Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

[John Snow]

I for one beleive Santanam garu, because it will not allow us to sit on our butts. WE need to do the right thing.
If the H bum gives us 20 Kilos weighing only 20 grams then even more better. I feel Santanam garu desrves Bharat Ratna.
Those who pick on him why did he say H bum worked read below

A failure will not appear till a unit has passed final inspection.

[shiv]

Why do you think so many experts lied and called Pokharan-2 a success?
<snip>
Some pleeeezee start a thread on N-bum progress in world and India.

.

Rahul Mehta I consider you a well read person. I recently heard a story called "Ramayana". Have you heard that story? If you have could you please tell me who this person Sita was?

I mean - come on - what do you think has been going on in the last 90 odd pages of discussion?

[John Snow]

Rocket Science and Nooklear Physics are not easy subjects ask RC not RM

[shanth]

While KS latest interview has been reported here many times, I found the following transcription in economic times odd.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Pol ... 040401.cms

According to Mr Santhanam, the hydrogen bomb test, which was the second and most powerful of the three tests conducted on May 11, 1998, did not produce the desired yield. Saying that the H-bomb did not explode with its designed power equivalent of 25,000 tonnes of TNT, he claimed that the physical evidence at the site was also another proof of the failure of the thermo-nuclear device.

Is he saying here that the DESIGN yield was 25 kT for S1? (Why does he say 'second and most powerful' and not 'first')
Probably more transcription error...?

[shiv]

Santanam is a known obfuscator - but not (IMO) a liar. He has genuine misgivings and is pointing them out without giving anyone any new information about exactly what India did in May 1998.

[vera_k]

To Those who claim that Pokharan-2 was a failure (includes myself),

Why do you think so many experts lied and called Pokharan-2 a success?

I have been mulling over this. So here's my understanding -

Vajpayee refused to commit to signing the CTBT and Jaswant worked with the Repubs (Jesse Helms per Talbott's book) to stall progress on the CTBT. Thus, my inference is that Vajpayee government either a) knew the bomb was a failure or alternatively b) wanted to test some more at a future date. And so, the experts had reason to keep their peace.

Two things have changed since then -

1) The MMS government signed the IUCNA, and
2) The Dems made huge gains in the US, to possibly overcome Republican opposition to the CTBT

It is possible that there were assurances given when (1) above was signed that are now in jeopardy due to (2). Hence the experts are going public now.

[kit]

Somehow Santa could have GOI s tacit backing , passive that is.

[Masaru]

A large proportion of P5 warheads - are in the 20 to 300 kiloton range. At least some Megaton warheads are reatined for "legacy" purposes. - i.e left over from an earlier era.

Shiv sir, I am aware of the evolution of device design from the WW2 days to the current light weight dial-a-yield MIRV capable devices. The question here is that where is the Indian program in this technology curve?

Having seen the futility of the multi MT monsters nobody is suggesting GoI to go down that path. Rather the concern is not enough is being done (either in design/testing) to have the operational 50 - 300 kT deployable devices in sufficient numbers; and word games are being played how a few fatboy/littleman scale devices (possible of 1960's tech. as you pointed out), is enough for deterrence when faced with adversaries with hundreds (even after discounting the vintage MTs) of proven modern devices from sub kT to 300 kT.

If not for deterrence at least for the sake of science/technology the light weight TN option should not be discarded.

[shiv]

Masaru - there is nothing better than overt testing to prove 2 points

1) Prove to the data seekers (scientists/forces) that it works
2) Prove to the world that it works

Supposing only point 1 occurs, it will mean that the world is not convinced and there will always be doubt about capability.

Since the geopolitical situation and internal political resolve in India are both against testing - India will not test.

That only means one of two things - neither of which can make jingo happy.

1) We have to depend on data and simulation fro our designs
2) We can beg friends for designs.

[ramana]

Most likely MMS will have to hedge the accession to CTBT by saying will not stand i its way of coming into force but want to make sure all else ratify it.

But that has been the position from Vajpayee's days. Unless MMS was considering signing up to the CTBT, KS's efforts are more in the way of forcing the government to test and perfect a TN capability.

Or retain the stall option.

Shanth, its complicated. What he means is the secondary design goal was ~25kt and that didn't happen. From his recent pronouncements the pry worked. As for A frame looks like it was buried too deep that the A frame didnt suffer damage.

[Arun_S]

While KS latest interview has been reported here many times, I found the following transcription in economic times odd.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Pol ... 040401.cms

According to Mr Santhanam, the hydrogen bomb test, which was the second and most powerful of the three tests conducted on May 11, 1998, did not produce the desired yield. Saying that the H-bomb did not explode with its designed power equivalent of 25,000 tonnes of TNT, he claimed that the physical evidence at the site was also another proof of the failure of the thermo-nuclear device.

Is he saying here that the DESIGN yield was 25 kT for S1? (Why does he say 'second and most powerful' and not 'first')
Probably more transcription error...?

Bhai Sahib: Those are partial statement, read here the full one (that was only 2 pages old, or shoudl I say ancient, given how fast this thread is growing), and I think you will understand what that this 25 kT "Fusion" is all about in the S1 2 stage bomb.

Cross posting this earlie post that clarifies:

• A few news reports of the KS and AP press interviews:
  
  Chandigarh Tribune:
  
  http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090922/main3.htm
  

  Santhanam says it again: Pokhran-II a fizzle
  Hits back at NSA, claims data could’ve been fudged
  Ashok Tuteja
  Tribune News Service
  
  New Delhi, September 21

  So he does say the TN was ~ 20-25kt. Now how can that not produce a crater? Must have been quite deep. So these are teh 25kt things that people are throwing around.
  
  Is it likely that RC and co fixed the bad design and issued these nominal 25kt ones? but in reality they can go for the value that shaft was designed for?
  
  Expressbuzz:
  
  LINK

  Pied Piper of the PMO - by V Sudarshan
  
  ... . . . . Santhanam also released to the media pictures of the test crater site, pointing out that there was no crater there. The thermonuclear device had a yield of 20-25 kilotons and not 45 kilotons as claimed by the NSA. He wondered if Agni III missile, which has a reach of 4,000 km, was required just for a 20-kilotone bomb.
  
  First Published : 22 Sep 2009 11:53:00 PM ISTLast Updated : 22 Sep 2009 12:09:44 AM IST

  Pay attention to the chronology narrated about the May 1998 tests and recall ABV's statements in 2004 for which he was laughed at.
  
  HINDU:
  
  ‘Naked’ India needs ‘series of tests’ to deal with China: Santhanam

  http://www.hardnewsmedia.com/2009/09/3243
  

  ....To the NSA's assertion that "nobody, including Santhanam can contest what is proven by the data that is there", the scientist said: "The trouble lies in what data was included in the BARC analysis and what was not. There is a wealth of seismic and other data which reveal that the thermonuclear device under-performed."
  ....
  
  The TN device was a two-stage one. The first was an atomic bomb or A-bomb device which triggered the second stage and the main hydrogen bomb or H-bomb. The A-bomb trigger worked as designed and lived up to expectation. But, the main H-bomb "completely failed to ignite, let alone explode with its designed power of 25,000 tons of TNT, Hardnews learnt. Seismic instrumentation network set up by Santhanam and his seven colleagues proved that categorically. This is what the two scientists claimed in the press conference.
  
  Also, after the TN device test was over and the scientists examined the shaft, it was found to have remained exactly as it was built. If the H-bomb stage of the device worked, the shaft would have been blown to smithereens, said Santhanam.
  
  The scientist asserted that the rubicon must be crossed. "It is up to the government of the day to factor in all facets - technological, economic, security and diplomatic - and take a decision. If there is a window to test thermonuclear devices, test it because the CTBT will be knocking on doors soon," said Santhanam.

  So the data that is added from above is:

  • 1. the TN device had a yield of 20-25 kilotons and not 45 kilotons (I.e. same yield as the S2 Pure Fission warhead)
    2. The primary FBF trigger of the TN worked as desired
    3. The S1 Secondary fusion that completely failed to ignite should have produced 25 kT Fusion yield (design yield).
    4. The failed thermonuclear device “totally incapable of weaponisation,”

  And for the sake of completeness :

  • 5. S2 pure fission yield was also 20-25 kT.

In simpler terms: The S1 TN device was a two-stage one. The first was an atomic bomb or A-bomb device which triggered the second stage (the main hydrogen bomb or H-bomb). A-bomb in the TN bomb is also called trigger or primary. It worked as designed and lived up to expectation. But, the second stage that is fueled by fusion material LiD material "completely failed to ignite, let alone explode with its designed power of 25,000 tons of TNT.

In reality the S1 TN also had a fissionable/fissile tamper thus technically a 3 stage bomb where most of the yield comes from third stage (just like all TN bombs deployed worldwide).

What is being said thus is that the multi-stage TN device that S1 was, only gave 25 +/-2 kT total yield (if you are interested in details only 2-3 kT came from Fusion (the Hydrogen bomb part), 17 kT came from the primary/Trigger stage (from fission) , and the rest from fissile spark plug and minute amount from 3rd stage that had no chance to work since the second stage (Fusion stage) failed.

If (a big IF) S1 worked as advertised by R Chidambram the Fusion yield was supposed to be 25 kT, instead of the actual yield of only 2 kT !

[SSridhar]

No need for any more tests: DST Secretary
Posting in full

T. Ramasami, Secretary, Department of Science and Technology, on Monday said there was no need for yet another thermonuclear test, as the Pokhran-II data had demonstrated its “designed impact.”

He was talking to The Hindu at Kundrakudi, near here, after inaugurating a seminar.

“The test is a success. I don’t have the original data. But based on the secondary data, I can say the Pokhran-II is a success.”

Many eminent scientists, who were part of the programme, averred that the test had achieved its goal.

No one could raise doubts about the country’s nuclear capabilities. The Atomic Energy Commission and its Chairman did not feel the need for another test, he said.

The apprehension raised by some was only about the “yield” and not about the nuclear capacity.

Mr. Ramasami said that if the “persons concerned” had a different view, they should have come out with it within a reasonable period after the test, which was conducted in 1998. It might have given opportunities to verify the doubts on specific areas.

[ShauryaT]

Any evidence so far that the primary of S1 was a boosted one and not just POF?

[ramana]

Obviously Mr Ramaswami has not read Dr. K Santhanam's report submitted in Oct 1998. What is he talking about?

[shiv]

In reality the S1 TN also had a fissionable/fissile tamper thus technically a 3 stage bomb where most of the yield comes from third stage (just like all TN bombs deployed worldwide).

Let me point out that you will be able to offer no proof of this. Nobody has said this other than you. Maybe another "private source"? This sort of cooking up makes people believe India has deployed 150 kt warheads on MIRVs

What is being said thus is that the multi-stage TN device that S1 was, only gave 25 +/-2 kT total yield [/size]

Note that you said as per Santhanam's email the yield of fission only S2 was 20-25 kt

Add the two together and you get 25 +/- 2 of S1 and 20-25 of S2.
So the yield on may 11th was a minimum of 43 kt and a maximum of 50 kt.

Does anyone have any doubts about this quoting Western seismologists

[SSridhar]

It also brings into focus, when the Secretary of DST shoots his mouth off, the scary thought whether we have a strategic culture at all. It is one thing to refute Santhanam but quite another thing to say that the apprehension is only about 'yield' and not 'nuclear capability'. The whole issue has stemmed from that 'yield'. He is also implying that with the passage of time, it is not possible to investigate this any more, which is totally wrong.

[Manish_Sharma]

As I got confirmed from Arun_S around 2 weeks ago on my email since I was not a member at the time that 5 warheads of 20kt will cause the same damage as a 200kt warhead.

Now since 20kt. FISSION warhead will weigh 800 kg. and 200kt. TN weapon will be around 350 kg. (Would love it if somebody can confirm it or correct it by giving more probable figures).

Using Agni missile 3 petals weighing 350 kg. each of 200kt. are showered over Shanghai covering three extreme points of the city. Now all three fizzle to 27-30 kt. each. As Narayanan and Shiv have pointed out we have achieved the objective of burdening the government with wounded suffering population and collapsing the infrastructure. With their swamphy land in the Shanghai it will cost them much more to construct the infrastructure again.

Since China is no more the same as under Mao. All of us saw the pics of Hu Jintao leading rescue operations during last earthquake. Do you think Mao would have cared. Mao would have worried about the public opinion.

The story of China is now like a orphan homeless goonda with courage of one who has nothing to lose. By fearlessly killing fight raises himself up the ranks of mafia.

Change of Scene
20 years passed.
The same goonda has now become Don Pedro with business investments, soft body, fat belly used to live in comfort. Plus the burden of 4 children educated in convents and promising good life. Now he has to keep up the pretence of being the same tough guy. But deep down courage of homeless poverty "nothing to lose is gone". Behind the scenes he deperately tries to settle disputes making compromises.
Just like Don Corleone made peace with the Families after massacre of his son Vicky.

People still have the picture of Poverty stricken Mao's China taking on US. No more no more.

We should under no circumstance sign CTBT. Meanwhile next 7 years get as much technology and best conventional arms in MRCA, Radars, Sub and most important Howitzers. While underneath keep working on the bomb designs. Even buy MRCA+Second Line of Subs from Russians in exchange for confirmed design or warheads itselft from them. [Anyway there is no chance of MMS testing come what may].

Although would be nice to have a TN warhead of 100kt weighing 200kg on Brahmos. With Pillai's dream of 5000 Brahmos. Taking care of our immediate borders with lizard + TSP.

I hope this question of most probable weight difference between 20kt. FISSION and 200KT. THERMONUCLEAR WARHEAD DOES GET ANSWERED.

Now only thing making me hesitate to convert is this statement of Arun_S:

So the data that is added from above is:

1. the TN device had a yield of 20-25 kilotons and not 45 kilotons (I.e. same yield as the S2 Pure Fission warhead)
2. The primary FBF trigger of the TN worked as desired
3. The S1 Secondary fusion that completely failed to ignite should have produced 25 kT Fusion yield (design yield).
4. The failed thermonuclear device “totally incapable of weaponisation,”

And for the sake of completeness :

5. S2 pure fission yield was also 20-25 kT.

But question to Arun_S is according to Santhanam with whom you have agreed from day one said it achieved 60% of the yield which was aimed. So how come you are saying that it is now a complete failure. (I am not arguing just want to understand).
Also would be extremely grateful if you would give me the weight difference between 20kt fission warhead and a 200kt TN Warhead.

[ss_roy]

Deterrence explained by Dr. Strangelove (a composite of Herman Kahn and Wernher von Braun)

Deterrence is the art of producing, in the mind of the enemy, the fear to attack! (Deterrence is more of an art, not an exact science and perception matters)

and

Yes, but the... whole point of the doomsday machine... is lost... if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell the world, eh? (Deterrence is only possible if your adversary knows your capabilities)

Maybe we should show our netas this movie, and quiz them after viewing it.

[Arun_S]

First get TN going, even if a 250-300 kt weighs 500 kgs. Then talk about getting it on PJ-10. You may want to peek into its nose cone to see how small that space for the bomb is, much less a TN bomb. And if you want BARC to make it, don't count on it.

according to Santhanam with whom you have agreed from day one said it achieved 60% of the yield which was aimed. So how come you are saying that it is now a complete failure.

TN failed to ignite the fusion stage (just 2 kT fusion yield), thus it is abject failure (no two ways about it).

In S1 the Fission from Primary and sparkplug yielded (27 kT) which is 60% of the grand success that Dr R.Chidambaram claimed with his 45 kT yield of S1.

Simple madrasa Al-Zebra only.

[Sanku]

But question to Arun_S is according to Santhanam with whom you have agreed from day one said it achieved 60% of the yield which was aimed. So how come you are saying that it is now a complete failure. (I am not arguing just want to understand).

Manish a lot of the questions that you are asking are in prior pages, you may want to just look at Arun_S's posts the way to do it is to click on the poster and see all posts by that poster, the data is well organized. Its worthwhile to go through his posts, good reasonable stuff and not psuedo science as some else here.

Anyway specifically 45 == 17+3+25 (FBF+trigger etc+ fusion)
Total achieved was 25-27 == 60% of 45, 27 == (17+3+some others)

Now note none of the numbers are iron clad, all of us including Arun_S are trying to fit possible numbers to understand things as we go forward.

As new data comes some of these guesstimates change. (Arun_S posted, but hey I already typed it)

[svinayak]

It also brings into focus, when the Secretary of DST shoots his mouth off, the scary thought whether we have a strategic culture at all. It is one thing to refute Santhanam but quite another thing to say that the apprehension is only about 'yield' and not 'nuclear capability'. The whole issue has stemmed from that 'yield'. He is also implying that with the passage of time, it is not possible to investigate this any more, which is totally wrong.

The entire post test process was taken over by babus for negotiation and the deal.
The change in the China, TSP and US relationship was to be handled. but looks like nothing has changed and the situation is worse. Unkil is reeling from econ crisis which has made it weaker than it was in 1998 with less influence on Chin. Chin was supposed to be also relatively weaker but seems to have stabilzed.

Desi strategic scenario and game planners had not envisoned this world situation and being naked in front of Chin
In 2006 2007 Desi elite had not figured that the world would be in this situation - with Unkil holding a global recession and unable to handle Chin if Chin flexes the muscle.

US plan to reconcil with Russia on missle defence may be to get support from Russia to tame Chin during these times.
Russia is the pivot between Chin and US at this time

I am just now watching Dr StrangeGlow on TV - TCM

[Manish_Sharma]

Thanks Sanku, I am very very thankful to you for telling me this technique. I was trying to always read all the posts of Arun_S and Vivek_Ahuja but didn't now how. Thanks to you now I can. I have been reading these 94 pages of pokharan continuously but they move so fast and although I am able to read but not always able to have time to digest the info properly.

Thanks Arun_S also for answering.

Warm Regards

[Sanku]

@Manish, since you mentioned in the post that my some of my explanations were difficult to understand, let me try once again, please let me know if it is better this time (please note that there are two aspects to this 1 whether I managed to convey it properly, 2 whether you agree, all I am trying to achieve is 1, since I believe I have no control on 2)

Firstly, irrespective of any claims made so far
There is no linear correlation of magnitude of earthquake and damage -- that if 5 mb causes some damage it can not be claimed that 6 mb will cause much more damage.

Because
1) Damage depends on the depth
2) Damage depends on the frequency of shock, higher yields give higher frequencies.

Further natural earthquakes have a totally different earth displacement vs time graph patterns from Nuclear explosion, normally the damage caused by natural earthquake is much higher because of that.

It has been known that US has conducted 200KT tests Seismic signatures as low as 5. (which is piffle if from the perspective of natural earthquake)

There fore in the open media there is no known data which suggests a bigger yield will be bigger damage (For example two mosquito bites are twice as painful as 1 mosquito bite however no number of them is likely to cause your arm to break)

Now coming to Khetolai specifically, recall there were two tests
S1
S2

S2 seems to have worked as expected and caused minor damage


S1 seems to have not worked as expected -- question would it cause more damage if it worked?

Answer -- NO, because it was buried a a suitable depth and shaft design such that even if it exploded things would be fine.


Also in scheme of things Kehtolai itself is close to irrelevant, the people were all evacuated and if there was any unexpected damage (could always be) the building damage would have been compensated for (the way things always work in India, not a big deal at all)

[Babu Bihari]

RC sir is still claiming that the tests were perfect
link

....Former Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) chairman R Chidambaram and former National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra have both rubbished Santhanam's claims.

"I don't want to get into this debate. Enough has already been said. The AEC, in its recent meetings, has given the verdict: "The tests were perfect. Several papers have also been published by BARC scientists in reputed scientific journals. There is nothing more to say,'' Chidambaram told DNA. Brajesh Mishra refused to comment saying that enough has been said on the subject.

[Arun_S]

No need for any more tests: DST Secretary
Posting in full

T. Ramasami, Secretary, Department of Science and Technology, on Monday said there was no need for yet another thermonuclear test, as the Pokhran-II data had demonstrated its “designed impact.”

He was talking to The Hindu at Kundrakudi, near here, after inaugurating a seminar.

“The test is a success. I don’t have the original data. But based on the secondary data, I can say the Pokhran-II is a success.”

Many eminent scientists, who were part of the programme, averred that the test had achieved its goal.

No one could raise doubts about the country’s nuclear capabilities. The Atomic Energy Commission and its Chairman did not feel the need for another test, he said.

The apprehension raised by some was only about the “yield” and not about the nuclear capacity.

Mr. Ramasami said that if the “persons concerned” had a different view, they should have come out with it within a reasonable period after the test, which was conducted in 1998. It might have given opportunities to verify the doubts on specific areas.

This is a real GEM. Don't have original data (Better still will be original data lost for Secretary, Department of Science and Technology) !!

• "Wah bhai Wah !! Mazaa Aa gaya Secondary Data samajh kay".

[Neela]

No need for any more tests: DST Secretary


Mr. Ramasami said that if the “persons concerned” had a different view, they should have come out with it within a reasonable period after the test, which was conducted in 1998. It might have given opportunities to verify the doubts on specific areas.

Please tell me am I reading too much into this.

[Manish_Sharma]

Sanku, I am in office so reading the post quickly and looking over my shoulder only one quick thought stuck me, as your example of mosquito bite. This one mosquito bite let's say has caused at least hairline fracture [not a bump] so another may cause more than a bump. I MAYBE TOTALLY WRONG.
BUT WHAT I'll do is print your post now and during the lunchtime sit and read every word again slowly..... Then come back to let you know if my slow 34% mathmatics mind could grasp or not.
Thanks to all of you for the patience with aam aadmi

[csharma]

One question I have is whether the POK II tests provided enough data to fix the TN bomb if there was a problem?

I know one has to test to be sure but another equally valid question is if the tests provided enough data to at least understand why the TN device did not work as expected (if that is true).

It was mentioned by Santhanam himself that the subkiloton tests were specifically meant to aid the process of creating a TN bomb. Given that those worked flawlessly, do we have enough data for the computer simulation model. Again, I do know that simulation modeling is not enough and I am not advocating that line.

[Sanku]

Sanku, I am in office so reading the post quickly and looking over my shoulder only one quick thought stuck me, as your example of mosquito bite. This one mosquito bite let's say has caused at least hairline fracture [not a bump] so another may cause more than a bump.

Well yes, the analogy is chosen to explain or illustrate the prior math and not the other way around (i.e. correctness of the real event is not based on the analogy) its only for explanation and not proof so to say.

The math etc has been posted by me and Samuel in great detail before so all the statements are backed, just trying to make the explanation simpler.

[Raj Malhotra]

It is almost as if the BJP was waiting for the test to be over so it could declare it a success and sign the CTBT. In fact after the May 11 tests the NDA government declared it was ready to consider adhering to “some of the undertakings of the CTBT” soon. Ten days later it declared unilateral moratorium on nuclear tests. The full seismic analysis of the tests were not to come in till months later, analysis that showed that the thermonuclear bomb had failed. But the BJP did not want to conduct any more tests, even if they were needed to refine the thermonuclear bomb because it simply didn’t want to weather the storm.
Pay attention to the chronology narrated about the May 1998 tests and recall ABV's statements in 2004 for which he was laughed at.

1. IIRC that is what Narisimha Rao was indirectly referring to, in his interviews just before his death?

2. What statements of ABV are we talking about?

3. Did ABV back out from escalating Kargil as we did not have sufficient advantage over Pak in nukes?


4. During Parakaram Pak was laughing at India and privately saying that tensions will de-escalate once UP elections are over, it is again because we did not have sufficient advantage over Pak in nukes?

[Raj Malhotra]

So the data that is added from above is:

• 1. the TN device had a yield of 20-25 kilotons and not 45 kilotons (I.e. same yield as the S2 Pure Fission warhead)
  2. The primary FBF trigger of the TN worked as desired
  3. The S1 Secondary fusion that completely failed to ignite should have produced 25 kT Fusion yield (design yield).
  4. The failed thermonuclear device “totally incapable of weaponisation,”

And for the sake of completeness :

• 5. S2 pure fission yield was also 20-25 kT.

I regret to note that Santhanam still not has said that FBF worked. Having 3 stage TN of 50kt does not make sense. Santhanam is saying that we did not reach the claimed yield of 50kt. I think that last shock would be when he says that designed yield was 350kt and if we take best case scenario and estimate the fusion yield was supposed to be only 25kt even then with FBF primary, FBF spark plug + tertiary, we are looking at minimum 80-100kt "design yield".

[Raj Malhotra]

As I got confirmed from Arun_S around 2 weeks ago on my email since I was not a member at the time that 5 warheads of 20kt will cause the same damage as a 200kt warhead.

Now since 20kt. FISSION warhead will weigh 800 kg. and 200kt. TN weapon will be around 350 kg. (Would love it if somebody can confirm it or correct it by giving more probable figures).

As per this thread info:- 5 warheads of 20kt fission bomb will weight around 2x250kg = 1250kg versus 200-350kt well tested TN which should weight only 150-350kg.

[Manish_Sharma]

Raj Malhotra
Post subject: Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2
PostPosted: 22 Sep 2009 07:55 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 26 Jun 2000 06:01 am
Posts: 941
Manish_Sharma wrote:
As I got confirmed from Arun_S around 2 weeks ago on my email since I was not a member at the time that 5 warheads of 20kt will cause the same damage as a 200kt warhead.

Now since 20kt. FISSION warhead will weigh 800 kg. and 200kt. TN weapon will be around 350 kg. (Would love it if somebody can confirm it or correct it by giving more probable figures).



As per this thread info:- 5 warheads of 20kt fission bomb will weight around 2x250kg = 1250kg versus 200-350kt well tested TN which should weight only 150-350kg.

HURRRAH !!! FINALLY!!!
Please accept my profound pranaams for this golden info!

Of course 2 x 250 is a typo, you mean 5 x 250 for 20kt.
Hope doesn't sound ungrateful

[Sanjay]

800kg for a 20kT seems excessive even by Indian standards. In 1974 POK-1 had a weight of approximately 800kg.

In 1982-83, the weaponized fission weapon had a weight of 170-200kg according to Dr. Perkovich. Nobody has yet refuted this.

If this was the weaponized fission weapon tested in 1998, then 800kg is too much.

Also note, per a IPCS discussion shortly after the 1998 tests, it was revealed that S-1 weighed 1000 pounds or about 450kg.

[vishwakarmaa]

Most likely MMS will have to hedge the accession to CTBT by saying will not stand i its way of coming into force but want to make sure all else ratify it. That will buy time and even if it doesn't, it locks up those who should be locked up.

Japanese Elites and business lobbies suck up to USA. Same is not true with Japanese youths. They want to see their country to stop this slavery system.

MMS and Indian Business lobby are in same category. They want India not to talk against USA and become a slave and donot appose Dollar in Asia. Instead they want India to appose RUssian and Chinese moves against eliminating the Dollar influence from Asia trade system.

Japanese and Indian business lobbies are similar to those pre-independence Indian business lobbies who were in complete favour of British Rule in India. They were very unhappy about British leaving India.

Anglo-saxons grows by owning up corrupt elites around the world. Story is same everywhere. It fails only in countries like Russia and China where they have independent and fearless power structures.

This anglo-saxons lobby is same who earnt heavy profits during World-wars, Gulf-war, Iraq and Afghanistan wars. 9/11 is too small casualty, when interests at stake are so huge.

[NRao]

OT, but, I was about to post that the Japanese model is dead with the election of the opposition in that nation.

[Austin]

Spectral defence
R. RAMACHANDRAN

S.K. Sikka, a scientist involved in Pokhran-II, shows how the U.S. calculations of yield of the thermonuclear device were way off the mark.

[JimmyJ]

From the above link which Austin posted

At depths greater than the optimum DOB, the crater size begins to reduce as less and less material now gets ejected. There would be upheaval within the crater boundary but nothing is thrown out. At these depths a great amount of broken rock is produced, which was seen in the Pokhran-II thermonuclear explosion, whose DOB was about 230 metres compared with Pokhran-I’s 107 m.

Wouldn't this statement clear the doubts regarding the depth at which the thermonuclear device was placed in Pokhran II test?

[NRao]

Spectral defence
R. RAMACHANDRAN

This was my argument all along - at the depth of >200 Meters one cannot expect a crater:

At depths greater than the optimum DOB, the crater size begins to reduce as less and less material now gets ejected. There would be upheaval within the crater boundary but nothing is thrown out. At these depths a great amount of broken rock is produced, which was seen in the Pokhran-II thermonuclear explosion, whose DOB was about 230 metres compared with Pokhran-I’s 107 m.

Besides this seems to be the first time a more accurate depth has been provided (by whom?).

[NRao]

And, the following:

Now, according to studies at BARC for the design yield of the Pokhran-II thermonuclear device, the DOB was exactly in the region where the crater size falls at the minimum of the scaling curve. And this is exactly what was observed. In fact, according to Sikka, exact simulations were done to eliminate completely the venting of radioactivity and the DOB was chosen accordingly. He further points out that the little mound that is seen in the picture of the cratering by the thermonuclear weapon is actually owing to the strong reflection of the shock waves from the granite stratum below the DOB.

conforms to the article written for Bharat-rakshak:

Cratering Phenomenology and Yield Estimation

the S-1 event did produce a small sand mound, consistent with our equation (3).

The only confusion between the two are that the BR article states that the soil was "was wet [3], and somewhat softer" and therefore uses a different value to compute the associated retarc.

But, that does not make much of a difference, since in either cases it would be a retarc and never a crater.