny drops. :coffee:
 
  • Agree
Reactions: bonobashi

Arvind

The PoKeMon
Moderator
Dec 1, 2017
1,393
996
India
One crucial detail Indian members are missing here while trying to assess Indian existing and future MIRV capabilities.
Whats the lightest and smallest Indian warhead of Strategic Yield you can find on any existing missile?
To MIRV the warhead must be small in size and lightweight.
For Example Americans use W87 for MIRV configuration,and the warhead is 180cm tall 56 Cm wide and weighs 270 Kg.
So a Minuteman can carry three of these and still remain within it's maximum payload capacity of 1150 Kg.
Also Minuteman second stage is 1.32 meters wide. Three ,circles of 0.56 meters each can fit in a large circle of 1.32m dia. (check here Smaller Circles in a Larger Circle).

Try finding smallest and lightest Indian Warhead and then we can talk about Indian Mirv.
The smallest i can find is the meter wide Agni-1 warhead.

We dont have very small warhead with high yield now because we dont have MIRV capable missile. Once we have that, surely you will see smaller warheads.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,552
8,789
India
I dont see any value in it. Why wont someone bluff and do a first strike using vehicle declared for conventional use?

There's no need to bluff. If you are going for a nuclear strike, then go all out with your dedicated strategic weapons.

There are weapons earmarked for conventional warfighting and there are weapons earmarked for strategic deterrence. There is no need to combine the two. As far as India is concerned, our policy is NFU. But we will use nukes if there's a threat of NBC weapons being used against us. We don't need nuclear tipped Brahmos then, we will simply go all out with our strategic arsenal.

What you are referring to is a tactical nuclear strike, which is pretty useless because conventional weapons are highly specific and more flexible.

Regardless, if it's necessary to use Brahmos in a nuclear strike because of its specific capabilities, like sea skimming, then we can. But that's a decision that will probably be taken when we are already in a nuclear war.
 
  • Like
Reactions: suryakiran and Paro

bonobashi

Well-Known member
Dec 3, 2017
887
413
We dont have very small warhead with high yield now because we dont have MIRV capable missile. Once we have that, surely you will see smaller warheads.

Stands to reason that nobody will do something for the heck of it. Only if there is some specific need.
 

Kshithij Sharma

Well-Known member
Dec 4, 2017
756
551
India
There's no need to bluff. If you are going for a nuclear strike, then go all out with your dedicated strategic weapons.

There are weapons earmarked for conventional warfighting and there are weapons earmarked for strategic deterrence. There is no need to combine the two. As far as India is concerned, our policy is NFU. But we will use nukes if there's a threat of NBC weapons being used against us. We don't need nuclear tipped Brahmos then, we will simply go all out with our strategic arsenal.

What you are referring to is a tactical nuclear strike, which is pretty useless because conventional weapons are highly specific and more flexible.

Regardless, if it's necessary to use Brahmos in a nuclear strike because of its specific capabilities, like sea skimming, then we can. But that's a decision that will probably be taken when we are already in a nuclear war.

Difference between conventional and Nuclear is just a made up one. If you expect anyone to lose a war because they refuse to use nukes first, you are being delusional. There is nothing called separation between conventional missiles and nuclear missiles. Missiles and their warheads will be used according to objectives and operational necessity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shekhar Singh