Missed a zero! With hypersonic cruise glide MIRVed warheads (not glide-bombs) on A-5 and successor A-6, the range actually is increased by 2000-3000 kms (not 200 kms as mentioned in my previous blog on the subject). So, an 8000 km A-5 becomes a near ICBM with 11000 km range (tho’, strictly speaking, 12000 kms range defines ICBM).
Further on ASMP-A, it can go supersonic at low altitude but isn’t maneuverable at these heights because its MiG-25-type air-intakes would be pulled sunder. At tree-top height it, in fact, becomes a “dumb bullet” that a mobile target can avoid, rendering ASMP-A vulnerable to interception. Brahmos, on the other hand, can pull an S-maneuver at very low altitudes. This was proved in the 2nd Brahmos test in the desert, destroying a target 20 kms away with pinpoint accuracy after relying on the Russian Glonass GPS. (The first Brahmos test failed, it may be recalled, because the US GPS it was using to cue to target “blinked” at a crucial moment in time in its flight path.)
Security Wise 
But will the A-6 get GoI sanction ? that is what matters irrespective of Dr. Avinash Chander’s push. Will a UPA3 or third front govt sanction A-6 ? I doubt. I just hope that UPA does not cancel A-5.
Nevertheless, this is still meaningless unless we have a real H-Bomb of a yield of minimum 3MT. What I will add, but I doubt many people would agree is that we should continue testing till we have a ~26MT warhead which is miniaturised for the MIRV warheads.
We know for a fact that if there is a major breakthrough tomorrow in any branch of Physics and one of the P5 is able to make say a 1 TT (Teraton) yield warhead, the others will and have to follow suit, where would we be then? Science will continue to progress and that will always be the foundation on which the next generation conventional and unconventional weapons will be based. We should never allow ourselves to be boxed in with any treaty which seeks to do so.