Deterrence

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5620
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Deterrence

Post by RoyG »

disha wrote:
ramana wrote:Any gist on last part or we have to hear it?
Nothing new that this thread already does not know. Some summations from the rambling interview:

1. Dr. Kakodkar dwells on nuclear deterrence with the perspective that he asked for TN test. And Dr. Kalam asked repeatedly that the yield has to be constrained to save Khetolai. And one piece I did not know, that Dr. Kakodkar gives in writing that the TN Test yield will be constrained within 45 Kt. His view was that India is a reluctant nuclear power, and paraphrasing, the global situation warranted that India needs to have an advanced deterrent and a proven weapon capability. So the 15 Kt shot was a weaponized device.

Some time is spent on the discussing two-stage (confirmed by Dr. Kakodkar) TN shot. Also per Dr. Kakodkar it was designed yield of 200 kt dialed down to 45 Kt. There is some discussion about fizzle controversy (which happened in '74 as well). Dr. Kakodkar points out about the siesmic signal and points out the lacunae in the western world's analcysts debates about yield using siesmic signals without understanding the geology strata.

2. One of the deep sites was near Khetolai and to let villagers of Khetolai know that they need to vacate. This would be public information and hence for secrecy required only 4 hours of a priori update. Dr. Kakodkar acknowledges the patriotism of the villagers of Khetolai.

2. Sub-kiloton tests were integrated tests. Personally I always maintained that the "chotus" (euphemisms for the sub-kiloton tests) were more important from science and weaponization perspective than the other two.

3. Dr. Kakodkar points out 'Dil maange mor'. There is a desire of using deterance for peace, at the same time there is pragmatism.

One thing that the interview did not go into details was Dhruva.

All of the above is covered in

1. Raj Chengappa's Weapons of Peace
2. Dr. Kakodkar's Fire and Fury: Transforming India's strategic identity

Note:

1. Op Smiling Buddha-2 (Pokhran-2) was a very well executed plan given all the national and international challenges. Comes out very well in the interview.

2. For any detractors of Shakti-1 (the TN shot), please check out Astrosat.

3. The https://news3lv.com/features/video-vaul ... -baneberry Baneberry shot was used to qualify the shockwave code developed by BARC (Dr. Kakodkar/Dr. Gupta) and the same code was used to demonstrate the yield of Shakti-I.
They scrubbed the sixth test after the TN fizzled. DRDO-BARC team was sent to Laser Megajoule in Bourdeax which at the time used NOVA chamber from Livermore. They were able to use the data to debug the design. Rumour is we have high confidence 125&175kt TN designs in the inventory.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Deterrence

Post by ShauryaT »

disha wrote: 2. For any detractors of Shakti-1 (the TN shot), please check out Astrosat.
Thanks for the summary. Same question as Anujan, what has Astrosat to do with Shakti-1?
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Deterrence

Post by ShauryaT »

RoyG wrote:Rumour is we have high confidence 125&175kt TN designs in the inventory.
Any sources or basis for these designed payloads and its rationale?
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Deterrence

Post by ShauryaT »

THE NUCLEAR CLUB - JONATHAN HUNT
On this episode of Horns of a Dilemma, Jonathan Hunt talks about his book, The Nuclear Club: How America and the World Policed the Atom from Hiroshima to Vietnam. Hunt starts out with an anecdote about the origins of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty under U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson and his Special Assistant for National Security Affairs Walt Whitman Rostow. He then outlines the core argument of his book: that parallel to the nuclear revolution was a “counter-revolution” to prevent the universalization of nuclear weapons, therefore maintaining the dominance of the “nuclear club” of nuclear-armed states. He then discusses the sequence of events that led to the implementation of nuclear laws, including the Limited Test Ban Treaty and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Finally, he touches on the lessons of this narrative and how the politics of nuclear diplomacy during the Cold War led to the rise of a “paternal” U.S. presidency. This was recorded at the Clements Center for National Security at the University of Texas at Austin.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5620
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Deterrence

Post by RoyG »

ShauryaT wrote:
RoyG wrote:Rumour is we have high confidence 125&175kt TN designs in the inventory.
Any sources or basis for these designed payloads and its rationale?
Bharat Karnad himself admitted it.
Tanaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4521
Joined: 21 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Deterrence

Post by Tanaji »

Why did the French help us with nuclear weapons design debugging by offering the facility? Doesnt it violate multiple treaties?
Cyrano
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5481
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: Deterrence

Post by Cyrano »

Perhaps to prevent India from doing more tests, and also to get to know intimately our level of progress, if we were helped by some other countries in violation of NPT etc. The French might have had US encouragement behind the scenes to engage India while maintaining a strong anti posture in public.

Treaties are applicable only until a signatory decides to break it.
disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 8243
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: Deterrence

Post by disha »

Anujan wrote:What is Astrosat and how does it relate to Shakti-1?
X-Ray lenses
disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 8243
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: Deterrence

Post by disha »

RoyG wrote:
ShauryaT wrote:Any sources or basis for these designed payloads and its rationale?
Bharat Karnad himself admitted it.
With all due respect, BK'ji is a maximalist. Anything sort of a Tsar Bomba tested in Pissawar will not satisfy him. I respect his position. But that does not mean the deterrent has flaws which only the French could help us fix and that too in one of the best wine region.
disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 8243
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: Deterrence

Post by disha »

Tanaji wrote:Why did the French help us with nuclear weapons design debugging by offering the facility? Doesnt it violate multiple treaties?
I think it is a parable to state that Indian designs were flawed, Indians had the test data, and the facility at France with some American help, decoded the design flaws for us given the test data we had.

I can come up with that line once I have two bottles of high quality Bordeaux.
disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 8243
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: Deterrence

Post by disha »

Cyrano wrote:Perhaps to prevent India from doing more tests, and also to get to know intimately our level of progress, if we were helped by some other countries in violation of NPT etc. The French might have had US encouragement behind the scenes to engage India while maintaining a strong anti posture in public.
Why would US do that? Till 2010, they were into Cap-Rollback-Eliminate. From 2010-2014 they were into Cashmere/Siachin etc.

No nation will respect you unless your Deterrent is working. And once you have a working Deterrent, all nations will want to know how well it is and how much bargain they can do (quid pro quid) to see the deterrent.
Cyrano
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5481
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: Deterrence

Post by Cyrano »

Aren't we more or less saying the same thing ? :)
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Deterrence

Post by ShauryaT »

RoyG wrote:
ShauryaT wrote:Any sources or basis for these designed payloads and its rationale?
Bharat Karnad himself admitted it.
Understood. So the design of S-1 is the basis. Thanks.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5620
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Deterrence

Post by RoyG »

disha wrote:
RoyG wrote:
Bharat Karnad himself admitted it.
With all due respect, BK'ji is a maximalist. Anything sort of a Tsar Bomba tested in Pissawar will not satisfy him. I respect his position. But that does not mean the deterrent has flaws which only the French could help us fix and that too in one of the best wine region.
I don't understand the point of your post.
Last edited by RoyG on 18 May 2023 17:31, edited 1 time in total.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5620
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Deterrence

Post by RoyG »

ShauryaT wrote:
RoyG wrote:
Bharat Karnad himself admitted it.
Understood. So the design of S-1 is the basis. Thanks.
Yeah and it fits w/ the max 200kt yield from AK. This may be way GoI feels no need to test at this point. If you look at the newer European designs fielded atop slbm force, they don't cross 200kt either. With more accurate targeting available today, nobody will risk it.

BK won't bring up what he's heard about the debugged designs in recorded discussions unless point blank asked. We have reliable TN deterrent.

Bordeaux has a rich history with the NOVA chamber loaned from Livermore. They were able to conduct ICF experiments and update nuclear detonation data. Indian teams did participate and help fund the program. The US benefitted by allowing India to forgo further testing which would've caused some itch to NPT and CTBT regimes. I guess they figured India would have done it anyway why not at least make it less disruptive.
Tanaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4521
Joined: 21 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Deterrence

Post by Tanaji »

There is a whole lot of things here in the above:

Indias TN shot failed
France allowed us to validate the design
US allowed us to use their property
US has no problem is providing material assistance to a non Nato member to build a thermonuke

#2 alone is difficult to believe from logistical standpoint alone let alone 3 and 4.

This topic usually results in impassioned debate that leads to bredators circling, so I will stop here and go into lurk mode.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Deterrence

Post by ShauryaT »

@RoyG: These are all plausible theories and something that has been debated on these threads ad nauseam. The credibility of a theory is based on evidences and proofs demonstrated. The value of deterrence comes from an understanding of proven capabilities. On the issue of EU designs, they are irrelevant for our thought processes due to the US arsenal and they ALL sit on MIRV missiles. 5-10 200 KT on a city yields higher destructive power than a 1-2 MT, in both cases the capacities of the payload are fully utilized.

Tanaji provides sane advice for our own peace!!
Last edited by ShauryaT on 18 May 2023 23:08, edited 1 time in total.
Cyrano
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5481
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: Deterrence

Post by Cyrano »

There is some credence to that. The overlords of NPT don't want nuclear testing to become destigmatised and mainstream. Multiple rounds of overt testing by India, Pak, noko etc will tempt more nations to try and join the n club. Hence the response to India's tests is, if they think we are there, or nearly there, give us a grumbling push quietly to get us (into thinking that we are ?) there in exchange for a no more testing commitment.

I can see there is some sense in that approach. In today's world there is enough free availability of info, industrial know how, materials, parts, electronics etc that were once upon a time hard to get, that a dozen non NATO countries could make serious progress towards making enrichment centrifuges and atleast make a dirty device in a couple of years or so. Which in itself will become a major geo-security headache. From there building a TN device could take less than a decade and in one country starts on it, will create 5 copy cats.

Keeping the N stuff firmly in the no go zone and maintaining a public taboo is an important part of global security. IMO only.
Cyrano
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5481
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: Deterrence

Post by Cyrano »

But what about expertise you ask? Who is keeping track of the hundreds of top level experts who retire every year from the western world? Many seek warmer climates to spend their sunset years. Do we keep track of all our retired scientists and engineers? Nuff said.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Deterrence

Post by ShauryaT »

101 level podcast on nuclear deterrence its evolution and trajectories.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5620
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Deterrence

Post by RoyG »

ShauryaT wrote:@RoyG: These are all plausible theories and something that has been debated on these threads ad nauseam. The credibility of a theory is based on evidences and proofs demonstrated. The value of deterrence comes from an understanding of proven capabilities. On the issue of EU designs, they are irrelevant for our thought processes due to the US arsenal and they ALL sit on MIRV missiles. 5-10 200 KT on a city yields higher destructive power than a 1-2 MT, in both cases the capacities of the payload are fully utilized.

Tanaji provides sane advice for our own peace!!
Not a theory. Offered in 98 to Vajpayee.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5620
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Deterrence

Post by RoyG »

Tanaji wrote:There is a whole lot of things here in the above:

Indias TN shot failed
France allowed us to validate the design
US allowed us to use their property
US has no problem is providing material assistance to a non Nato member to build a thermonuke

#2 alone is difficult to believe from logistical standpoint alone let alone 3 and 4.

This topic usually results in impassioned debate that leads to bredators circling, so I will stop here and go into lurk mode.
Tanaji,

The problem with BRF is that it has become an echo chamber of ego driven fluff. If one would just take the time to do some research, you will arrive at this timeline:

1998 - Pokhran II ; 2nd TN test aborted after S1 fizzle.

1998 - Formal offer to Vajpayee to use Laser Megajoule with NOVA chamber from Livermore.

2002 - Completion of Laser Megajoule

2005 - Framework for 123 Agreement

It's obvious what happened. S1 fizzled. We made up for it using a combination of subcritical testing, Pokhran II data, Laser Megajoule data, and supercomputing. We have a ssbn program in full swing and we have an entirely new political dispensation since 2014. If there had been any doubts, there would have been more urgency. Perhaps at some stage there may be a test or two down the line if we decide to field anything greater or new gen with fissionless trigger.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Deterrence

Post by ShauryaT »

Read the whole thing, from an expert on the topic.

A lot of Twaddle about AI and nuclear weapons, tacnukes
I have no patience anymore for uninformed commentaries on nuclear deterrence penned by people who wear their unfamiliarity with the broad swath of deterrence literature and with the empirical evidence of nearly 80 years of the nuclear age, on their sleeve. Missing the nuclear woods for the trees is one thing. Quite another for these worthies to convert the analects of minimal deterrence into articles of faith. With logic, reason and experience thus rested, who can argue with faith?
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5620
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Deterrence

Post by RoyG »

ShauryaT wrote:Read the whole thing, from an expert on the topic.

A lot of Twaddle about AI and nuclear weapons, tacnukes
I have no patience anymore for uninformed commentaries on nuclear deterrence penned by people who wear their unfamiliarity with the broad swath of deterrence literature and with the empirical evidence of nearly 80 years of the nuclear age, on their sleeve. Missing the nuclear woods for the trees is one thing. Quite another for these worthies to convert the analects of minimal deterrence into articles of faith. With logic, reason and experience thus rested, who can argue with faith?
Ask him if he has heard "rumours" that TN warheads are being fielded by SFC. Simple.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Deterrence

Post by ShauryaT »

RoyG wrote:
Ask him if he has heard "rumours" that TN warheads are being fielded by SFC. Simple.
The question was its credibility, that is what his two decades of writings are about. To the question of if there are TN warheads in the deployed arsenal, this question has been answered IIRC by multiple SFC commanders and chiefs of staff in the past. The answer is yes. The worry is, it may not work.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9265
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Deterrence

Post by Amber G. »

ramana wrote:Any gist on last part or we have to hear it?
I watched the whole interview, with a physicist friend (knowledgeable about physics/US perspective - perhaps less familiar with Indian landscape. Interview was *excellent* quite fascinating.
I have met AK, so knew he is quite soft spoken. modest and brilliant. As the interview said a few times, India is quite lucky to have such people.

New things for us:
- The teamwork - and working with so many teams (including Political leadership, Military and scientists) was awesome. They worked together extremely well.

- The planning (and making sure that outsiders had no clue about all of this) and discipline by all was amazing. Scientists did not use telephones, or told family exactly where they were, put on military uniform to blend etc. AK's father died during that time, yet his mother/family helped and all the rituals were performed and his absence was not noticed.

- Not surprising (to those who knew about calibre of Indian science) the attention to details, scientific methods, and getting all needed data was done almost to perfection. The *all* designs worked as expected, getting all necessary data.

- The cooperation and trust from locals - surprised many. For example, evacuation from houses near point zero was done within 4 hours notice - Locals did not ask questions but said something like "don't worry.. we will do what you want us to do, we know you are doing something for the nation"

- Interview also underlines the point - why that much touted 'seismic argument that it was a fizzle' was scientifically nonsense. (A point I pointed out Brf decades ago).

Okay I will stop. For anyone seriously interested, a must watch interview, IMO.

I am *not* commenting on many bizzare narratives, posted here by some. (eg ' TN was fizzle') . IMO these are as silly as believing in Flat Earth or jihnn thermodynamics.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5620
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Deterrence

Post by RoyG »

Amber G. wrote:
ramana wrote:Any gist on last part or we have to hear it?
I watched the whole interview, with a physicist friend (knowledgeable about physics/US perspective - perhaps less familiar with Indian landscape. Interview was *excellent* quite fascinating.
I have met AK, so knew he is quite soft spoken. modest and brilliant. As the interview said a few times, India is quite lucky to have such people.

New things for us:
- The teamwork - and working with so many teams (including Political leadership, Military and scientists) was awesome. They worked together extremely well.

- The planning (and making sure that outsiders had no clue about all of this) and discipline by all was amazing. Scientists did not use telephones, or told family exactly where they were, put on military uniform to blend etc. AK's father died during that time, yet his mother/family helped and all the rituals were performed and his absence was not noticed.

- Not surprising (to those who knew about calibre of Indian science) the attention to details, scientific methods, and getting all needed data was done almost to perfection. The *all* designs worked as expected, getting all necessary data.

- The cooperation and trust from locals - surprised many. For example, evacuation from houses near point zero was done within 4 hours notice - Locals did not ask questions but said something like "don't worry.. we will do what you want us to do, we know you are doing something for the nation"

- Interview also underlines the point - why that much touted 'seismic argument that it was a fizzle' was scientifically nonsense. (A point I pointed out Brf decades ago).

Okay I will stop. For anyone seriously interested, a must watch interview, IMO.

I am *not* commenting on many bizzare narratives, posted here by some. (eg ' TN was fizzle') . IMO these are as silly as believing in Flat Earth or jihnn thermodynamics.
No offer to Vajpayee to use Laser Megajoule the same yr would've happened had the TN been a success. The Shakti VI test was also aborted after the first TN fizzled.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Deterrence

Post by ShauryaT »

Will India play ball?
A Nuclear Collision Course in South Asia
Tellis hints at a tantalizing solution to India’s problems. The United States could provide India with a reliable thermonuclear weapon design. The trilateral security pact among Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States that is known as AUKUS, which will assist Australia in acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, could be expanded to include India. Might the Americans also share their nuclear reactor designs with New Delhi? But for this to happen, India, which has kept the United States at arm’s length practically since its birth, would have to finally and firmly close ranks with the leading Indo-Pacific democracies and formally forsake the nonaligned strategic autonomy it has long enshrined at the heart of its foreign policy.
drnayar
BRFite
Posts: 925
Joined: 29 Jan 2023 18:38

Re: Deterrence

Post by drnayar »

ShauryaT wrote:Will India play ball?
A Nuclear Collision Course in South Asia
Tellis hints at a tantalizing solution to India’s problems. The United States could provide India with a reliable thermonuclear weapon design. The trilateral security pact among Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States that is known as AUKUS, which will assist Australia in acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, could be expanded to include India. Might the Americans also share their nuclear reactor designs with New Delhi? But for this to happen, India, which has kept the United States at arm’s length practically since its birth, would have to finally and firmly close ranks with the leading Indo-Pacific democracies and formally forsake the nonaligned strategic autonomy it has long enshrined at the heart of its foreign policy.
Simple answer. NO.Indias strategic autonomy has equal status to its nuclear weapons. The Americans can dream all they want.

All.the talk about fizzle and fossil is just subterfuge and Tellis is as telling as that.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Deterrence

Post by ramana »

And doesn't torpedo their sacred NPT which was renewed in perpetuity to keep Inid out in 1995?
That Tellis has sadly become a snake oil Gungadin.
VKumar
BRFite
Posts: 730
Joined: 15 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Mumbai,India

Re: Deterrence

Post by VKumar »

How do we know if any bomb is reliable without testing?
williams
BRFite
Posts: 875
Joined: 21 Jun 2006 20:55

Re: Deterrence

Post by williams »

VKumar wrote:How do we know if any bomb is reliable without testing?
Computer simulations can be used to simulate various aspects of a nuclear test, providing valuable insights into weapon performance and behavior without the need for actual physical tests. Here are some ways computer simulations can be employed:

Weapon design: Simulations can aid in the design and optimization of nuclear weapon components, such as the nuclear core, explosive lenses, and other critical elements. Computational modeling can help determine the most efficient and effective configurations, materials, and geometries.

Weapon performance: Simulations can predict the behavior and performance of nuclear weapons, including factors like explosive yield, blast effects, radiation release, and thermal effects. By modeling the physical processes involved in a nuclear explosion, simulations can provide estimates of the weapon's characteristics.

Safety and reliability: Computer simulations can assess the safety and reliability of nuclear weapons. Simulations can evaluate the behavior of the weapon under various conditions, including accidents, aging, and potential vulnerabilities. This information is crucial for ensuring the proper functioning and security of the weapons.

Stockpile stewardship: For existing nuclear arsenal, computer simulations play a vital role in stockpile stewardship. Simulations can help monitor the aging of weapons, evaluate the effects of dismantlement, assess the performance of replacement components, and maintain the reliability of the stockpile without the need for new physical tests.

It's important to note that while computer simulations can provide valuable insights, they are not a perfect substitute for physical testing. Real-world nuclear tests provide unique data and validation that simulations may not capture entirely. However, advances in computational power, modeling techniques, and data from past tests can enhance the accuracy and reliability of computer simulations for nuclear weapons. That is where the smaller tests become important. I would assume our scientists have enough data to simulate real-world conditions.

Also, they would have conducted many sub-critical tests even before 1998. No country will think our scientists are dwindling their thumbs all these years without improving and expanding on reliable weapon design. So let us stop this self-flagellation based on speculative reports in the media.
williams
BRFite
Posts: 875
Joined: 21 Jun 2006 20:55

Re: Deterrence

Post by williams »

https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/scie ... 1998-08-30
Significantly, the official announcement after India's second series of tests on May 13 declared that they were undertaken to provide the nation the ability to use computer modeling in weapons' design which "may be supported by subcritical experiments, if necessary". Indian scientists have, after all, proved that they can keep up with the best if adequately supported and financed.
ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4056
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Deterrence

Post by ArjunPandit »

williams wrote:
VKumar wrote:How do we know if any bomb is reliable without testing?
Computer simulations can be used to simulate various aspects of a nuclear test, providing valuable insights into weapon performance and behavior without the need for actual physical tests. Here are some ways computer simulations can be employed:
how exactly do you validate simulations if you dont have the data over full curve?
Tanaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4521
Joined: 21 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Deterrence

Post by Tanaji »

If Tellis is gushing about US sharing thermonuclear designs, then you can be 100% sure that the Indian thermonuclear design is spot on and works.

There is no other reason for US to share otherwise.
williams
BRFite
Posts: 875
Joined: 21 Jun 2006 20:55

Re: Deterrence

Post by williams »

ArjunPandit wrote:
williams wrote:
Computer simulations can be used to simulate various aspects of a nuclear test, providing valuable insights into weapon performance and behavior without the need for actual physical tests. Here are some ways computer simulations can be employed:
how exactly do you validate simulations if you dont have the data over full curve?
https://web.archive.org/web/20191028030 ... 010840.htm
According to Dr. R. Chidambaram, Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), and Secretary, Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), "a dozen new ideas and systems" were tried out in the five nuclear tests carried out at Pokhran in Rajasthan on May 11 and 13. "And all of them worked perfectly well." With the data yielded by the tests, he said, "we have now built an adequate scientific database for designing the types of devices that we need for a credible nuclear deterrent. So from a scientific point of view we advised that we could now announce a moratorium on testing because no more tests were considered necessary by us."
There is tons of more information there. Make your own conclusions.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5620
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Deterrence

Post by RoyG »

williams wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote: how exactly do you validate simulations if you dont have the data over full curve?
https://web.archive.org/web/20191028030 ... 010840.htm
According to Dr. R. Chidambaram, Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), and Secretary, Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), "a dozen new ideas and systems" were tried out in the five nuclear tests carried out at Pokhran in Rajasthan on May 11 and 13. "And all of them worked perfectly well." With the data yielded by the tests, he said, "we have now built an adequate scientific database for designing the types of devices that we need for a credible nuclear deterrent. So from a scientific point of view we advised that we could now announce a moratorium on testing because no more tests were considered necessary by us."
There is tons of more information there. Make your own conclusions.
Shakti VI aborted along with post test French assistance are really hard to beat for sizzle folks.
sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6095
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: Deterrence

Post by sanjaykumar »

Great article. But no radiological analysis.

Sometimes I am surprised what level and quality of information is published in Indian popular news magazines. I have never seen similar in the general western press. Perhaps other cultures ?Russian, may be similar.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Deterrence

Post by ShauryaT »

williams wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote: how exactly do you validate simulations if you dont have the data over full curve?
https://web.archive.org/web/20191028030 ... 010840.htm
According to Dr. R. Chidambaram, Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), and Secretary, Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), "a dozen new ideas and systems" were tried out in the five nuclear tests carried out at Pokhran in Rajasthan on May 11 and 13. "And all of them worked perfectly well." With the data yielded by the tests, he said, "we have now built an adequate scientific database for designing the types of devices that we need for a credible nuclear deterrent. So from a scientific point of view we advised that we could now announce a moratorium on testing because no more tests were considered necessary by us."
There is tons of more information there. Make your own conclusions.
Folks: We would be rehashing things that have been covered in this thread but it is a long one, some rehash may be required. RC was against the "need" to test and was vetoed by a BARC panel led by A.N Prasad in 1996, leading up to the Shakti series. His continued optimism on simulations post Shakti tests is not surprising. The only issue is even a N. Korea has better data than India does from its field tests to conduct such simulations. Even Pakistan may have access to Chinese supplied data for TN designs. Were it not for the mortal danger PRC and TSP present, such simulated data may have been enough but India can ill afford playing roulette with its Brahmastras.
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3989
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Deterrence

Post by vera_k »

Looks like a window of testing will open up when Japan starts to test. Question is if other countries in Asia (ex India) would be looking for help to test as a hedge against China at the same time. Potentially all those looking to import Brahmos missiles may desire to have their own deterrent against China.

Henry Kissinger Surveys the World as He Turns 100
He foresees that Japan, in response, “will develop its own weapons of mass destruction.” He offers a time frame of “three, or five, or seven years” for that to happen.
Post Reply