Agni & Prithvi Ballistic Missiles : News & Discussions
- Thread starter Sathya
- Start date
Indian nuclear weapons, 2026
As India expands its nuclear stockpile to an estimated 190 warheads and ramps up plutonium production with its new fast breeder reactor, major technological strides in MIRV-equipped Agni-V missiles, rail-mobile launchers, and a growing SSBN fleet mark a decisive maturation of its nuclear...
thebulletin.org
BARC Newsletter October 1999 discussing the samples extracted from the Pokhran nuclear test site:
Yeah. FBRs are far more complex than TN bombs. Still some people will argue that we can make FBRs but not TN bombs. I just found this old PDF today. Thought I should post this.
Many still doubt the TN test success
Attached the DAE statement
"Successful in terms of achieving their scientific objectives and the capability to build fission and thermonuclear weapons with yields upto 200 kt"
Just a theory but the shorud motors was also seen near a site where the nose cone of Ababeel was found . tho the diameter of the nose cone looks smaller imo .
Idk if this is the right thread to post these questions, but here we are.
Since the Canisterization of the Missiles like the Agni V / Agni P or the Agni V -mk2/MIRV ,
-Possibly how much the indian Nuke doctrine has changed or is subjected to change ? .
One of the traditional feature of the Indo-Pak nuclear posture was the degree of separation b/w the warheads and its delivery system . Now with the canesterization this changes the equation as What canesterization does is that it allows the user to store , transport and operate the missiles with the Warheads mated on it . Improving reaction times , Ease of use and also increasing Level of threat/deterrence posed by the user .
So does this all means that Canisterization was more of a doctrinal shift then a technological one?
How does the GOI/SFC Plans to balance its canistered vs non canistered missiles ?
For eg Canistered missiles for the Chinese while Non canistered for the Pakistani side . How would Pakistan get to know the posture towards it has been changed and all the missiles under SFC are mated? Yk this could force us to mate our missiles too .
You get the idea , what im asking about right?
FYI this isnt under any OPSEC violation .
@Rajput Lion @Gautam @project igi @RationalGuy
Since the Canisterization of the Missiles like the Agni V / Agni P or the Agni V -mk2/MIRV ,
-Possibly how much the indian Nuke doctrine has changed or is subjected to change ? .
One of the traditional feature of the Indo-Pak nuclear posture was the degree of separation b/w the warheads and its delivery system . Now with the canesterization this changes the equation as What canesterization does is that it allows the user to store , transport and operate the missiles with the Warheads mated on it . Improving reaction times , Ease of use and also increasing Level of threat/deterrence posed by the user .
So does this all means that Canisterization was more of a doctrinal shift then a technological one?
How does the GOI/SFC Plans to balance its canistered vs non canistered missiles ?
For eg Canistered missiles for the Chinese while Non canistered for the Pakistani side . How would Pakistan get to know the posture towards it has been changed and all the missiles under SFC are mated? Yk this could force us to mate our missiles too .
You get the idea , what im asking about right?
FYI this isnt under any OPSEC violation .
@Rajput Lion @Gautam @project igi @RationalGuy
You do realise there isnt any scary info im asking , Any "knowing guy" will NEVER disclose such info on an open forum .
Kher , if you(in particular) dont want to answer it or just dont know what the answer could be then feel free to ignore .
Kher , if you(in particular) dont want to answer it or just dont know what the answer could be then feel free to ignore .
The previous posture was because of our generosity. Times changed after pakistani introduction of Nasr (WS-2) and tactical nuclear sabre rattling. How are we supposed to know what a small missile like it is carrying?
Ambiguity itself is part of the doctrine. No one is stopping you from canistering.
Relevant read: https://direct.mit.edu/isec/article/43/3/7/12216/India-s-Counterforce-Temptations-Strategic
IMHO, it's driven by operational necessity of maintaining credible CASD in the sea leg which negates the demated nuc doctrine -- the land leg simply followed suit.
Why you're so concerned about cainsterization all of a sudden I mean you for sure don't think we spent +$10 billion on Arihant class and K4 to keep warheads de mated even there? Canisterization debate is useless cuz Arihant already shows we have mated missiles ready to fire at any moment now that we have 3 SSBNs and will have more soon. This entire game changed 10 years ago.
As for canisterization I think most analysts agree a part of the nuclear arsenal on land is mated and ready to fire, a small part or bigger part nobody knows. Small likely.
Pak likely has a part ready to fire as well, most likely tactical warheads imo.
They have the warheads mated and launchers stowed in hardened shelters, they roll out, fire the missiles, and get back in.
This has been the primary driver (for India) of first creating a second strike capability, second - a rapid counterforce capability (Agni-P) once missile launches are detected
I don't think demated nukes were ever meant to be a confidence building measure (cbm) agreed between the two countries. It was more of a technical limitation on our part.
The earliest Prithvis were too bulky and used corrosive liquid fuel that had to be loaded just before launch. Otoh, Agni-1 was a hybrid missile with solid + liquid stages so cannisterization wouldn't have been practical.
That's no longer the case. Plus you cannot expect us to cart around 50t ICBMs without a proper environmentally controlled cannister.
The earliest Prithvis were too bulky and used corrosive liquid fuel that had to be loaded just before launch. Otoh, Agni-1 was a hybrid missile with solid + liquid stages so cannisterization wouldn't have been practical.
That's no longer the case. Plus you cannot expect us to cart around 50t ICBMs without a proper environmentally controlled cannister.
IMO canisterization has got nothing to do with doctrine w.r.t pak since most agni missiles are kept in climate controlled storages and the RVs don't require any special storage ( even the canistered agni prime rv is exposed ) so canistered or non-canistered they are mated and ready to fire with only warhead arming procedure before launch but i could be wrong here just my opinion
Last edited: