Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 27 Aug 2009 08:06

negi wrote: Secondly if the the yield indeed is below the designed specs

A subtle but important distinction between what K. Santhanam has said, if the TOI report is to be believed and what Iyengar said earlier. K. Snathanam says the stated yield was not the actual yield. Iyengar said the actual yield was not the designed yield.

ramana: I remember you standing behind the assertion of the actual yield being the stated yield. In light of the "new" revelations, where do things stand? I do not remember where was Arun_S on this aspect. Please chime in.

You know there are some other troubling questions in all of this, of much higher importance than whether these tests worked or not.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 27 Aug 2009 08:06

Front page on TOI

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 27 Aug 2009 08:08

Going into a CRE phase and BO's unsupportive noises, maybe now is the time to test a "weapon" and not a "device"

10 years is quite some time to rectify defects and weaponize the "device"

Didnt Sikka win an award recently ?

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 27 Aug 2009 08:09

Gagan wrote: Partly the scientific community is again acting in India's interest by saying it out loud when India's interests are threatened. Perhaps there are possibilities that MMS is heading into another deeper CRE exercise? Perhaps this is at the behest of MMS and co to raise the issue in public, so that public pressure leaves the government with no option but to test. Perhaps the Chinese are really planning an attack, and this is an exercise to deter them.

What ever the reasons, I hope that this round of tests will not be a symbolic one, and will go on and on until the deterrence is credible.

If there is a test under an MMS regime, I swear, I am willing to bare by big fat ugly body and dance on the streets but unlikely Mr. Singh will give me the pleasure.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 27 Aug 2009 08:13

Singha has it right

A decisive win for Arun_S

and what a win - it cuts across so many major threads, nuclear, missile, arihant and hell even the MRCA!!!!

But I am also depressed

I need alcohol

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 27 Aug 2009 08:13

The issue is too clouded right now to be able to judge what's going on. Perhaps by tomorrow, more people will have commented, and we'll know better.

Either of the two are possible - CRE by MMS with scientists protesting, or a MMS lead plan to head into tests or perhaps to ward off pressure by threatening to test.

Smoke and mirrors onlee.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 27 Aug 2009 08:14

x posting from GD (BJP Shiv thread)
******************************

sorry shiv garu, you are wrong in ABVs role in this "SOAP" Drama... ( In a DOOs world, where I live, SOAP is Simple Object Access Protocol )

ABV did his best standing in front of a Huge tri color and correctly translated the Hydrogen Bum as Maha Bum.
He even declared uniateral moritorium with uranium based on our DRDO suggestions we have the DOOs writing code and models are enough no need to catwalk or ramp.

But here in the below is some where there is a problem you no?

Kalam Directed
Chidambaram Conceived
Anil produced
Santhanam Chipped
Mahajan clapped
LKg gloated
Jasoo bloated
India Shined
Uncle Sanctioned.
ABV declared
Wallace faulted
MMS signed
Parliament defaulted
Now Naked.

We have to quickly develop Recessed Bums (which are superior to Neutron bums, according to leading unnamed Scientist with Pee HD who blogs on Mava of India)

So back to drawing board.

{ strictly speaking bark is also contniuing the tradition, PK Iyengar (not PK in hindi) et al in 1974 POK1 claimed 12 to 16 T yeild, after sometime they said due deprication the yeild is at 8T, in 1998 we said yeild was 45 now again Santhanam has delivered the correct yeild to be less than 45 which could also mean less than 8t that is why in BRF we said we have dada bum and chotu bums. The bark guys basically lied through their teeth, instead of saying the other tunnel is saved for a rainy day testing, and also went down the tube to get the device back....}

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Aug 2009 08:15

Considering this came from some one who was part of the test team , this gives more credibility to the already known fact that TN was a fizzle.

Delayed but K Santhanam did a great service to the country by reveling the truth, hopefully he does not get charged under OSA for reveling state secrets

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 27 Aug 2009 08:16

ShauryaT wrote: K. Snathanam says the stated yield was not the actual yield.

In fact Santhanam says:

``Based upon the seismic measurements and expert opinion from world over, it is clear that the yield in the thermonuclear device test was much lower than what was claimed. I think it is well documented and that is why I assert that India should not rush into signing the CTBT,'' Santhanam told TOI on Wednesday.

Based on Seismic measurements and expert opinion from world over the yield is lower than claimed.

This is absolutely true.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 27 Aug 2009 08:21

but I am told that bose noise cancellation technology was used to damp the sizemic waves?
I think we are still safe because of reconcilaition of semantic bums.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 27 Aug 2009 08:24

No no the soil in rajasthan is very SDRE onlee, does not conduct waves properly.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 27 Aug 2009 08:31

Somebody said Neutron bum
I think IMVHO Neuter bum is better, as standing structures will not come down, remember the whole three years plus discussion on how Khotali village cracks were openly coming out in the streets? If we test any higher Bum you know how wide cracks will be seen?

In case Neuter Bum all these villages will be Neuterlized and safe from any crack effects.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 27 Aug 2009 08:32

John Snow wrote:but I am told that bose noise cancellation technology was used to damp the sizemic waves?

Hence the damp squib and frank fib.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 27 Aug 2009 08:38

Wasn't it known that more tests would be needed once the ATV is operational? Now that the delivery systems are coming online, calling the earlier test a dud provides the rationale to test some more.

negi · Post by **negi** » 27 Aug 2009 08:39

Enlightening...brothers what about Higgs Bomb ? I haph heard its bhery eajy to fabricate and is even more dangelous than the Tsar Bomba , it produces millions of stranglets which can destroy an entire country of size of TSP.

But Epil GOI and scientists are still struggling with TN bombs.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 27 Aug 2009 08:43

negi wrote:Enlightening...brothers what about Higgs Bomb

Its yield can be damped using Bose noise cancellation tech to make Higgs Boson bum. But fizz(i)le material requirement is high.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 27 Aug 2009 08:44

negi garu>> I hope you are not offended by reference in the other thread.
Just in case If I have to apologize, not a problem I will.
Like my catholic school days impositions
I have stack of apologies kept ready fro BRF admins, posters, and Mavas of the world.
I will reserve one for U2.

Never take me seriously, and thats seriously.
TIA

milindc · Post by **milindc** » 27 Aug 2009 08:47

Austin wrote:Considering this came from some one who was part of the test team , this gives more credibility to the already known fact that TN was a fizzle.

Delayed but K Santhanam did a great service to the country by reveling the truth, hopefully he does not get charged under OSA for reveling state secrets

That's the reason, he used this specific, careful and well thought out quote. He is not stating that it is based on inside info.

Based upon the seismic measurements and expert opinion from world over, it is clear that the yield in the thermonuclear device test was much lower than what was claimed. I think it is well documented and that is why I assert that India should not rush into signing the CTBT,'' Santhanam told TOI on Wednesday

Avarachan · Post by **Avarachan** » 27 Aug 2009 08:49

This is huge news. I'm very glad that I opposed the nuclear deal. I don't have the technical background that many BRF members have, but there was too much about the deal that seemed fishy to me.

Arun_S, congratulations.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 27 Aug 2009 08:53

Avarachan wrote:This is huge news. I'm very glad that I opposed the nuclear deal. .

Guess who doesn't

Why the nuclear deal is just not done

Dr Santhanam replied with an emphatic ‘no’ when he was asked whether India was compromising on its national security, whereas Varadarajan was not certain.Most of the viewers — 98 per cent of them — also agreed with Dr Santhanam that India was in no way going to compromise national security with this deal. Dr Santhanam said he thought it was going to be a win-win deal for India.

Indo-US nuclear treaty: A good deal

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 27 Aug 2009 08:57

What the Hell is going on ? The revelations about Pokhran 2 needs to be read in conjunction with this and the full story is emerging slowely.I pray to God this is not true.

India defines outer limit of weapons programme

Eleven years after it detonated nuclear bombs at Pokhran, India has defined the outer limits of its strategic weapons programme.

There will be no Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles, so far considered the litmus for being acknowledged as a bona fide nuclear power.

Instead, India will restrict its weapons delivery to medium-range rockets, aimed at countering only regional threats

“We need credible minimum deterrence not against the whole world. We need the capability only with respect to our neighbourhood,” said Chief of Naval Staff, Admiral Sureesh Mehta.

From Network 18's summit on 'Enhancing Defence Capabilities', India's military establishment sent the message that New Delhi does not wish to extend its nuclear posture beyond China and Pakistan, that it is wielding nuclear arms only as weapons of peace and that India is content with being a regional power.

“To ensure peace and stability in the region, we must have credible minimum deterrence,” said Mehta.

Indeed, the main emphasis in New Delhi's doctrine of credible minimum deterrence is on minimum. Mehta announced that India is even restricting the size of its nuclear submarine fleet to just three

“Three submarines are sufficient. These should take us through the next 15 years,” Mehta said.

India was the first civilization in the world to conceive of both weapons of mass destruction -- the Brahmastra and the ultimate doctrine of non-violence, Ahimsa. As it tries to reconcile the diverse ideological strains, the big question is - can a nation become a credible nuclear power by half measures?

negi · Post by **negi** » 27 Aug 2009 08:58

^ No not at all...I would have stopped posting on BRF and Mav's blog if I took offense to leg pulling by fellow members (for I myslef do it at times).

Btw I did reply to your post on ATV thread.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 27 Aug 2009 09:10

X posted:

Rony wrote:What the Hell is going on ? The revelations about Pokhran 2 needs to be read in conjunction with this and the full story is emerging slowely.I pray to God this is not true.

India defines outer limit of weapons programme

Eleven years after it detonated nuclear bombs at Pokhran, India has defined the outer limits of its strategic weapons programme.

There will be no Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles, so far considered the litmus for being acknowledged as a bona fide nuclear power.

Instead, India will restrict its weapons delivery to medium-range rockets, aimed at countering only regional threats

“We need credible minimum deterrence not against the whole world. We need the capability only with respect to our neighbourhood,” said Chief of Naval Staff, Admiral Sureesh Mehta.

From Network 18's summit on 'Enhancing Defence Capabilities', India's military establishment sent the message that New Delhi does not wish to extend its nuclear posture beyond China and Pakistan, that it is wielding nuclear arms only as weapons of peace and that India is content with being a regional power.

“To ensure peace and stability in the region, we must have credible minimum deterrence,” said Mehta.

Indeed, the main emphasis in New Delhi's doctrine of credible minimum deterrence is on minimum. Mehta announced that India is even restricting the size of its nuclear submarine fleet to just three

“Three submarines are sufficient. These should take us through the next 15 years,” Mehta said.

India was the first civilization in the world to conceive of both weapons of mass destruction -- the Brahmastra and the ultimate doctrine of non-violence, Ahimsa. As it tries to reconcile the diverse ideological strains, the big question is - can a nation become a credible nuclear power by half measures?

Santosh · Post by **Santosh** » 27 Aug 2009 09:11

IBN as usual is twisting words to peddle their b$. Admiral Sureesh Mehta of all people will not say that India does not need ICBM. India does not need to target the entire world which is true, but by what convoluted logic does it mean that India will not field ICBM. And this specially when A5 has been given the go ahead. Pure lifafa.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 27 Aug 2009 09:12

Add A + B and you get, India is trying very hard to convince the west that India acquiring MCD is not a threat to the west and that India should not be sanctioned if it goes ahead.

But I wonder,
1. First Indira Gandhi compromised and called it a PNE
2. Then ABV compromised and called it a day when the test series was not complete
3. Then ABV compromised and announced NFU and MCD.
4. Now MMS has decided to compromise and given up ICBMs and true blue SSBNs. (Capping the N sub fleet at 3 means that they will be restricted to the IOR and South china sea. There will be none left to prowl the waters beyond).

All these compromises will in the end retard the acceptance of India as a power.

AmitR · Post by **AmitR** » 27 Aug 2009 09:15

Santosh wrote:IBN as usual is twisting words to peddle their b$. Admiral Sureesh Mehta of all people will not say that India does not need ICBM. India does not need to target the entire world which is true, but by what convoluted logic does it mean that India will not field ICBM. And this specially when A5 has been given the go ahead. Pure lifafa.

There must be some fire before the smoke. Given the closeness of our rulers to the US regime this does not look like a pure conjecture to me. Whatever it is, this forces the GoI to take some action to deflect the criticism, a few such articles will actually help our defence.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 27 Aug 2009 09:18

Well India truely is a land of jokers. The Chinese are certainly laughing.

negi · Post by **negi** » 27 Aug 2009 09:30

Gagan wrote: 1. First Indira Gandhi compromised and called it a PNE
2. Then ABV compromised and called it a day when the test series was not complete
3. Then ABV compromised and announced NFU and MCD.
4. Now MMS has decided to compromise and given up ICBMs and true blue SSBNs. (Capping the N sub fleet at 3 means that they will be restricted to the IOR and South china sea. There will be none left to prowl the waters beyond).

All these compromises will in the end retard the acceptance of India as a power.

Do you really classify '1' as a compromise ? Wasn't the explosion itself a more visible and audible proof and indicator of India's intentions ?

As for no '2' GOI infact the PMO in particular are no nuke geeks all they do is give a go ahead based on input from the bomb team itself (ofcourse subject to geo political forces); so ABV regime did a commendable job by giving a go ahead in 98.There were no tests conducted between 74 and 98 goes to show the GOI will and assertiveness.

# 3 , India has always proclaimed to be a non aggressor and literally all our PMs have re-iterated our stand about not attacking any country this obviously includes the nukes too ; its just that it was the ABV regime under which India's place in nuclear group was reaffirmed so he merely re-stated our stand .

# 4 To be fair to MMS this has been the case with previous governments too (btw yes I am of the opinion that we need a top of the line ICBM as well as a SLBM ...now )

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 27 Aug 2009 09:38

What is K Santhnam's qualification on nuclear matters to know if Pok-II was successful or fizzle? I think some on this forum will ask for higher proof (even) above Sri K Santhnam to believe that S-1 was fizzle; will believe authorities like Dr R.Chidambrum, Kakodkar, Sikka or top nuclear scientist (sic) Ex-President Kalam. It does not matter that K Santhnam was the leader of the "Shakti campaign" and all the above worthies worked under him.

People should now revisit their position knowing what we know today, the heated and divisive discussion last year in run up to the signing of 123 agreement w/USA.

All the faith in believing S-1 was a successful and worked exactly per design, yielding 45 kT, and that its 2 stage worked perfectly, and it used an inert tertiary stage (to limit yield) because of the overflowing love and concern for the god forsaken poor villagers only few kms away.

Indian deterrence credibility today is as good as Chidambrum vintage thermonuclear fizzle bum.

One who did not get it right in the field test (in 1998), with in few days had the gall to say that computer simulations will allow BARC to scale up and make a credible bum of 200 kT. And the genteel (naive) scientifically educated people sucked up to it happily. Talk of cognitive dissonance.

Chidambrum babu ki Jai Ho !!!

Does he deserve one flower or jutti for every Indian citizen? Let the worthy citizens decide for themselves.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 27 Aug 2009 09:39

Not so fast,
We need CNC machines from unkil, Russia, SCB from France, subs from Germany...
Once these arrive and things will go so fast, you better fasten your seat belts.

I some how feel dal may kusch kala hai,
But I am not good at strategery, I leave to the gurus here. Strategic future of India is it compromised? A resounding NO!
We can still liberate Tibet, but what purpose will it solve? We can bomb TSP to smithers what purpose will it solve. We have to think economically, strategically, the best way to win a war is not to start one or fight one.

I am totally confused, on one hand I want to support DRDO in Arjuns case or Tejas case, but when I read that people with Ph D. lie or spin, the I have to support Army/AF who say T-55 is better than Arjun, AJT is not as good as Hawk, Tejas is way behind Grippen.

I think I should only beleive in mavericks magician chela teen party for whom bums are childs play and he can solve any problem with string theory or magic crucible. The only thing he cant is master web even with dream weaver, but puts down others who can, as excel sheetists. I hope not bark employes such mavericks.

I know he likes to read my mind and psotings about Ghee.

negi · Post by **negi** » 27 Aug 2009 09:43

On a serious note my thoughts on this episode:

If someone asks me to speculate and guess about the TN test in 98 , until yesterday I would have confidently said 45kt but now I can't , however the issue is there is little open source info on the designed/stated/actual yields .

India needs a credible nuclear deterrent its a fundamental truth but we need energy too and have already signed the nuke deal ..another fact.

Do we need to test ? yes of course definitely ....

When ?

I would say let the nuclear reactors come up and India attain a decent foothold in nuclear fuel cycle (with new uranium sites under exploration in India and JV with FSU and even African countries in place); we would in next decade or so become more or less not only sanction proof but command pretty decent clout in the global fora to explode a few right under Unkil's nose and latter would have no choice but to turn a blind eye.

kit · Post by **kit** » 27 Aug 2009 09:44

Accepting a truth is the beginning of a corrective step.,and its never too late.Although one wonders how 'far' India can go with its weapon testing given its current relations with the US *unless* it is indeed a strategic relationship aka Britain and the US .We will know that for sure in a couple of years.India needs (and i emphasize need) fusion weapons and tactical neutron weapons to contain its bigger neighbor to the east.No amount of conventional 'qualitative' superiority (which again is a myth given that India till now has no correct estimate of the technological advances of china) can give it any 'strategic' safety.

Why is India looking more like a nuclear castrated nation by the day.. looks as if uncle is shaping up india to be its colony

ps : Is Arun_S running for president ? Hope he does

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 27 Aug 2009 09:46

My fear is whether TN even reached 20kt and boosted fission worked on it or it fizzled below that yield also?

negi · Post by **negi** » 27 Aug 2009 09:46

John Snow wrote: We need CNC machines from unkil, Russia, SCB from France, subs from Germany

Yes we do.... and these CNC machines and other so called dual use items is what we should strive to get our hands on under the garb of nuclear deal.

vasu_ray · Post by **vasu_ray** » 27 Aug 2009 09:46

Saar, any reason why they didn't plan to obtain enough simulation data during POK-2 knowing fully well the political outcome of testing?

Avarachan · Post by **Avarachan** » 27 Aug 2009 09:48

Gerard wrote:
Avarachan wrote:This is huge news. I'm very glad that I opposed the nuclear deal. .
Guess who doesn't

Why the nuclear deal is just not done
Dr Santhanam replied with an emphatic ‘no’ when he was asked whether India was compromising on its national security, whereas Varadarajan was not certain.Most of the viewers — 98 per cent of them — also agreed with Dr Santhanam that India was in no way going to compromise national security with this deal. Dr Santhanam said he thought it was going to be a win-win deal for India.
Indo-US nuclear treaty: A good deal

Gerard, here is a quote from that 2007 IBN article you quoted:

Dr Santhanam says, "After May 1998, there was a clear declaration from India that we don't have to conduct any more nuclear tests. India should not have any problem legalising this position."

Here is Dr. Santhanam in the 2009 TOI article: ``Two things are clear; that India should not sign CTBT and that it needs more thermonuclear device tests,'' said Santhanam.

How do you reconcile this?

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 27 Aug 2009 09:49

Raj Malhotra wrote:My fear is whether TN even reached 20kt and boosted fission worked on it or it fizzled below that yield also?

I answered that in my post many weeks ago.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 27 Aug 2009 09:49

They will never sell duel use equipment and dont you see End User agreements or Memo random checks.

Actually historically India always performed better in second tests in any series.

First test opener was a failure or lets call it partially succesful or could do better... (1974)
Second test opener having gained experience perfomed to the full potential but the debutant partially perfomed (1974 vintage, 1998 vintage partially succeded)
so in the third series this debutant of second series will perfom to the full as he has gained experience and may have lost weight also. So we need third test series....

About subsitutes 0.8 and 2kt I have doubts, remember some time back in Outlook Indian General Sahib said we dont have Tactical nuke weapons.......

so we need third series for sure and hope they tell us the real figuers instead of saying figure out ,and then cut a sorry figure.

a_bharat · Post by **a_bharat** » 27 Aug 2009 09:50

All this rhona dhona is quite unseemly. Is there any "news" in Santanam's qualified admission/revelation -- other than that it is from someone involved with the program?

That said, I do have the following questions/concerns:

- if the TN test failed, do the scientists clearly know what failed and how to fix it. Has it been fixed yet (pending confirmatory test)?

- do we have any reliable (non thermo) nuclear weapons that can be used today. If we do, are they sufficient to deter Pakistan? China?

- if India tests, but doesn't announce to the world, does the world make a huge noise about it (even though they know it)

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Aug 2009 09:52

morale in the goat cave is at a low. we need leadership, we need guidance....