Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Dilbu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6333
Joined: 07 Nov 2007 22:53
Location: Deep in the badlands of BRFATA

Re: Thread for whines.

Postby Dilbu » 27 Aug 2009 11:42

Pokran 2 was a dud!! The news was like a hard kick in the nuts right in the morning. Feeling nothing but a seething cold rage onree. :(( :(( :((

nishug
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 27 Mar 2007 01:28

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby nishug » 27 Aug 2009 11:43

nukavarapu wrote:After the statement by Santhanam, I have been in dilemma for two days. It seems Ameer-Khan has systematically sabotaged our right to self respect and survival. There is no point in shedding tears, that wont stop the porkis and chipandas from the other side to throw their gifts at us. I can already hear rejoicing and merrymaking on both borders.

What is strange is it took 11 years for Mr. Santhanam to give this statement, or is this some kind of psy-ops :?: I personally dont think that he gave that statement to stop the Italian and White Worshiper to lick Ameer-Khan's a** by signing CTBT and selling away the dignity of billion yindus. :(


Dignity of billion yindus
Are you joking :rotfl:
I didn't know that there is such a thing .......

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Arun_S » 27 Aug 2009 11:45

Gagan wrote:The only real solution to this is to proof test a reworked design.
I hope our scientists now don't back down and say that LIF will also do, or that given adequate computing power we can be 99.9999999999999% sure onlee.

When India was designing its nuclear weapons it could not import computers with > 10 Mega FLOP capability, for the fear that non-kosher Yindu's not use it for computer simulation fo nuclear BUM.

Now I have many computers in home that I have junked, with that is 100 times more powerful than 10 MFLOP. Having adequate computing power by its own will not mean I or BARC can make credible BUM !!
To make BUM, BARC need to have competent people. process and organization. Credibility does not come from reciting "Chidambrum Mantra" but by explicit adherence to Scientific process, questioning/challenge, peer review and experimental verification.

Reminds me of a poem by "Nirala" (Suryakant Tripathi 'Nirala' सूर्यकांत त्रिपाठी 'निराला'):
    "Sankranti Kaal Ki vela hai; Kuch Kaam Karo, Kuch Kaam Karo !"


Do your "Dharma", and all will be forgiven.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11201
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Thread for whines.

Postby Gagan » 27 Aug 2009 11:46

Dilbu,
Just like a true paki consoles the other, "keep jour chin up biradher"

PS: And you need to respond with, "Don't worry I will biradher" followed by numerous smilies depicting a flag and happy smileys.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11201
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Gagan » 27 Aug 2009 11:50

Problem is that in Kalyug, the Prime Ministers who hold our scientists back are also following the "Dharma" on their watch.

Bahut ho gaya.
This nuclear genie has to be released completely from India. India has been living an ardh-satya for 4 decades, under sanctions, under tech denial, and morally pontificating others.
Neither we give up nuclear weapons nor we develop them.
Last edited by Gagan on 27 Aug 2009 11:53, edited 1 time in total.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby vina » 27 Aug 2009 11:50

I really think that India should NOT test. We are not going to sign the CTBT and NPT anyways. Yes, the Shakti II might have fizzled, but it definitely WOULD have given sufficient real time data to model it better and fix it. Why if your updated models can show that the design you tested would fizzile, that itself is a big improvement(note, predicting failure is different from guaranteeing success , so I grant that there is still a gap there)..

I guess we will just have to go ahead to the next step and do whatever the countries who have signed up to the CTBT are doing (laser/simulation whatever) and hope to get as close a fit to our experiences (both success and failure) and hope that whatever fix works.

Remember, Indian nuclear posture is recessed and most probably warhead and missiles are separate. North Korea got OUT of the NPT and tested .. You are allowed to do that under supreme national interest. So if the situation gets that dire, we should give short notice, and test. A full Megaton level test will remove all credibility gaps and you have the deterrence. Remember, Nukes are for deterrence and not for use.

There is no getting away from it. Nukes will neither will a war, nor win the peace (think USSR). India NEEDs to integrate with the broader world . This failure of Shakti II is NOT a sufficient case to resume testing, when there are alternatives available. We simply should have two (or maybe more) simulation /shepherding programs and ask the teams to come up with two fixes on the Shakti II device and have equal numbers of both that can be disperesed across the MIRVs of the Agni and other series. That is another equally good way of deterrence.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby arun » 27 Aug 2009 11:51

Politics does indeed make strange bedfellows. The NDA may have lied to country in which case the UPA is now covering up on its behalf :roll: .

Meanwhile :

'Indian hydrogen bomb was a dud'

Manoj Joshi
New Delhi, August 27, 2009

K. Santhanam, the Defence Research and Development Organisation official who coordinated India's nuclear weapons programme during the Pokhran nuclear tests in 1998, has thrown a bombshell.

He has declared that the first and most powerful of the three tests conducted on May 11 that year - a thermonuclear or hydrogen bomb - was a " fizzle." This is the first time that a topranked figure, directly associated with the nuclear weapons programme, has acknowledged the test had not been as successful as was trumpeted at the time. ...............

Santhanam made the remarks at a semipublic seminar on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty at the Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses on Tuesday that followed off- the- record Chatham House rules ( where the identity of the speaker is not revealed, although what he or she said can be freely quoted).

However, after reports of his remarks appeared in a section of the media, he said on Wednesday that his recollection of his statements was slightly more nuanced. His view was that India should not sign the CTBT and that it needed to conduct more thermonuclear tests.

"There is no country in the world," he emphasised, " which managed to get its thermonuclear weapon right in just one test." He said that he had also pointed to the fact that western seismic experts had doubted India's claim that the three simultaneous tests on May 11 had a combined explosives yield of 60 kt. .......................

Santhanam's doubts about the hydrogen bomb after the Pokhran tests were first featured, on an unattributable basis, in security analyst Bharat Karnad's book India's Nuclear Policy ( 2008) where he pointed out that " a senior DRDO official involved in the testing" had, some six months after the tests, " recommended resumption of testing to the government because he was convinced that the test of the hydrogen bomb was inadequate". Karnad, a professor at the Centre for Policy Research, felt that the Indian need to test again " is less a matter of opinion than of fact." In his view, Santhanam's " extremely courageous stand" had struck a fatal blow at the foundation of the Indo- US nuclear deal " predicated on India's never testing again and at any accommodationist policies the Manmohan Singh regime may be considering visa- vis the CTBT and the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty". .........................

Santhanam's revelation is likely to be like a bucket of cold water on the security establishment in the country.

India claims that it is second to none as a military power. It is building a nuclear triad - basing nuclear weapons on land, air and sea - just like the US, China and Russia.

But the lack of a weapon of adequate explosive yield undermines Indian claims of possessing world- class strategic capability and damages its nuclear force posture.

Asked why Santhanam might have decided to go public now, Karnad said that it was his belief that " as a nuclear scientist who has always dealt in physical certainties, try as he might Santhanam could not reconcile the physical facts of deficiencies in the design of the thermonuclear device evidenced in the test results with the profession of satisfaction by the government with the same results." He said that for reasons best known to him, the DAE chief Chidambaram had claimed success, a position that had undermined the credibility of India's deterrent posture and brought into question the reliability of the unproven thermonuclear armaments in the country's arsenal.

Mail Today via India Today
Last edited by arun on 27 Aug 2009 11:52, edited 1 time in total.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6948
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Anujan » 27 Aug 2009 11:52

K Santhanam-ji's words are devastating. Being involved in the tests gives him inside information and insight. Being Ex-RAW he knows when to seal his lips and when to speak. He is a person uniquely placed to upset the applecart.

The only question ramana-ji is: on what do you base your optimistic assessment that Santhanam-ji spoke under the direction of the government ? Could it also not be the case that (a) The scientists have mislead the BJP government (b) The current government is a strategic kumbhkaran and Santhanam-ji felt like speaking out ?

The factors that support your assessment is the fact that
1. Sanctions are to safeguard security of the goras. That gives a apriori blanket license to do whatever we want to ensure our security. Every 2-bit politician would understand this simple fact
2. We needed to buy time after the 98 fizzle. A reworked design would not bloom overnight

The factors that dont support your assessment is the fact that
1. PKI could easily be shut up by letting him into the secret
2. Current govermand, instead of risking its image, can score brownie points by accepting the tests were a failure, blaming the BJP and conducting more tests. This convoluted way of making a scientist speak to apply indirect pressure is not necessary
3. What is all this throwing the gauntlet statement about ? Either we have a TN bum or we dont. If we dont, there is no throwing the gauntlet. We test. This is not up for negotiation. BO or not, deal or no deal. We *should* test if the '98 test was a fizzle. So this does not look like a chanakyan move to "send signals"
4. Chanakyan move would have been to raise questions about the safety and reliability of our arsenal and make noises about testing. Testing justified through that route is negotiable --- the governmand will not be blamed if it does not test in return for goodies.

SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16102
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby SwamyG » 27 Aug 2009 11:54

Gagan wrote:Problem is that in Kalyug, the Prime Ministers who hold our scientists back are also following the "Dharma" on their watch.

In Kalyug Drama rules Dharma.

Dilbu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6333
Joined: 07 Nov 2007 22:53
Location: Deep in the badlands of BRFATA

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Dilbu » 27 Aug 2009 11:54

vina wrote:I really think that India should NOT test. We are not going to sign the CTBT and NPT anyways.

Saar are you really sure about that? I have a feeling K.Santhanam came out with this news precisely because of this scare. If the TN test was a dud and we go on to sign these treaties, India can kiss its a$$ goodbye with the kind of neighbours and allies we have. No one would like the blame for such a thing to be placed at his door steps, even if it happens after 50 years from now.

csharma
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby csharma » 27 Aug 2009 11:58

vina wrote:I really think that India should NOT test. We are not going to sign the CTBT and NPT anyways. Yes, the Shakti II might have fizzled, but it definitely WOULD have given sufficient real time data to model it better and fix it. Why if your updated models can show that the design you tested would fizzile, that itself is a big improvement(note, predicting failure is different from guaranteeing success , so I grant that there is still a gap there)..


This is what I was asking. Since we know that there was fusion (a few kt) then wouldn't the data allow the scientists to improve their designs. Ofcourse, that has to be tested to be 100% verified.


Brajesh Mishra is doing some CYA and putting the ball in Kalam's court.

bhart
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 41
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi
Contact:

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby bhart » 27 Aug 2009 11:59

What about subcritical testing? Can it help evaluate a design yield wise?

vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3004
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby vera_k » 27 Aug 2009 12:00

vina wrote:Remember, Indian nuclear posture is recessed and most probably warhead and missiles are separate.


This is supposed to change with the ATV deployment. It is OK to defer tests until the ATV is ready, but they have to test the weapon that will be in the ATV. If I understand correctly, this weapon is supposed to be a different design from that tested in 1998.
Last edited by vera_k on 27 Aug 2009 12:01, edited 1 time in total.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6948
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Anujan » 27 Aug 2009 12:01

vina wrote:I really think that India should NOT test.....India NEEDs to integrate with the broader world.


Vina-ji
Just think calmly for a second. Who made up the rule that if India tests, she will be shunned and boycotted ? Or in other words, what is the moral or ethical basis on which India should be sanctioned and boycotted if she tests ? After all, we are not talking about killing anyone or taking anyone's property. We are talking about setting off an explosion in our territory while ensuring that nobody gets hurt. What moral or ethical principles does that violate ?

So there is no moral or ethical basis which justifies western sanctions for Indian testing. The basis on which India will be sanctioned if she tests, is the perception of the needs of the security of the goras. If goras can do whatever they please to ensure their security, why cant we do whatever we please to ensure ours ?

Why are you tolerant for the gora antics of sanctions which ensure *their* security while recommending the path of ahimsa and dhimmitude towards ensuring *our own* security ? Even Gandhi said that disobeying unjust rules is our moral duty. Being afraid of sanctions not only makes us cowards, but an accessory to injustice and immorality, apart from racism which values western security over the security of our own population.
Last edited by Anujan on 27 Aug 2009 12:03, edited 1 time in total.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11201
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Gagan » 27 Aug 2009 12:02

Sub critical testing can only test a design in several different parts, there is still no telling how a complex three stage warhead will actually perform with all parts assembled.
I guess the only way you can do that is to test it. Since India doesn't have a successful test to base a computer model on, a successful test can be a valuable starting point.

Shankar
BRFite
Posts: 1905
Joined: 28 Aug 2002 11:31
Location: wai -maharastra

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Shankar » 27 Aug 2009 12:02

In short I feel vindicated - right from the day one opposed the shitty nuclear deal and maintained we are being bluffed by the government - and that sadly is the case as events prove

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11201
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Gagan » 27 Aug 2009 12:04

40 - 50 years hence, the world's G-3 are going to be
1. China
2. USA
3. India.

Think of the future. India's deterrence is one of the important components that will help India get there.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11201
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Gagan » 27 Aug 2009 12:05

The nuclear deal is bad only because of its linkages to testing. In effect it is a CTBT from the back door. Otherwise there seem to be no problems with the deal per se.
Now is this a work around that, given that BO has cooled off Indo-US ties? We'll have to wait and see.

csharma
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby csharma » 27 Aug 2009 12:07

In US, it was clearly being said that the nuclear deal was about limiting the nuclear clout of a rising power.

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby John Snow » 27 Aug 2009 12:07

Arun S garu>> I dont know about Viswakarma, but I know about karma..
The so called teen party PeeHds and mavas who had no faith in web technology or excel are ready to comedown and look at viswakarma Virachit work even if it is in excel sheet or photo shops :mrgreen: looks like their bluster and spin fizzled out.
Remember you must take resposibility blah blah.

Anyway all is well that ends well, so now GOI back to the drawing board.
**
added later
vina garu, generally I am in agreement with your view or balancer of views but in this case
Remember, Indian nuclear posture is recessed
has relevance
IFF
Recessed if Possessed

Otherwise it is relapsed
Last edited by John Snow on 27 Aug 2009 12:14, edited 1 time in total.

a_bharat
BRFite
Posts: 641
Joined: 07 Aug 2009 09:54

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby a_bharat » 27 Aug 2009 12:09

Any insight into the timing of Sanathanam's disclosure? Would it not have been more appropriate before signing the nuke deal? Or, perhaps we want to get whatever we can from the deal, and then test?

Some possibilities:
- he is a patriot
- he is a loose cannon; shooting his mouth off
- he is doing it under govt. guidance
|-- to counter Obama's anti nuke-deal moves
|-- increased threat from China

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6948
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Anujan » 27 Aug 2009 12:10

a_bharat wrote:Any insight into the timing of Sanathanam's disclosure? Would it not have been more appropriate before signing the nuke deal? Or, perhaps we want to get whatever we can from the deal, and then test?

Some possibilities:
- he is a patriot
- he is a loose cannon; shooting his mouth off
- he is doing it under govt. guidance
|-- to counter Obama's anti nuke-deal moves
|-- increased threat from China


You can rule (2) out.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby vina » 27 Aug 2009 12:11

Saar are you really sure about that? I have a feeling K.Santhanam came out with this news precisely because of this scare


Listen, I tend to believe that all babus collectively are pin heads and collectively the system is dumber than a bag of stones. But however, that said, one thing is true about babus like these in sensitive positions. They are simply NEVER allowed to open their mouths (retd or serving doesnt matter) unless cleared by the Govt (remember something called Official Secrets Acts and Oath of secrecy ?) . A retd govt babu opening his mouth on such things. it means absolutely ONE thing and ONE thing only .

The GOI of India is signalling to the world via demi/semi "official" channels with good credibilty


And what is it they are telling the world ?. See what is BO's and NPA's big takleef and next agenda ?. get the CTBT ratified and bring it into force. This is India's way of laying the "red line" / "lakshman rekha" .

Govt Babu Santhanam wrote: Indian bomb fizzled

Actually what it means , when translated in to Inglees.

Well, we are willing to sign CTBT. But we will have to resume testing before we can do that. So think hard before you push the CTBT on us. There will be unintended consequence.. After all, we have France's example in front of us . We are all Polynesians now , right?

arnab
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 13 Dec 2005 09:08

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby arnab » 27 Aug 2009 12:17

[K Sathanam's views on the nuke deal. So is he a patriot ? :twisted:

Indo-US nuclear treaty: A good deal

http://www.rediff.com/news/2005/jul/25guest1.htm

sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4142
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby sanjaykumar » 27 Aug 2009 12:19

So while GOI uses Santy's clauses to signal on CTBT, its own citizens are told 'we lied to you' but we do have a not-so-big bomb so it doesn't really matter.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby vina » 27 Aug 2009 12:27

sanjaykumar wrote:So while GOI uses Santy's clauses to signal on CTBT, its own citizens are told 'we lied to you' but we do have a not-so-big bomb so it doesn't really matter.


arnab wrote:K Sathanam's views on the nuke deal. So is he a patriot ? :twisted:


Guys. guys.. Cool it. Yeah. Santhanam as the good dhoti clad Yindoo babu is just being "His Master's Voice" .

Yeah. What the signal being sent is " CTBT --> Great idea. But we will sign only after we test" .
"NPT --> Great idea, but unfortunately we can only sign it now as a Nuke Power"

If there is a way to ward off any pressure on CTBT and make AmirKhans think again, it is this. All the NPAs will now have to go and think really really hard if they are willing to do the trade of letting India becoming a De Jure Nuke power.

Bottom line.. The signal reads this. Okay , you want us to sign the CTBT and NPT. We are willing to do a deal. We test and sign.

So the trade is CTBT and NPT go through (India stops being obstacle) and You recognize India as De Jure nuke power ( an upgrade from being De Facto) and all the privileges that go with it including full nuke trade


Think of the irony of it. In the worst case, if we accept full Poodledom like UK Stan, we could even have the US nuke warheads sitting on top of the Agni III in Arihant , just like in UK stan nuke subs.. Yeah ,under no circumstance will be be Nuke nood from going forward.

But that said.
Actually going and testing now is a terrible terrible idea . That is dumbness to a Paki level

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby John Snow » 27 Aug 2009 12:31

In nuclear terms one can not expect rational negotiations or arguments.
Even our own NSA Naryanan (CBSP) said we did not have any lawers in our team but they came with attorneys.

My trust in GOI is at rock bottom, babus are smart they will feed the information the PM wants. You know what our PM wants...
So all this chankian moves are on paper only....

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Arun_S » 27 Aug 2009 12:42

Like all bluffs, this one was just waiting to be called.

Regarding Santhanam coming out explicitly in open now, it's a culmination of 5 events:

    1. True nature of NoKo test striking home (qualitative edge against Pakistan lost)
    2. "Fearless leader" at the point of accepting CRE (Cap, Rollback, Eliminate)
    3. Current cargo not suitable for credible/realistic sub based operations
    4. PRC border pressure mounting and wet dreams of the "grand strategic alliance" with unkill showing every signs of being a dud.
    5. Something else also.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Sanku » 27 Aug 2009 12:48

I do not think that all Babu's especially the retired ones are under 100% govt control.

The simplest explanation is as follows
Weapons tested some work some fizzled --> The political establishment does a cover up job of the mixed bag and beautifully handles the fallout --> Scientists are given time to make it work --> New bum ready --> Unexpectedly Congress gets to power --> Old testing plans scuttled by Sher e Sheik excuse given as Nuke deal --> GoI dangles Nuke deal carrots to Sci community in J18 India ecstatic --> GoI pulls out Hyde+123 from its bum (the other one) --> Sci community confused --> Time passes contours get clearer (EUMA, WTO concessions etc etc) --> Obama in place, doesn't care on giving our Sher the fig leaf the previous Gov was giving --> Scientists start speaking out.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Austin » 27 Aug 2009 12:50

Brijesh says in an interview to Times Now that Santy Boss was Kalam and what Kalam said was the test was sucessful , In a way BM says I relied on Kalam's word.

Kalam i believe is no nuclear scientist , he will believe what RC says , but he must be broadly aware the status of the test whether TN worked as expected or there were doubts.

Now I expect Kalam sir to stand up for Santy , Santy took the courage to speak up first , Kalam should say that we need futher test to prove TN works.

Its a test for Kalam as well , will he speak the truth what ever it may be , or will be the good establishment guy toeing the GOI line.

If Kalam stands up for Santy and GOI will be forced to admit , I just hope Kalam does not let down India and the aspiration of billion people.

Dilbu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6333
Joined: 07 Nov 2007 22:53
Location: Deep in the badlands of BRFATA

Re: Thread for whines.

Postby Dilbu » 27 Aug 2009 12:56

Gagan wrote:Dilbu,
Just like a true paki consoles the other, "keep jour chin up biradher"

PS: And you need to respond with, "Don't worry I will biradher" followed by numerous smilies depicting a flag and happy smileys.

Yes I will birader. After all I still have my kushpoo. Isnt that the great SDRE chankian game plan? Care only about your ayesha, kushpoo and the fake Rs.500 notes. Rest is all maya onlee :((

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12899
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby pankajs » 27 Aug 2009 13:01

Arun_S saar this may have been the final straw

Obama Hopes to Win CTBT Ratification by May
Washington has informed China, Japan, Russia and other nations of its intent to win Senate approval for the agreement ahead of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference, according to diplomatic sources connected to the United Nations

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Postby Arun_S » 27 Aug 2009 13:11

Surya wrote: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!!!!

I have been vilified many times in the last one year on this forum (and threads).

I was once asked if I would every apologize to Chidambrum or Kakodkar if later facts turned out to disprove my assertions based on my information, source, interviews and analysis.

Yet I see no compulsions by my detractors to concede and accept.

As for a decisive win: As long as India is losing and no corrective action in sight, how can it be my decisive win? I am on losing side.

My "Aastha" in "Karm" and "Satyam-eve Jayatay" will remain firm.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Postby Arun_S » 27 Aug 2009 13:16

kit wrote:ps : Is Arun_S running for president ? Hope he does :mrgreen:

I do not have any deserving quality to be President.

But does the office of President have power to play a decisive role in defending and defining the future of Bharat? Or pay enough to take care of my extended family? I doubt.

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Raj Malhotra » 27 Aug 2009 13:21

Arun_S wrote:
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.


If you saying 17kt for boosted primary plus few kt of fusion and (few kt?) of secondary fission then say 17+3+10? = 30kt???


My understanding of nukes is as under:-

Primary fission is around 1kt, which leads to primary fusion which is also around 1 kt but it boosts the primary fission material to give another 15-25kt. So in primary fusion yield is 1 kt and fission yield is around 10-20kt.

The the yield from boosted primary is used to ignite the secondary fusion which gives around 100kt and boosts/derives fission yield of around 100-300kt from fission in spark plug and tamper/tertiary (and in remaining primary fissile material?). So in secondary fusion yield is around 40-100kt while fission yield is around 0-400kt.

So it seems in Indian TN, the primary worked and gave 10-20kt, so what happened to the secondary. Was it complete fizzle which means that there was some fission in secondary but practically nil fusion or there was some fusion in secondary which further raised yield from sympathic fission in the secondary spark plug/tamper/tertiary (and in remaining primary fissile material?).

derkonig
BRFite
Posts: 952
Joined: 08 Nov 2007 00:51
Location: Jeering sekular forces bhile Furiously malishing my mijjile @ Led Lips Mijjile Malish Palish Parloul

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Postby derkonig » 27 Aug 2009 13:21

CTBT, NPT, FMCT time folks!!!!
http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/aug/27/n-test-yield-was-enough-asserts-defence-ministry.htm

Notice the sleight of hand, first claim that the h-bomb was a success, hence declare that no more tests are needed & all that credible minimum deterrent is in place, thus cap capabilities & hobble the nuke programme.

Truly, MMS is unstoppable.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Arun_S » 27 Aug 2009 13:24

Austin wrote:Brijesh says in an interview to Times Now that Santy Boss was Kalam and what Kalam said was the test was sucessful , In a way BM says I relied on Kalam's word.


Pls get this straight, Santy was Kalam's BOSS. Not the other way around.

And, Yes Ex-president APJ Kalam is not a nuclear scientist. (although he never corrects his hosts when they glorify and introduce Kalam as a Missile and Nuclear Scientist).

========Added later =============
Brijesh Mishra did not know basics of management then or even now.

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Raj Malhotra » 27 Aug 2009 13:27

Arun_S wrote:
Gagan wrote:The only real solution to this is to proof test a reworked design.
I hope our scientists now don't back down and say that LIF will also do, or that given adequate computing power we can be 99.9999999999999% sure onlee.

When India was designing its nuclear weapons it could not import computers with > 10 Mega FLOP capability, for the fear that non-kosher Yindu's not use it for computer simulation fo nuclear BUM.

Now I have many computers in home that I have junked, with that is 100 times more powerful than 10 MFLOP. Having adequate computing power by its own will not mean I or BARC can make credible BUM !!
To make BUM, BARC need to have competent people. process and organization. Credibility does not come from reciting "Chidambrum Mantra" but by explicit adherence to Scientific process, questioning/challenge, peer review and experimental verification.

Reminds me of a poem by "Nirala" (Suryakant Tripathi 'Nirala' सूर्यकांत त्रिपाठी 'निराला'):
    "Sankranti Kaal Ki vela hai; Kuch Kaam Karo, Kuch Kaam Karo !"


Do your "Dharma", and all will be forgiven.



This somewhat similar to what N3 is saying on Kaveri thread that there is no alternative to getting down and "doing it" as simulations are just to help & aid.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Arun_S » 27 Aug 2009 13:32

Raj Malhotra wrote:So it seems in Indian TN, the primary worked and gave 10-20kt, so what happened to the secondary. Was it complete fizzle which means that there was some fission in secondary but practically nil fusion or there was some fusion in secondary which further raised yield from sympathic fission in the secondary spark plug/tamper/tertiary (and in remaining primary fissile material?).

Raj saab: I partially answered that earlier. Yield from secondary fusion fuel was just few KT. and yes the rest of the yield came from imploding tertiary.
BTW fusion component of the primary boost is generally not counted in the fusion yield of a TN, and so does the trigger.

But I am onlee a paan eating village bumpkin of disrepute on these matters.

csharma
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby csharma » 27 Aug 2009 13:51

What would be the weight of a 200kt boosted fission bomb.

Can India mirv these boosted fission bombs? VK Saraswat was talking about the need to reduce of the missiles by 30%.Is it to work around the TN handicap?

What would be the range of Agni III with mirved 200kt boosted fission bombs?


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests