Casting doubt on Indian nuclear weapon designs and yields

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2935
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Postby Kanson » 27 May 2008 00:51

achy wrote:
Kanson wrote:If people mistaken that this prayer is for me, no, it for all those readers of this thread/forum.

If you are praying for me , then thanks, but, I dont need it.

Whatever be the purpose of this thread, but almost everyone agrees on strategic and techincal need for more tests. Question is, does the BSP issues trump the strategic and technical need.

If i have not choosen the words correctly, when yajnaa was done for loka shema, it is done with general concise, no one take permission from everyone to do that.

p_saggu
BRFite
Posts: 1058
Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03

Postby p_saggu » 27 May 2008 00:55

Gerard wrote:Admiral David Jeremiah...
Jeremiah News Conference - CIA
The identification of the Indian nuclear test preparations posed a difficult collection problem and a difficult analytical problem. Their program was an indigenous program. It was not derived from the US, Chinese, Russian or French programs. It was totally within India. And therefore, there were some characteristics difficult to observe.

Sorry for the late reply.
But these articles are archives from a Pre 1998 assessment, released after the tests. What happened after the failure is a matter of conjecture.

There will never be any credible open source material on this subject, but there are some very funny things that have happened since the tests:
1. The russian strategic forces commander??? was given access to India's Super-computing laboratories immediately after the tests and he was supposed to have expressed his high praise for Indian supercomputing poweress.
2. Why allow an ex KGB man into Dhruva and Cirus? Vladimir Putin is seen standing in BARC with D and C in the background and AK and RC flanking him. Russia gave fuel for Tarapur not for D & C.
3. The International tendency has been of sharing weapons designs / nuclear weapon knowhow as a rule rather as an exception. Sample this:
-USA gives weapon designs to Britain
-Russia gives weapon designs to China
-China gives weapon designs to Pakistan and North Korea
-USA / France gives weapon designs to Israel (Is it too far fetched???)
-Israel and South Africa have a secret test (Vela???) If this is true it might suggest exchange of knowhow.
-Pakistan proliferates to every tom dick and harry with a fistful of dollars: Libya, Iran, NoKo, ??Syria, ??Saudi Arabia.
Who's left here: India.

In view of the above how far fetched is peer review of indian weapons by another advanced nuclear weapons power? Given the confidence with which the missile armoury is surging ahead, mind you if our bombs are heavy, every calculation about range gets thrown out of the window, and we truely have Prithvi-300, Agni 1-700, Agni 2-2500 and Agni 3 MIRV x 3-3500 Km range.

Amit,
Very correctly you point out that most Indians only know that India has a Bomb and all is well. Suppose we enlighten them of the fact that the H-Bomb was a failure, and we risk being a second rate power in the category of the unmentionable group, I am sure many will accept the pain that will have to be borne by us in the aftermath of any breakthrough testing. India is a proud nation, and in those dark years of the 60s and the 70s, national pride was all that kept this nation going and in one piece.

JMT
Last edited by p_saggu on 27 May 2008 12:25, edited 1 time in total.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7533
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 27 May 2008 01:24

Why allow an ex KGB man into Dhruva and Cirus? Vladimir Putin is seen standing in BARC with D and C in the background and AK and RC flanking him. Russia gave fuel for Tarapur not for D & C.


Mark Hibbs has also been allowed inside Dhruva and Cirus.

Tilak
BRFite
Posts: 733
Joined: 31 Jul 2005 20:19
Location: Old Lal Masjid @BRFATA (*Renovation*)

Postby Tilak » 27 May 2008 01:25

I am sure many will accept the pain that will have to be borne by us in the aftermath of any breakthrough testing.


Manmohan Singh is on record reiterating, that the moratorium is "self imposed", if ~"India were to test, it will have to face the consequences" (wrt. Hyde Act). IMO, if all was hunky dory, he would have said "India doesn't need anymore testing", no ?. This in spite of having said "BJP was offering to sign CTBT". Or) is there a fear that people wouldn't be willing to play along, if signing the CTBT is put to the democratic test.

Nuke deal does not take away right on future tests


[quote]“If a necessity arises in future, there is nothing in the agreement which prevents us from carrying out tests.â€
Last edited by Tilak on 27 May 2008 01:43, edited 3 times in total.

satyarthi
BRFite
Posts: 179
Joined: 21 Aug 2006 08:50

Postby satyarthi » 27 May 2008 01:26

While India was chanting universal disarmament, NPT was created specifically to chain it.

CTBT is not yet dead.

Environment can get much tougher if a jihadi delivers a JDAM to an address in the western hemisphere.

So, no good comes of waiting and aspiring but not testing.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7533
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 27 May 2008 01:46

The P5 are in the business of hobbling the nuclear weapon development program of all potential peer competitors... not in assisting them via peer review.

Last year Russia proposed that India invest in the construction of a uranium enrichment center in Angarsk, east Siberia.

The nuclear center, part of Moscow's non-proliferation initiative to create a network of enrichment centers under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency, will be based at a chemical plant in Angarsk. The center, co-founded by Russia and Kazakhstan, will also be responsible for the disposal of nuclear waste.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Postby John Snow » 27 May 2008 02:00

Boss log and maha gurus

so a maha bum aka hydrogen bum aka fusion bum

is devise which at minimum is two stages in sequence,

then we mate thsi device on a agni which is again at minmum two stage missile (to keep it very simple because the Mavericks of the world think BRF is a frorum fo bums).

so

fission device 99% reliable
Fusion device 99% reliable
agni 1 stage 99% reliable
agni 2 stage 99% reliable

therefore the whole package is .(.99)(.99)(.99)(.99) = 0.96

that is if we fire up 100 missiles with RC bum 96 of them will be successful right?

so with one shot of fussion device we can go ahead and sing the rhyme?



Tweedledum and Tweedledee
Agreed to have a battle;
For Tweedledum said Tweedledee
Had spoiled his nice new rattle.
Just then flew down a monstrous crow,
As black as a tar-barrel;
Which frightened both the heroes so,
They quite forgot their quarrel.

p_saggu
BRFite
Posts: 1058
Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03

Postby p_saggu » 27 May 2008 02:04

There is a message being conveyed here. What is the first thing that comes to one's mind?
Image

ranganathan
BRFite
Posts: 277
Joined: 06 Feb 2008 23:14

Postby ranganathan » 27 May 2008 03:40

Just small nitpick. Israel got nukes from france not US.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Postby John Snow » 27 May 2008 03:46

May 1998: India conducts two rounds of nuclear weapon tests. After the first, Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee announces that "a fission device, a low-yield device and a thermonuclear device" had been successfully tested in the Pokhran desert. Two days later the government explodes two more sub-kiloton nuclear tests at the same testing range. The five underground tests range in yield from less than 1 kiloton to an estimated 45 kilotons.


May 1998: Russia refuses to join other countries in punishing India for its nuclear tests.

June 1998: Nucleonics Week, citing "well-placed Indian official sources," reports that since the mid 1970s India's DAE and BARC prepared about 25 spherical plutonium metal bomb cores from the spent fuel of two reactors.

November 1998: The periodical Nucleonics Week cites Washington officials who claim that analysts at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory have concluded that one of India's May nuclear explosions, described by India as a successful thermonuclear test, failed to ignite its secondary stage as planned. As a result, one unnamed U.S. official stated that India's DAE "is under intense pressure to test again."

November 1998: India introduces a resolution at the United Nations on nuclear de-alerting to reduce the potential for an accidental launch.

December 1998: Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee tells parliament that India's nuclear doctrine will be centered on two elements: a small but credible deterrent, and a no-first-use policy.

February 1999: The United States ends its opposition to extending World Bank loans to India, allowing the approval of a $210 million energy project.

April 1999: Dr. A.J.P. Abdul Kalam, head of India's Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) says that "the Agni II [intermediate-range ballistic missile] is designed to carry a nuclear warhead if required," and claims that an Agni-class payload was tested during the underground nuclear tests in May 1998.

June 1999: Officials at DAE admit they are planning to build a new research-size reactor inside the BARC campus to increase its annual production of weapon-grade plutonium. Officials say the new reactor will be based on the existing CIRUS and Dhruva reactors and predict that it will be operational by 2010.

August 1999: The chairman of the AEC claims that India can manufacture nuclear weapons of "any type of size" based on information obtained during last year's nuclear tests.

December 1999: India's 220 MWe Kaiga-2 becomes operational. Kaiga-1 will become operational the following year.

December 1999: The U.S. Commerce Assistant Secretary for Export Administration announces the lifting of 51 organizations from the list of 200 Indian entities sanctioned in November 1998.

June 2000: One of India's leading nuclear scientists, retired DAE head P. K. Iyengar, tells an Indian newspaper that India's May 1998 thermonuclear bomb test wasted most of its fuel by burning "only partially, perhaps less than 10 percent" and that India needs to redesign and test the weapon again.

satyarthi
BRFite
Posts: 179
Joined: 21 Aug 2006 08:50

Postby satyarthi » 27 May 2008 04:52

Why do people expect that there will be a great brouhaha if India tests a thermonuke now? After all India is a declared nuclear power now which was not the case in 1998.

The big deal about 1998 was not just tests, but the fact that India declared itself to be a nuclear weapons power with an intent to maintain nuclear weapons program for a minimum nuclear deterrence posture.

That Indian position has been pretty much accepted by the world. A TN test is justifiable if it is part of Indian MND posture. Only thing India will be breaking is its self imposed moratorium on testing. But it couldn't be as big a deal as it was in 1998.

There could be some impact on IT-vity. But the scale and duration of damage should be possible to manage.

But if India enters into new treaties or the world goes into a fit due to, say a JDAM, then situation becomes much worse.

Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Postby Bade » 27 May 2008 05:01

so with one shot of fussion device we can go ahead and sing the rhyme?

With only one shot saar, the reliability is at best 50% onlee as a second test could have failed. :P

So the number is 0.99 x 0.5 x .99 x .99 = 0.48 :eek: So 100 bums launched to Dragon side will mean 50 explosions guaranteed. So with each target a backup bum required.

satyarthi
BRFite
Posts: 179
Joined: 21 Aug 2006 08:50

Postby satyarthi » 27 May 2008 05:15

One way to decipher John Snow's sutra:

When you mate a 99% reliable TN 1st stage with a scaled version of 99% reliable TN 2nd stage, but never testing them together, then what you get is 98% reliable "confusion-device".
Last edited by satyarthi on 27 May 2008 05:43, edited 1 time in total.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 27 May 2008 05:26

Kanson wrote:
I was just saying how some people are becoming puppet on the BK's chain..


Kanson as per the rules I have demanded at the beginning of this thread - your statement above should not be made on this thread.

Everyone who says anything is considered to be saying brahma satya unless he is being derogatory or less than respectful of another's opinion. The idea of someone becoming someone else's puppet falls into that "being derogatory" category.

Please desist. I will read through your exchanges with Tilak and may delete the whole lot if I feel that your statements provide a lever or licence for other to start making derogatory remarks about people.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 27 May 2008 16:28

amit wrote:
Sanku wrote: Why exactly please? Also whats golden about the $ 3 Trillion mark? Why 3? Why not 4? Why not 3.3, 2.9, 3.141 etc etc?


Sanku,

I suggest that you look at Suraj's post and some of my earlier posts to other posters here.



In short you don't have a answer; well why am I not surprised.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@ Amit & Others
I have read Suraj's and others post -- all Suraj has said is about the increased linkages of Indian economy with the world; which if you notice I have never disagreed with.

All I am saying is roughly speaking the economic impact will be in the same ration as the growth in external linkage (that is know) so if you plug in the "economic" damage from last tests we should have the answer in a ball park figure.

That of course does not talk about a inflection point in this equation around 3 or any other trillion $ figure.


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest