| ▲ | walrus01 2 hours ago |
| The first, second and third stages all being solid rockets also means India now has a global-range ICBM, with only a little bit of modification needed to make it storable in a silo. Privately developed, but I would be astonished if the Indian military isn't well aware of this new capability. |
|
| ▲ | nirav72 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| India has had the ability to reach LEO and beyond for a while now. So bringing down a nuke anywhere on the planet wouldn't be that difficult for them. That goes for any country that has LEO launch capabilities. Of course miniaturization of the nuclear payload is another matter. |
| |
|
| ▲ | ghm2199 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The mil have had solid propulsion for a while https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agni-VI |
| |
| ▲ | walrus01 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Right, but see the details for estimated range and the map. Not that India has any foreseeable need to nuke Argentina but it's not in range. It's entirely possible the public data is wrong and the Agni VI has a global range. But by definition if you can put something into a 350x350 km low earth orbit (something like 7800m/s total delta V) you could also deliver a re-entering payload from your launch site to any other spot on earth, within the limitations of the inclination you're launching to. | | |
| ▲ | rrrazdan 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Multiple sources think that the real range is an ICBM level. And the Indian government purposely limits it's range. No strategic reason to communicate a larger range than needed and why have an headline that reads, "India develops capability to nuke Europe or US"? | |
| ▲ | londons_explore 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I was under the impression long range missiles aren't much use in global warfare anymore, because they are easy targets for missile defence systems. Even if your target doesn't have missile defence systems, any ally of theirs along the route can intercept too. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | mayama an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| India has developed ASAT, which is arguably more complicated that ICBM, agni series, they developed. India routinely understates ranges and appear non threatening. Agni5 and 6 are genuine ICBM, and with little tuning could reach anywhere in the world. India's bureaucracy and MEA is beset with gandhian mindset who try to avoid confrontations and minimise belligerence, opposite of PRC wolf warriors I guess. |
| |
| ▲ | alephnerd 28 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > India's bureaucracy and MEA is beset with gandhian mindset who try to avoid confrontations and minimise belligerence, opposite of PRC wolf warriors I guess. It isn't because of some purported Gandhian mindset. It's becuase India is in a pacing conflict with China and Pakistan, whereas China is in one with the US and historically the USSR. Assuming the Chagos Archipelago dispute gets resolved in the next decade (India and France backs it's return to Mauritius because Mauritius' police and military leadership are under direct Indian control [0] but the US prefers Chagos remaining under British control because we are closer aligned), India has no need to explicitly publicize ICBM capabilities. Additionally, publicly stating India has ICBM capabilities makes it harder to land transnational mining deals [1] because then discussions with Australia, Brazil, Canada, etc adopt a nuclear proliferation dimension as well as placing a target on India's private sector because of SpaceTech and DefenseTech's dual use implications. [0] - https://thesecretariat.in/article/inside-raisina-hill-nsa-to... [1] - https://www.ft.com/content/c5868e2f-8d19-4393-93be-2ad726a63... |
|
|
| ▲ | delta_p_delta_x an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| India has had ICBMs for decades now.[1] [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agni-V?wprov=sfla1 |
