Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

[pankajs]

Deterrence is based on demonstration of the yield and not on claims.

So Deterrence is what your adversary perceive as threat. It doesn't need demonstration to create that threat, mere Info warfare could do that with minimal show.

I am an insider and hence more sympathetic to the local scientists and may even accept the claim about the scalability of the TNW at face value. Will the outside powers accept our claim of possessing a 200 kt TNW at face value? We will either have to share the design or some data that will convince them about the nature and potential of the bomb. Obviously we can't do that so what is the next best option? We have to demonstrate the full design yield of the TNW to convince outside powers about the true potential of the TNW.

We will keep going in loop if we continue to have the insiders viewpoint. The productive way of looking at this question would be by taking an outsiders view e.g a Chinese general in charge of PLA's nuclear forces and responsible for their strategy and posture wrt India.

Will AK and co's claim of having a 200 kt design fly with this Chinese General, assuming 45-50 kt TNW was a success? Another equally illuminating question could be will India (GoI/Forces) accept a claim made by AQK about the scalability of the one of the devices tested by Pakistan? Say the 5kt device was actually a FBF device and could easily be scaled up to 100 kt.

My point is that if outside powers, in this case Chinese, do not buy our claim on the TNW yield, we are naked as far as nuclear umbrella is concerned. Deterrence has broken down and miscalculation will happen on both sides with catastrophic consequences. The only option is to test till a majority of decision makers within the nuclear weapon powers are convinced. It does not matter even if every Indian is convinced about the 200 kt maal. Deterrence will holds only if the above parties are convinced about you 'maal' otherwise it's usefulness is limited to being a vengeance weapon.

If you say f**k the Chinese (representative of all nuclear powers) , I really don't care what they think or If the test was purely for internal consumption and had nothing to do with our deterrence...then I guess I was chasing the wrong end of the discussion.

[ramana]

Pankajs, They did share the details of the design. That is when the claims fell apart. the curcial thing was to obtain the stated yield. The siesmic signatures and crater morphology did not back it up. So there is gap.

However do I belive that they have a 200kt weapon? Yes for there are other ways of achieving it.

What makes me assured that is the case?
The heavy payload weight (~1t-1.5t) of the A series. If it were lightweight then its another thing.

[pankajs]

Can you substantiate your statement that Deterrence is ONLY based on demonstration?

www.fas.org/pubs/_docs/OccasionalPaper7.pdf

The National Defense Strategic published by the Office of the Secretary of Defense in June 2008 pledges that:
“Our ability to deter attack credibly also reassures the American people and our allies of our commitment to defend them. For this reason, deterrence must remain grounded in demonstrated military capabilities that can respond to a broad array of challenges to inter-national security. For example, the United States will maintain its nuclear arsenal as a primary deterrent to nuclear attack, and the New Triad remains a cornerstone of strategic deterrence. We must also continue to field conventional capabilities to augment or even replace nuclear weapons in order to provide our leaders a greater range of credible responses.” 15

This from the Secretary of Defense, US. We can disagree with him but he presides over the biggest military.

[pankajs]

Pankajs, They did share the details of the design. That is when the claims fell apart. the curcial thing was to obtain the stated yield. The siesmic signatures and crater morphology did not back it up. So there is gap.

However do I belive that they have a 200kt weapon? Yes for there are other ways of achieving it.

What makes me assured that is the case?
The heavy payload weight (~1t-1.5t) of the A series. If it were lightweight then its another thing.

Saar I do not doubt AK&Co when they claim a 200 kt TNW design and is the reason I am keen that they test it to full design yield. It is the outsiders that need to buy the design yield else what happens to the deterrence. From an outside power's perspective it will remain a claim only till demonstrated.

[SaiK]

well said. that is very coherent in deterrence notions.. an outsider verifying and validation in the yields is something valuable. one of the reasons, that AK's team had various ("outsider-for classified info[drdo etc]") groups for measurements etc.

that makes it all of us squared!

[member_23229]

I think its part jealously on the part of so called western experts..bcoz..their first H test has fizzled.
But Dr. Kakodkar clearly explains and clears all the doubts in the interview with Karan Thapar...




one test is enough..back then no simulations...now we can trust the simulations because the code is validated with available test data....DRDO instruments to measure yield didnt work but multiple other sensors picked up data and confirm the yield...crater size is misleading because its affected by depth and nature of soil...everyone involved only had information on need to know basis ...this includes DRDO...and we do have weaponized TN heads....Dr. Kakodkar is trustworthy...

http://lewis.armscontrolwonk.com/archiv ... -revisited

Nice rebuttals in the comments..."Do the so called experts have really proved they can predict yield accurately?..the answer is no

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/19/scien ... all&src=pm
Check the last line...

''They're pretty smart guys,'' said Harold M. Agnew, former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the birthplace of the bomb in New Mexico. ''The tests will give them confidence'' in how to make a wide variety of nuclear warheads, including an assortment of hydrogen bombs.'' 'If you can do a little one,'' he said, ''you can do big ones.''

India

India is among the countries that unofficially possess nuclear weapons. It has an advanced program of applied military research.
The country has high industrial and scientific-technical potential, skilled national cadres, and the material and financial resources to create WMD.

A member of the IAEA, India has nonetheless not signed agreements to put all its nuclear activities under this organization's guarantee and has not subscribed to the Treaty on Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons, considering it "discriminatory" against nonnuclear states. India is one of the few developing countries able to independently design and build nuclear power generating units and perform various operations within the framework of the fuel cycle, beginning with extracting uranium and ending with reprocessing spent fuel and processing wastes.

The country has its own reserves of uranium, which according to IAEA estimates come to about 35,000 tonnes with costs of around 80 dollars a kilogram to obtain. Reserves of natural uranium and the amount of uranium concentrate being produced are on a level sufficient to operate existing reactors, but their limited nature may be a major obstacle to the development of India's atomic power engineering in 15-20 years. In light of that, Indian specialists consider using thorium, with deposits in the country of about 400,000 tonnes, as an alternative way to expand their raw material base. Here we should mention that unique research has been done in India and significant results have been achieved in developing a technology for using thorium in the fuel cycle. According to available data, experimental work is being done to isolate the uranium 233 isotope by irradiating thorium oxide assemblies in a reactor.

India possesses large capacities for producing more than 300 tonnes of D20-type heavy water a year and may become one of its exporters. The agreement signed in April of last year on deliveries of heavy water to South Korea was India's first appearance on the international "nuclear market."

Overall, India has been able to achieve substantial progress in its nuclear program and develop original technologies; this permits it to follow an independent policy in the sphere of nuclear power engineering. India is no more than 10 percent dependent on foreign equipment in atomic industry (according to estimates of Indian specialists).

At the present time, the country has nine industrial reactors with a total capacity of about 1,600 megawatts (el.). Of them only two NPP's, in Tarapur and Rajastan, are under IAEA safeguards. Specialists believe that in the near future India will become a supplier of heavy water reactors to other countries.

Moreover, the country has eight research reactors. The most powerful of them is the Dhruva reactor with a thermal capacity of 100 megawatts; it was built entirely by Indian specialists. According to the statement of Indian representatives, the reactor is designed for producing isotopes for industrial purposes, medicine, and agriculture. But it can also be considered a potential producer of plutonium. Overall, India has created its own nuclear fuel cycle for experimental and research reactors (pilot installations) and for power-generating reactors (industrial installations). However, the research reactors and their fuel cycle are not under IAEA safeguards.

According to experts' estimates, by exploding its own nuclear device in 1974, India laid a powerful foundation for developing a military nuclear program. It has both great production potential and a testing base. With reserves of irradiated reactor fuel which are not under safeguards, the country may process it to extract plutonium to create a powerful arsenal of nuclear weapons.

http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/svr_nuke.htm#india

[Amber G.]

QUESTION: What if a large column of PLA tanks crosses the border -- What kind of nuclear weapon could be the best option, if nuclear arms are all that are available?
ANSWER: NOT a large weapon, but a small one, obviously, since it would be exploded over Indian territory. If this small weapon could be thermonuclear, the fallout hazzard would also be lessened, since the half lives of these expolsion byproducts is much less than with fusion weapons.

Thermonuclear = fusion.

Just a small comment - In technical jargon and weaponry, thermonuclear is an ambiguous term. For some, it can refer to either a small atom bomb that burns a bit of hydrogen fuel to raise its power (may be 10x) , or to a true hydrogen bomb that can be hundreds or even thousands of times stronger.

(Pure) fusion weapons, OTOH have not been built yet (at least not yet known)..

(Yes it depends on which dictionary you look into, but my point is people do use it in ambiguous term... though for most, thermonuclear / hydrogen and fusion term is used interchangeably. )

[SaiK]

adding more variable to the mysteries.

If we can do a little one, then we can do big ones. But the big ones needs testing as well. or you all want a blind build and stock. Just leaving aside realities of using them.

then hopefully, we (our future generations) should never have to say this in the future:
- our designs were good, but we never tested even one production unit.
--
^^no simulations then? when?

[member_23229]

@SaiK

As Dr. Kakodkar calls it, if its about "Dill Maange moore", then its a different story. But what he clearly states is, the current configuration, which is only ONE configuration, did work as designed. So.. " can do a little one, then can do big one" could also mean, if you intentionally reduced the yield..you could also scale it up to make it work. So, by publishing so much information about the tests, BARC, has already created a deterrent in the heads of people.

and When? meant back then when NWS were doing tests after tests. Today, we have supercomputers on desktop. The design itself is very simple with no moving parts though very very sophisticated materials are required to achieve. This is what Dr. Kakodkar is stating. Using this ONE working configuration, several heads can be made based on yield requirement. He even wanted to use Karan plural when it comes to number of heads. As some one else put it in comments, if they really actually didnt work in 1998, India would have gone ahead right away with more tests since sanctions were already in place. Santhanam gauges didnt work so he thinks it fizzled...west cannot prove they can predict yields accurately...So I will go with BARC's words..Jai HO!

"

Or he’s got a side biz working with a foreign gov to destabilize India.

I don’t see it being true, had it been a fizzle 11 years ago, India would have worked to make it happen.

I fail to see how that makes them naked w.r.t. China
Yeah, me too. I wonder if this is more of a political statement than a truthful one. India is outside of the NPT, and maybe he's trying to claim "we aren't so bad." -- OR -- Maybe he's arguing that the plutonium from the fast-breeders they're buying from the US ought to be put into more Chinese deterrence instead of reactor fuel.

Making H-Bombs is difficult, but they've had a long time and a number of tests since then. And they're certainly technologically capable of anything the Chinese are.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2353952/posts

[vina]

The proof of "Sizzle vs Fizzle" debate will be there for the eating ONLY when the mount MIRVs on the Agni V and it's SLBM series. That is for the common folks and "analysts" outside. DAE will of course know everything right from the start due to their drilling of borehole and radioisotope analysis from the test.

If it they do mount MIRVs, it is easy to see that it was a Sizzler. No way you can mount small 150 to 200 kt warheads on a small form factor MIRV and put it on something as dinky as an Agni V.

Come on.. they put composites and want to go full composites to increase range.. makes no sense to do all that if each of the warhead you are carrying is as heavy as a baby elephant! If the Agni-V was an SS-18 sized behemoth, I will buy the Fizzle story. However, with the size and form it is currently in, unless it was a Sizzle, there is no way you can mount MIRVs.

So there you are. If a future version with say 4 or 5 MIRVs are tested, you know the answer is settled in favor of a good Sizzle . If the Agni continues with the single solitary warhead like at present, the doubts will be there.

[amit]

^^^^^^

Am no expert and so I can't/won't comment on the technical aspects of the sizzle/fizzle dhamaka. However, I do have some experience in gauging national/political intentions via circumstantial evidence. And for that reason I think Vina is right on the money on this one.

The Indian establishment, especially DRDO wouldn't be talking about test schedules for MIRVs if it didn't have the phatakas to put into these babies. BK and others talk about MIRV tech being ready for 8 years. Of course he blames MMS for stalling for so long. However, I would tend to think that the stalling, if any, was because the little ones were being perfected. As far as I can see the security establishment is confident that these puppies will behave, which is why there's bold talk about cannisters (BTW like Harbans ji commented, smooth bore or rifled? ) and MIRV. As far as I can recall, Avinash Chander came out with a specific comment that highly accurate delivery makes 150kt weapons potent and there's no need for anything bigger. The point is one 150kt per missile isn't going to cut the ice with the Dragon, and I think Chander Sir certainly understands this. IMHO, he'd have kept his mouth shut if he didn't know better.

I also think China's reaction to Agni V is a measure of the fact that they know that India can MIRV and deliver the flowers to any part of China. I don't think a single warhead FB weapon would have garnered the type of reaction we've seen from the Dragon. I mean if you look at it, an Agni 3 fired from the Northeast could reach some very interesting areas in China, yet narry a peep from the guys.

The announcement about MIRV is the key IMHO.

JMT and all other disclaimers. And I know there will be naysayers and IMO their opinion also needs to be taken into account. This debate can't be settled unless fresh information is on the table.

[tejas]

I am conphused. Before Arun_S left he had pics with an Agni 3 carrying 10 or so fission warheads. Why does MIRV imply TN? It simply implies relatively light weight. There were several reactions from China including deriding the A5 as puny and cautioning India that challenging China was a fight it couldn't win. With the Kangress in power for a few more years I might have to agree with them.

Deterrence is in the mind of your opponent. The arrogance of the Chinese toward India is breathtaking. Only a megaton test while one of their high ranking thugs is visiting India will convince them ( besides making me very happy).

[Fidel Guevara]

fidel and nachiket if you read the articles after the Tessy test, the first one after it was the canister launch, next is likley to be lofted trajectory and on to deployment. MIRV is after that.

When A5 goes to the MIRV tests, the conical 3rd stage will likely go away, IMHO. it will probably look more like a Trident-style blunt top, to fit in a few MIRVs. The 3rd stage would then likely become a regular cylindrical stage...more volume=more fuel=more range, partly offset by carrying more RV mass.

For this reason, I would like to see a mix of MIRV and large MARV in the force. In any nuclear strike against defended targets, use the MARVs to screw up the defences and create general EMP hell, and then the "dumb" MIRVs can go in and do the mass-scale destruction of multiple targets.

JMTC.

[amit]

I am conphused. Before Arun_S left he had pics with an Agni 3 carrying 10 or so fission warheads. Why does MIRV imply TN? It simply implies relatively light weight. There several reactions from China including deriding the A5 as puny and cautioning India that challenging China was a fight it couldn't win. With the Kangress in power for a few more years I might have to agree with them.

Does Kangress remaining in power for a few more years make the 50t AgniV more puny than it is now?

Look at it another way would the Agni V suddenly become TFTA if the NDA came to power in 2014 or earlier? And would the Chinese be doing a downhill skiing?

Regarding your point about why MIRV implies TN, please check the relative theoretical weight (and dimension) of a FB device with that of a TN device with the same dhamaka power, say 150kt.

[Fidel Guevara]

I am conphused. Before Arun_S left he had pics with an Agni 3 carrying 10 or so fission warheads.

Who is this legendary Arun_S, and where did he go? So many posts refer to him...

[tejas]

Arun_S was the former missile section webmaster and a missile uber guru. My rant against the Kangress was because their mismanagement of the economy and reverse Midas touch along with never seeing a PSU they didn't like will make sure India is forever on its knees via China. India should be making and exporting military trucks not importing 3rd rate ones from 3rd rate countries in Eastern Europe.

[SaiK]

Ganapathi dev.. I ( or anyone who is in the same understanding) accept the tall claims and believe in everything the ex chief said. You have to understand that this is not about claims, counter claims, and yields. It is just not dil maange more, it is different, ie: future.

The future requirement is not what S1 tested for. The armed forces and DRDO has the delivery in design, and let us wait for the time to come.. we shall see if the design satisfies future configuration. If we simply think about our forces, operational aspects is another big game changer that we all have to know.

The forces will not chest beat unless it can satisfy the numbers and power.

Again, I am not talking fizzle and sizzle buzz words. This is all about future configuration, and do we have it ready?

[Kanson]

Can you substantiate your statement that Deterrence is ONLY based on demonstration?

www.fas.org/pubs/_docs/OccasionalPaper7.pdf

The National Defense Strategic published by the Office of the Secretary of Defense in June 2008 pledges that:
“Our ability to deter attack credibly also reassures the American people and our allies of our commitment to defend them. For this reason, deterrence must remain grounded in demonstrated military capabilities that can respond to a broad array of challenges to inter-national security. For example, the United States will maintain its nuclear arsenal as a primary deterrent to nuclear attack, and the New Triad remains a cornerstone of strategic deterrence. We must also continue to field conventional capabilities to augment or even replace nuclear weapons in order to provide our leaders a greater range of credible responses.” 15

This from the Secretary of Defense, US. We can disagree with him but he presides over the biggest military.

ha ha ha.....

I asked you..."Can you substantiate your statement that Deterrence is ONLY based on demonstration?"

I stressed the word ONLY, which means you have to see what Deterrence meant to various types of people at various time. Is there such a belief/theory was accepted or overthrown or seen reversal. In short, is that withstand the test of time etc. How many theories were floated. what was the understanding from them. If you have done this you know the meaning of my statement. And give me one statement from US Defense Secretary and does that one statement proves that it is ONLY based on demonstration?

Depending on what is wanted to achieve as end result, what is needed for the deterrence varies. If you want to force an entity to follow your diktat it needs different things to maintain deterrence but if you want to merely put spanner in their works, create enough doubt to deter their action, then it is a different thing. America was deterred from attacking NoKo but the same America can compel others(like India) to follow their its diktat but fails more often when it comes to Pakistan- again what is needed to do varies between people to people and from time to time. America may be deterred by mere testing of some fizzle(that is what the belief)and possessing of N warhead with some missile but it can't be said the same thing that Noko did and possesses deters if it comes to Russia or Japan.

No offense sir but Discussion in this forum actually typifies the way you replied. Number of people who wants to see the whole hog is very less. Many don't understand what is mentioned maybe becoz of the pressing time or other compulsions, we see or want to see only part of the problem that will be typical of blind men of Hindustan story. I'm saying this only to mean, the forum should treat itself as center for culmination of information/knowledge and not as mere discussion or debate to score points.

Deterrence is actually part of Information Warfare. Nuclear Deterrence theory is a subset of that.

[Kanson]

As far as I can recall, Avinash Chander came out with a specific comment that highly accurate delivery makes 150kt weapons potent and there's no need for anything bigger. The point is one 150kt per missile isn't going to cut the ice with the Dragon, and I think Chander Sir certainly understands this. IMHO, he'd have kept his mouth shut if he didn't know better.

Sir, I know you have raised many valid points. One correction, as i could remember, he mentioned 200 to 250 kt

[negi]

Jeez the Jingo penchant for hyper analysis and filling reams of paper is mind boggling; it is amusing to see how chankian logic is being used to read too much into what Dr. Kakodhar or BARC for that matter have said about the tests. Each time when anyone from BARC was quizzed on the test it was primarily with regards to the success and measured yield of the TN device their response that one test is enough was actually to allay fears if the test in itself was a success or not ; having said that the point being made here is the need for more tests have fckn nothing to do with the actual yield of the TN device tested during PoK-II . The success of PoK-II demonstrates that India has the technical knowhow to build TN bombs it does not imply that one has also weaponised and inducted the device formally which btw requires testing. Agni-V's first launch was a text book launch so if you ask Dr. Saraswat today if one test is enough to demonstrate our capability of course the answer will be an emphatic YES and rightly so; in fact I clearly remember when Chinese did their ASAT test shortly after our PAD tests he claimed that we had the technical capability to do the same and no one argues with that however all said and done there is a reason why Agni-V is going to be tested 6 times including 3 times by the IA before it gets formally inducted. So using the LAHORI logic being used to justify 1 test is enough should we say that DRDO and specially those who are behind the IGMDP are incompetent iditos who cannot get things right in just ONE test ?

The fact is establishment says one test is enough because they fckn CANNOT test anymore , at least at this point in time. ABV himself put a self moratorium on tests. That is why the refrain ONE test is enough. Every thing else is a figment of chankian imagination.

[gakakkad]

understand one thing ,negi-ullah ,eve if barc intend to carry out further test in the future , they cannot reveal that in public..

imagine head of AEC saying , "we need further tests ,and are going to carry them out.. " What would be the international reaction ? Missile and bum are different things..we can test missiles with impunity..but not bums..

he simply cannot say publicly .that further tests are necessary and that they are willing to do so.

whether they themselves believe that further tests are necessary or not is a different thing ,that we may never know.. Even further tests are planned we won't know them ,till they are done...

Kakodkar reveals as much as he can on the 98 tests..as he says ,there is a limit to what can be revealed..

[SaiK]

yes, la from white box to black box mode... we don't care about the efficiency, but we just care about the bum efficacy.

--

BTW, AK also said, the bum was built and verified with simulations (4th or 5th video).. with data provided from external source (out of India)!?!?!?

[amit]

As far as I can recall, Avinash Chander came out with a specific comment that highly accurate delivery makes 150kt weapons potent and there's no need for anything bigger. The point is one 150kt per missile isn't going to cut the ice with the Dragon, and I think Chander Sir certainly understands this. IMHO, he'd have kept his mouth shut if he didn't know better.

Sir, I know you have raised many valid points. One correction, as i could remember, he mentioned 200 to 250 kt

Kanson ji,

You are correct. I was typing on my mobile while doing a few other things, and I guess got the numbers mixed up.

[gakakkad]

@ SaIK ,one of the tendency we have , is that "US gave UK/france nooks, ussr gave em to panda, panda gave some fully assembled once to Paki ,but nobody gave India anything ,we did all on our own.. "

The above is partly correct actually .. Our program is more or less indigenous. But we had access to data from a friendly country ...

[Austin]

New firepower - T.S. SUBRAMANIAN
Story of self-reliance
Agni-V and neighbours

[amit]

IMO, the success (or failure, take your pick) of the TN in 1998 and the need for further testing should be looked at as two separate issues. It may be that we've gotten into a cycle of circular arguments because we are looking at both as part of one piece.

There can be two different scenarios.

1) The TN was a fizzle as claimed by BK, Santhanam and others.

2) The TN was sizzle as claimed by Kakodkar and the establishment.

Now whichever scenario you may subscribe to does not preclude the need for further testing, it's only the degree of urgency of that testing that differs. Negi ji is right in as much that as designs evolve we would need to test. However, IMO the comparison between the TN device and Agni V is not a very accurate apples to apples comparison.

[Here's why: The missile is a sum of many moving parts/systems and, as we've seen from previous experience, even a loose screw can result in failure. Hence from an engineering perspective we need haazar tests to validate. However, from what little understanding I have from reading what different gurus have written here, the bomb has few, if any, moving parts and if it works at first shot it should be good to go.]

Now if No1 is what happened then the only explanation for all these big bang advertising about AgniV and MIRV is that India is bluffing big time with the hope that Panda and others fall for it. MRIV with 20kt per shot would be hardly something that would deter Panda. A conviction that the TN was a fizzle would have to be supported by this POV, which is why I'm at a loss to understand why BK is unhappy that MIRV was stalled "for eight years". Heck if we don't have the maal to put into these puppies then why the brouhaha?

If one subscribes to No2 then everything would follow logically with the idea that as of now India thinks that its nook bombs are deterrent enough to keep Panda thinking twice before trying something stupid and all the MIRV stuff is just to reinforce this POV for Panda's benefit.

Regarding the future, like Negi ji said I'm convinced we'll have to bite the bullet and test. The only point IMO is that it's much better to test when you're a $2.5-3 trillion economy than when you're $1 trillion. During the great nuclear debate I had stuck my neck out and said I think a test might come in the 2017-18 or thereabouts time frame. I haven't seen anything to change my opinion.

JMT

[SaiK]

ggggg...gakakkad. you went tangential.

i was wrong on the video sequence. Check at 1:45 - 2:15 3/5 video. AK says, the 3d simulations code is verified with data obtained from abroad.

q: how valid was the data?.. I know, I am tangential here though. But, you see we can lead the discussion either way.

[pankajs]

Deterrence is actually part of Information Warfare. Nuclear Deterrence theory is a subset of that.

Reordering the above..... Nuclear Deterrence is part of Information Warfare
Well...I will leave this to the judgement of the other learned forum members.

I agree with you on the blind men of Hindustan part. Some see Deterrence as Information Warfare (One extreme) and some as demonstrated capacity (Other extreme) and everything in the middle. So yes, Deterrence meant different thing to different people at different time. But as other posters have rightly pointed out (I remember Tejas saar), deterrence is in the mind of your opponent and not in the minds of blind men of hindustan (wrt India's capabilities).

Perhaps a demonstrated 45-50 kt TNW is enough to deter the Chinese (Proxy for all adversaries) or perhaps the information about the scalability of the TNW to 200 kt will be deter the Chinese when the demonstrated capacity was not enough. Whether the information about the scalability of the pataka will add any deterrence value to the demonstrated 45-50 kt TNW only the Chinese can say. Perhaps our demonstrated mastery over every phase of the civilian nuclear cycle should have been deterrence enough for the rest of the world. Perhaps the SLV/ASLV/PSLV's success should have been enough going by the NPA's claims. Perhaps, simulated electronic tests of Agni 1,2,3,4,5... should have been enough after the success of Agni-TD as has been suggested for ASAT by Saraswatji similar to what is being advocated by AK&Co for Nuclear tests (we can trust the simulations). Perhaps demonstrated capability is actually a waste of public money and is nothing more than a ego trip for the rocket scientists and the jingos.

The blind men of Hindustan (All of us) will continue to grope about in the dark for none of us know what our adversaries are making or our demonstrated and claimed capabilities. Actually we may have some idea given the coverage of 1998 tests in the western press. All the doubting may the NPA's doings but on the other hand may reflect the thinking in the decision making circles.

It is precisely because we can't read the mind of the enemy and the deterrence thresholds varies based on situation, prudent policy dictates that we put the best, the biggest and the baddest pataka on the table and leave the rest to god. Again, I frankly admit I am one amongst the blind men of hindustan, groping about in the dark, unable to read the Chinese (proxy for all adversaries) mind, and the reason for my advocacy of a maximal position and multiple tests. Instead of shadow boxing test till there remains not even an iota of doubt in the minds of our adversaries about our capabilities.

[marimuthu]

One Noob question. What we have all seen is A-5 takeoff only. No one saw the travel path or the splash down. But when Dr.Avinash Chandar says it is a grand success, we joyfully agree. Also in Pok-2 we all the the ground tremble only. No body saw anything else. But why question AK if he claims the POk-2 a grand success.

[merlin]

One Noob question. What we have all seen is A-5 takeoff only. No one saw the travel path or the splash down. But when Dr.Avinash Chandar says it is a grand success, we joyfully agree. Also in Pok-2 we all the the ground tremble only. No body saw anything else. But why question AK if he claims the POk-2 a grand success.

Err, maybe because even the IN is a witness to the splash down? And SFC folks and other folks witnesses the launch. So if the launch was successful and the splash down and explosion were witnessed it may just, just, qualify as a grand success.

OTOH, only AK and BARC claim that S-1 was a grand success. Does DRDO support that? And SFC concur?

[Austin]

I read during A-5 launch jurnos were permitted to be present during the launch , you even have those screen showing trajectory etc ....so its wrong to say DRDO gets away atleast you wont say that for A-5 test and DRDO has accepted failure when it was not completely sucessful

The problem is that its impossible to say if BARC is speaking the truth and the whole truth when it comes to H-bomb test because its the judge and jury , no one has any data to prove it other wise and BARC can easily get away saying i know i am right and its not your business to know and you have to believe us. Thats called Leap of Faith.

Take the example of BARC claiming the ATV reactor are designed by them and it has gone on TV and interviews claiming that , in a recent write up in FORCE issue Admiral Arun Prakash mentioned the fact that the reactor were old 90 MW Soviet reactor and we have yet to design a reactor for ATV , most likely the bigger ATV will have indian designed reactor he alluded.

Politically its impossible for BARC/GOI to backtrack on H bomb irrespective its sizzle or fizzle , officially it will always be a sizzle , till they conduct the test next time and we might hear what was wrong before.

[atreya]

One Noob question. What we have all seen is A-5 takeoff only. No one saw the travel path or the splash down. But when Dr.Avinash Chandar says it is a grand success, we joyfully agree. Also in Pok-2 we all the the ground tremble only. No body saw anything else. But why question AK if he claims the POk-2 a grand success.

Dr. Saraswat clearly mentions a successful splash down in this interview
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/defe ... chief.html

What were the challenges posed in tracking such a long-range missile?

VKS: The Agni-V required a different range deployment. The Range of over 5,000 km meant the missile would land north of Antartica. That meant the ships tracking the launch would have to sail nearly a fortnight before the launch window. We had a slight difficulty in that all our tracking systems are ship and shore-based. We don’t have airborne sensors. We needed three ships to track the launch: two near the splashdown and one to track the mid-course correction. The ships are due to return on April 30 or, 11 days after the missile test. We have a highly integrated tracking range comprising 15 sensors, seven radars and seven telemetry systems. They did an admirable job of tracking the missile flight in real time.

So, if not Dr. Chandar, you can at least believe the 15 sensors, 7 radars and 7 telemetry systems

[krishnan]

One Noob question. What we have all seen is A-5 takeoff only. No one saw the travel path or the splash down. But when Dr.Avinash Chandar says it is a grand success, we joyfully agree. Also in Pok-2 we all the the ground tremble only. No body saw anything else. But why question AK if he claims the POk-2 a grand success.

Probably the video of the splash down cannot be sent from the ship that took the video..we will get to see it once the ships return back

[chiru]

@ marimuthu .. the path of A-5 tessy is clearly seen in a video as it appears on a tracking screen in the background... i will get a screen grab asap!
it is similar to isro SLV tracking screens

[amit]

The problem is that its impossible to say if BARC is speaking the truth and the whole truth when it comes to H-bomb test because its the judge and jury , no one has any data to prove it other wise and BARC can easily get away saying i know i am right and its not your business to know and you have to believe us. Thats called Leap of Faith.

Take the example of BARC claiming the ATV reactor are designed by them and it has gone on TV and interviews claiming that , in a recent write up in FORCE issue Admiral Arun Prakash mentioned the fact that the reactor were old 90 MW Soviet reactor and we have yet to design a reactor for ATV , most likely the bigger ATV will have indian designed reactor he alluded.

The problem I have with statements like these (it's my problem, may not be a problem for others I agree) is that if we start to think/assume BARC is not telling the truth and acting in a manner which is detrimental to the interests of India then forget the Chinni, Pakis etc, we ourselves think we are nook nude or let's say puny when it comes to our testimonials. Then if we don't have the stuff to put on top of all the TFTA missiles DRDO is designing, then what use are they anyway. Deterrence is dead because we ourselves don't believe in it.

The problem is when it comes to Indian deterrence it includes both Barc as well as DRDO. The Chinni don't make differences like Barc -> bad, DRDO -> good.

At some point, in the absence of concrete information it is a Leap of Faith. Ultimately isn't deterrence all about that?

[Austin]

Deterrence is not an issue because he still have Fission Device and even Boosted Fission assuming the 3rd stage of TN sizzled. No one ever says the entire series fizzled its just the TN device which is creating doubts.

[vina]

No one ever says the entire series fizzled its just the TN device which is creating doubts.

Pray, how did you conclude that ? All you have are the following 1) The seismic data as per the rest of the world indicated a total yield of around 43 KT or so. 2) The DRDO instruments too didn't record a big bang.

Since there were 2 or more weapons there, how did you conclude that since it was just 43 odd KT, that only the TN fizzled ? How do you rule out that both the FBF and the TN didn't fizzle and the cumulative yield from both were less than what could have been there, yielding only 43 kt ?

[Austin]

its also possible the entire TN fizzled including the primary and the data we have is just from the fission device , any combination is possible.

Since we dont have the data and the chances that BARC will ever share it with any one is remote we either believe barc or just dont.

[Singha]

the lethality radius (immediate) of a 21KT fatman device is 3km per a online calculator of sorts I found. for a 15KT nearly the same.
for a 140KT is 5km. for a 340kt its around 10km.

so the "sweet spot" of weight vs bang seems to be around the 250-300KT mark where all the worlds advanced nuclear nations have converged on. four of these spaced apart will destroy a large city.

45KT cannot be our primary weapon. we need a 250KT proven weapon even if its used as single weapon payload.

[Kanson]

The blind men of Hindustan (All of us) will continue to grope about in the dark for none of us know what our adversaries are making or our demonstrated and claimed capabilities.

It is precisely because we can't read the mind of the enemy and the deterrence thresholds

You want speak for all Indians including strategic community(that includes various Intel communities) and wanted to say everyone in Strats community continue to grope in the dark?

Ok...any war whether conventional or nuclear needs intel. Even for conventional there is great effort spent on understanding the behaviour of opposite Generals and officers who occupy key position. In Nuclear warfare I don't have to specify it considering its importance. Recently, after mumbai 26/11, IA exactly touched that topic while considering various responses available to GoI. If you are interested check DRDO statements on this topic.

It is precisely because we can't read the mind of the enemy and the deterrence thresholds varies based on situation, prudent policy dictates that we put the best, the biggest and the baddest pataka on the table and leave the rest to god.

There is always step by step escalation. You don't always fire your biggest weapon first in any encounter. What is need of the hour will be decided at that time. Agni V testing once such thing. If situation is gone to that level, no one going to stop us from, what you like to call as, demonstrating the required capabilities.