Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Sanku » 29 Aug 2009 02:16

Dear N, one word of completely unsolicited advice -- when facts start coming in the way of theory -- change the theory not attack the facts.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1708
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby sudeepj » 29 Aug 2009 02:17

narayanan wrote:And in KS' case, YES, they can and will prosecute him if he used his knowledge to make that statement.


You reverence for the letter of the law is touching, but irrelevant. Can you clarify, is this your opinion, conjecture, what?

Look into the rules on Insider Trading, to get another perspective on how the law thinks. It doesn't matter if half the country is yelling that they should sell your company's stock, based on rumors. What matters is if YOU sell it, knowing insider info that the company is heading to Pakistan, and before that KNOWLEDGE becomes public - i.e., it is DeClassified. The fact that YOU KNEW is what convicts you - the defense that everyone else "sort of guessed" does nothing to protect you.

This is what I love about BRF. The opportunity to point out simple logic that any kindergartner should be able to figure out in a minute, but the esteemed Experts here can't see. :rotfl:


I guess now, a precedent has been set for bringing in Reliance into LCA discussions.

And negi, somehow I don't think that shyness will keep them from prosecuting - they can't afford NOT to prosecute. The trial may itself be sealed, and the evidence not released. So everyone can speculate WHY he is being prosecuted - but there will be no confirmation. They're all speculating now, so what's the difference?


And you know this because of what?...

If theres any value in the last few exchanges, at least I fail to see it. Random theories about law enforcement, speeding tickets, insider trading, OSA..

What is the discussion about? What Santhanam said or about the terrible things we will do to him if he used his 'classified' brains to make a statement?

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby enqyoob » 29 Aug 2009 02:21

I didnt know that the Indian rules where so strongly upheld. I am lost for words.

Sankuji, maybe u r highly privileged and all, but I even got arrested for riding a bicycle in Adayar on Saturday night without a FIXED LIGHT, though I had a perfectly working soapbox-battery lamp of 400% indigeneous construction with no phoren technology.
Had to pay Rs. 3 fine in Saidapet court on Monday.
Check out what percentage of the population HAS lights on their bicycles on any given night.

Only reason why I am not giving any unsolicited advice to u, Sanku, is that u r already so perfect in your knowledge.

As for Admiral Nanda, did he give out Classified Info when he revealed the EXISTENCE of the ATV, or did he give out drawings and frequencies?

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby svinayak » 29 Aug 2009 02:23

http://meaindia.nic.in/interview/2002/02/10i01.htm
EAM Shri Jaswant Singh’s Interview with Financial Times

The Statesman
February 10, 2002

Q: You are travelling to Madrid on Monday to talk with your European counterparts. Presumably they will have as much interest in stability in the sub-continent as Washington?
A: We have interest in stability in Europe too. It's with fascination that we watch this experiment in Europe. Europe has no experience of federalism.

In the absence of any historical memory of federalism what is happening now in Europe is difficult to reflect on. This [federalism] is what India has succeeded in achieving over the last 50 years. We have after all in the Indian parliament no less than 18 official languages and members of parliament could very well participate in discussion in any of these. India's spread is in fact all the way from Scandanavia to Iberia and from London to Istanbul. So we naturally find this European experiment on currency to be fascinating.

Q: Is there any evidence of a slowdown in terrorist infiltration across the line of control into Jammu & Kashmir?
A: I would really much rather not be impatient about judging it. It is exceptionally bad weather this year. We haven't had such snowstorms for almost a decade. Of course the snow is very welcome, it will fill up the dams and I also believe it is a possible forerunner of a good monsoon to come. But I don't want to judge evidence on the ground until I am really in a position to comment on it.

What is however is a disappointment is the 5 February speech by Gen Musharraf, which is really playing yesterday's record. It is really as if 12 Jan [Gen Musharraf's speech foreswearing terrorism] hadn't taken place. We are disappointed by this regression into the past. What is equally disappointing is that, while it's understandable that all of you in the west want to hear and see only what you wish to hear and see but I really wish some of you had taken note of this speech of 5 February and remarked upon it.

The fact that you ignore it, do not observe it - please note - does give encouragement to the kind of unacceptable terrorist activity that you advocate should not take place. And western governments, some of them have taken note but not commented on it. If you go over the speech, he [Gen Musharraf] will continue to promote terrorist activities as far as J&K is concerned when he was earlier moving away from freedom fighters. We have lived with this for long enough.

Q: How are you going to be able to distinguish between terrorism originating in Pakistan and indigenous terrorism? Gen Musharraf, after all, has said Pakistan will continue to provide "moral, political and diplomatic" support for the Kashmir insurgents.
A: This is a very curious euphemism: "moral, political and diplomatic" for supporting terrorist activities. [UN Resolution] 1373 is quite clear, [it condemns] "terrorism in all its forms". Then when you are making this distinction between indigenous and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, you are really going back into how POK became part of occupied Kashmir. It was through an attack on territory that had already acceded to India in 1947. There is no way that we can accept that J&K, of which the Valley of Kashmir is a very small part in territorial and geographic terms, as if Pakistan has an a priori right to this part of India. On what basis? Simply because in the Valley, the percentage of Indian citizens that subscribe to Islam is higher than many of the districts in India?

You are saying for the sake of the 5m people who subscribe to the faith of Islam that I am to compromise the fate of the remaining 140m citizens of my country who also subscribe to Islam. I am amazed at the illogic of this proposition. I cannot accept it.

Q: Is it important for India's diplomatic standing that it is seen to hold "free and fair" assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir later this year?
A: Your starting point is wrong, that it is important diplomatically. It is important for India, "diplomatic" is a by-product. If it comes, fine, if it doesn't come, fine. But i t is my duty as the Indian government to ensure the widest possible participation of Indians in elections. If there is aggrievement, if there is disaffection, it is the duty of the government to address itself to it. Should elections be free and fair? Of course. Whose duty is it? The chief election commissioner. Does he have a private army to ensure it? No, so he must get assistance from the government.

I left the army at the fourth general election of India. We have had 13 general elections now. So I am quite a veteran of elections in that sense. It is an electorate of 650m voters - larger than the combined electorates of the US, Canada and western Europe. We have had 13 general elections. Please don't teach us how to hold general elections. And we are actually able to count 650m votes. We are able to count quite effectively.

Q: A lot of people have remarked that India has been too ready to link the attacks outside the American Center in Calcutta last month [which killed five people] to Pakistan's ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence]. Is India's credibility at stake?
A: We do of course co-operate with the FBI. But it is not the US that runs law and order in India and it is not the US that decides who has committed what crime. It's Indian courts of law. We have a federal system of government in which law and order is a state subject. The Indian government comes in to some activities relating to crime, attack against the union etc. This is not the first time that the state authorities and the central authorities have some differences of viewpoint in regard to conflicts and investigations. But I have no doubt in my mind that there's no jumping of the gun. And investigations are still going on. And I am hopeful that you will for yourself see that what was stated [the link to the ISI] was not incorrect.

Q: Many people in Washington see closer US-India ties as building up an India that can act as a bulwark against China. Is India ready to play this role?
A: India plays no roles. I, as a servant of parliament and as a minister of the republic, I intend to serve my country. But this is as untenable, India playing a role at somebody's behest, is as untenable as that other King Charles's head - an India, Russia, China axis. India has something called the Sankrant festival, particularly if you go to west of India, Rajasthan, Gujarat, the sky is filled with kites. It happens in mid-January. So these are kites that get flown over Indian skies at this time of year.

Q: Does India plan to have any further nuclear tests, as some in Pakistan have recently suggested?

A: I have said so in the UN general assembly, the prime minister has said so, and during President Clinton's visit, if my memory serves me right, we issued a document, the Delhi declaration, that India had announced a voluntary moratorium on any further nuclear explosive testing in violation of the specific requirements of the test ban even though we are not signatories. This is not time-bound. Kites are flow at this time of year in Pakistan too because of our cultural similarities.

On further missile tests: Our missile integrated development programme is an announced programme, annually. There is nothing clandestine, it is entirely indigenous - the world knows what we are doing. And if we have a neighbourhood that is cluttered with missiles, then why should not Indian indigenously do its own missile tests? Everything is open here.

Q: What is the status of the list of 20 alleged terrorists that you want Pakistan to extradite?
A: It is disappointing that their presence in Pakistan seems to be of such great value to Pakistan, that they continue to go into such contortions of statements and I have said so earlier, they are all criminals. Of the 20, 14 or 15 are Interpol red corner alerts. What does Pakistan want to keep these criminals in their country for? They are wanted for the most heinous of crimes in India. It will be a gesture that the Indian public would greatly welcome. Pakistan is committed to going down this path, why not take this step? We had a statement made by distinguished foreign minister of Pakistan, that they [Pakistan] also had a list. And I said please send me that list on an open fax and I assure you that we will act on that list within 24 hours. [Mr Singh shrugs.] It saddens me. It really trivialises issues of great significance of the day.

Q: Which is more important to India in regard to military de-escalation: action on the list of 20 by Pakistan, or a cessation of terrorist infiltration?
A: It would be an error to keep speculating about any kind of political hierarchies or priorities that India has. This [both demands] is the totality of what was announced on 14 December [the day following the attack on India's parliament] and reaffirmed later in Parliament. There is nothing new. I do not wish to create any artificial or political priorities.



ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53882
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby ramana » 29 Aug 2009 02:23

Old News report for reference:

Feb 13th 2002.

Musharraf creates stir in US, claims India conducted N-test

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13099
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby negi » 29 Aug 2009 02:25

Exactly N garu ... thats is why my question about 'classified info' in KS's statements.
He has merely cast a doubt about the TN device not given out yield numbers or even design specs.

It is there where the invovement/backing of GOI theory weakens.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53882
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby ramana » 29 Aug 2009 02:32

The seminar was titled "Revisit CTBT". It was held in IIIC, New Delhi by IDSA. It was held under Chatham House rules which means people can quote what was said but cannot quote who said what. That is hardly classified in the classic sense. The Hindi news paper Dainik Bhaskar reporter was astounded at what was said and reported what he heard and thought goli maro to the CH rules.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16859
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Rahul M » 29 Aug 2009 02:33

negi wrote:Exactly N garu ... thats is why my question about 'classified info' in KS's statements.
He has merely cast a doubt about the TN device not given out yield numbers or even design specs.

It is there where the invovement/backing of GOI theory weakens.

or it is a too well planned disclosure ? not saying it is, but we can't say either way can we ?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53882
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby ramana » 29 Aug 2009 02:35

RahulM, Should we lock as not much is going on except shuttle badminton? Can be re-opened once there is clarity.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13099
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby negi » 29 Aug 2009 02:39

Rahul M wrote:or it is a too well planned disclosure ? not saying it is, but we can't say either way can we ?
If it is then why objection to the :(( ; isn't it a part of the plan ?

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16859
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Rahul M » 29 Aug 2009 02:39

agree that not much is going on in terms of news but if the conclusions drawn following RR ji's comments are correct, the pressure needs to be kept on.

in the worst case scenario, (and I really mean WORST) by the time we achieve clarity it might be too late.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53882
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby ramana » 29 Aug 2009 02:47

OK. However I dont want these one para whines between posters. If they have smoething substabtial to contribute then please do so. Otherwise there are many threads for the past time.

munna
BRFite
Posts: 1392
Joined: 18 Nov 2007 05:03
Location: Pee Arr Eff's resident Constitution Compliance Strategist (Phd, with upper hand)

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby munna » 29 Aug 2009 02:50

^^Nobody read my post in the whine fest. :(( Ramanaji I remember using this line of attack in Indo-US dhaga and the ramifications of Ombaba's domestic political deadlocks.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5141&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=560

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Arun_S » 29 Aug 2009 02:56

Shankar wrote:To understand this bomb design, imagine that within a bomb casing you have an implosion fission bomb and a cylinder casing of uranium-238 (tamper). Within the tamper is the lithium deuteride (fuel) and a hollow rod of plutonium-239 in the center of the cylinder. Separating the cylinder from the implosion bomb is a shield of uranium-238 and plastic foam that fills the remaining spaces in the bomb casing. Detonation of the bomb caused the following sequence of events:

1. The fission bomb imploded, giving off X-rays.
2. These X-rays heated the interior of the bomb and the tamper; the shield prevented premature detonation of the fuel.
3. The heat caused the tamper to expand and burn away, exerting pressure inward against the lithium deuterate.
4. The lithium deuterate was squeezed by about 30-fold.
5. The compression shock waves initiated fission in the plutonium rod.
6. The fissioning rod gave off radiation, heat and neutrons.

7. The neutrons went into the lithium deuterate, combined with the lithium and made tritium.
8. The combination of high temperature and pressure were sufficient for tritium-deuterium and deuterium-deuterium fusion reactions to occur, producing more heat, radiation and neutrons.

9. The neutrons from the fusion reactions induced fission in the uranium-238 pieces from the tamper and shield.
10. Fission of the tamper and shield pieces produced even more radiation and heat.
11. The bomb exploded.

where did we go wrong

Based on "Panwadi" science, #2 of above.

Agree with Ramana. It was a leading bleeding-edge design (with very high yield to mass ratio and other attributes). Also there are indeed 2000 various design features that need to be validated. Fixing one does not prove all are fixed; confidence in design will largely come from series of test shots.

PLUS India anyway needs a credible new design suitable for prolonged close quarter human operation in Ari-HUNT.

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Arun_S » 29 Aug 2009 03:05

Arun_S wrote:
arun wrote:
    ["ldev" said:]Shiv,

    Baldev Raj is head of ISGAR at Kalpakkam and ultimately responsible for the 500MWe Fast Breeder Reactor being built. I guess he knows a little bit more than us. :)[/"ldev" said:]]

The Director of IGCAR is indeed as you say Baldev Raj. [url=http://www.hindu.com/2009/08/09/stories/2009080959771100.htm]See here.

However the article posted by you here in this threadrefers to a Raj Baldev and NOT a Baldev Raj.

Previously Raj Baldev, the “Cosmo Theorist” mentioned in the article you posted had claimed that Stephen Hawking had stolen his idea’s :rotfl: .

The Director of IGCAR, Baldev Raj and the “Cosmo Theorist”,Raj Baldev are different people sharing two separate names that are differently ordered.

One of them is a Evangelical Jihadi.


Jagan wrote::rotfl: lmao :rotfl: at the Dr Raj Baldev Cosmo theorist - great catch arun
Note that Dr. Raj Baldev also goes by the name of Swamy Raj Baldev (at least according to some other people who researched him online) -
(see: http://www.futurepointindia.com/consult/baldev.asp and here: http://www.occultastrology.com/AboutUs/Sarjatak.asp ).
In this connection, the publishers of Dr. Raj Baldev's book sent a legal notice to Mr. Stephen Hawking in this regard through the British High Commission to India for violating his copy right. Later on, keeping in view the good relations between India and the UK, the matter was dropped. It is just to mention that Dr. Raj Baldev does have an expertise on the Black Hole and the theory of the Cosmos and his comments in this article are therefore very relevant. (Monica Groover from San Diego, California).



more http://www.internationalreporter.com/Ne ... y-III.html


And

Who is Dr. Baldev Raj?
And in this : Nostradumus vs Swamy (Dr.) Raj Baldev – Both use water system of predictions - Series 1

You will notice the term "Intelligent Design" which is a EJ catch word.

Also note the following:
    1. If indeed the director of the IGCAR did indeed give the interview on a matter of such gravity (assuming that the International Reporter was a media outlet of repute and credibility, which it isn't), would he allow himself to be quoted as "Cosmo Theorist, lead head of the Scientific Advance Research of Universe & Life (SAROUL) & Head of God Believer, World Peace Mission...". Is IGCAR even mentioned in the article?

    2. Why talk about a "secret in-camera meeting",........ If the meeting was so secret, then even its occurrence would need to be kept secret.

    3. Note the reference to USSR. IIRC USSR had dissolved well before 1998.

    4. Why use bogus arguments like DNA theory, etc.....

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby John Snow » 29 Aug 2009 03:08

So after all this in lay man terms
Our maha bum is just like Ramar Pillai Herbal Gas

In 1996, Ramar Pillai claimed to be able to transmute water to gasoline by a herbal formula that he claimed was the result of a miraculous bush. Pillai obtained 20 acres (81,000 m2) of land to cultivate his bush, but in fact it turned out that he was using sleight of hand to substitute kerosene for the liquid he claimed to have derived from the bush.


Back to the feature! :mrgreen:

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53882
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby ramana » 29 Aug 2009 03:15

munna wrote:^^Nobody read my post in the whine fest. :(( Ramanaji I remember using this line of attack in Indo-US dhaga and the ramifications of Ombaba's domestic political deadlocks.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5141&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=560


It was discussed over rava dosas and sambhar, in lieu of traditional cahi biskoot, with select members to dicuss various points of view. Thats why no comments here.

munna
BRFite
Posts: 1392
Joined: 18 Nov 2007 05:03
Location: Pee Arr Eff's resident Constitution Compliance Strategist (Phd, with upper hand)

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby munna » 29 Aug 2009 03:29

^^Fair enough as long as things get discussed anywhere!

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby enqyoob » 29 Aug 2009 03:34

Dr has undermined Ombaba's/NPAs long run path by exploiting their short term propoganda and robbed any other black sheep in our own system of their cover to foist videshi CRE on us. He shot and greviously damaged multiple targets with just words! kudos


munnabhai, I agree with that whole reading of the situation, and it is scary. Agree that the Diyar Leadar test was a TSP-PRC violation of the SeeTeebeeTee and EnnPeeTee. But I can't place the significance of the NoKo ship in the scheme of things - did PRC convey that Port Blair could have been wiped out with no one having any idea how the weapon was delivered? Note that the rogue ship put down anchor and sat there until ppl went out and asked what was going on. In the many hours b4 that, a rather large bum could have been brought right up to the shore and vacuum-burst, with no one being able to figure out later what happened - and Indian power in A&N would have been over. No air raids, no landing from bases in Myanmar. Just a swift erasure, with the bonus of an atmospheric test, and the winds blowing - which way do winds blow that time of the year?

That would be a very scary message indeed. Wonder why they did that.

The other aspect to the KS message is:

So u have a UNSC P5 member committing aggression against us - it's very clear that we can't get any UN help in this, because the same ones will veto anything. So hey, if this is not stopped right now, we have to go to the brink, and we are getting set to do that. After all, u urselves said we don't have a credible detergent, hain? We need to fix that, in particular the TN part of it and beyond, on an urgent basis, and prove the weapons we have already deployed.


Which comes back to what is going on in Northern Arunachal. I take it that this was a warning to bo and putin to twist the panda's tail. Any interesting news from Siberia or Taiwan, I wonder...

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21100
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Prem » 29 Aug 2009 03:49

NOKO test being Chinese baby explain Nippon's and SOKO 'squiet murmur. WEST making the same mistake they made when Panda Pu showed up in Islooland in 90s ? NOKO ship must be warning to Indians that Poo is not shipped to Jihadis yet but can be done if PRC desire to do so. Is NOKO stuff small like Chinese , capable of taking Cruise across Yellow Sea or LOC?.

Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4774
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Yayavar » 29 Aug 2009 03:50

John Snow wrote:So after all this in lay man terms
Our maha bum is just like Ramar Pillai Herbal Gas

In 1996, Ramar Pillai claimed to be able to transmute water to gasoline by a herbal formula that he claimed was the result of a miraculous bush. Pillai obtained 20 acres (81,000 m2) of land to cultivate his bush, but in fact it turned out that he was using sleight of hand to substitute kerosene for the liquid he claimed to have derived from the bush.


Back to the feature! :mrgreen:


Did he go to jail ? He actually was selling his 'gas'oline ...Never heard of him since.....

munna
BRFite
Posts: 1392
Joined: 18 Nov 2007 05:03
Location: Pee Arr Eff's resident Constitution Compliance Strategist (Phd, with upper hand)

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby munna » 29 Aug 2009 03:54

narayanan wrote:munnabhai, I agree with that whole reading of the situation, and it is scary. Agree that the Diyar Leadar test was a TSP-PRC violation of the SeeTeebeeTee and EnnPeeTee. But I can't place the significance of the NoKo ship in the scheme of things - did PRC convey that Port Blair could have been wiped out with no one having any idea how the weapon was delivered? Note that the rogue ship put down anchor and sat there until ppl went out and asked what was going on. In the many hours b4 that, a rather large bum could have been brought right up to the shore and vacuum-burst, with no one being able to figure out later what happened - and Indian power in A&N would have been over. No air raids, no landing from bases in Myanmar. Just a swift erasure, with the bonus of an atmospheric test, and the winds blowing - which way do winds blow that time of the year?

Actually what we know about the entire fishing expedition in A&N might be just the tip of the iceberg and this particular expedition I suspect was actually a dry run of taking Deal leadels boat of candies to Indian shores in order to distribute a large and dirty one for maha-ati-mega type hamla even bigger than Mumbai. I know maybe I am being paranoid and the presence of ship might not be that significant but then it may well have been a dry run for bigger things which rang jarring alarms in the corridors of Dilli with all billis going in a huddle to devise a way out.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7778
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Gerard » 29 Aug 2009 03:55

narayanan wrote:If KS has said such things "in private" to people who then told ANYONE else, then he must have said it precisely because he knew those turds would go blurt it to someone.


Isn't feeding disinformation to "useful idiots" standard operating procedure in the intelligence game?

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Arun_S » 29 Aug 2009 03:57

Deterrence, fizzling
V Sudarshan
First Published : 29 Aug 2009 12:15:00 AM IST

Two years ago this occasional column ran a story (N debate: More fizzle than bang, August 10, 2007) that provided a different view of the way the thermonuclear device functioned during the Pokhran 2 nuclear tests, which were conducted in part to prepare the country to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, if it came to that. In order to get to the stage where the CTBT could be signed scientists needed to put a bomb design through its paces. They decided on a thermonuclear bomb because you get a bigger bang out of it than from a fission bomb.

Here’s a brief recap of it: The logistics of testing the device required a very deep shaft into which the explosive could be lowered, connected, triggered and fired. The depth of the shaft was critical because the yield had to be configured to it as well as to prevent venting of radioactivity. This shaft could not be dug for the purpose because that would have attracted attention and the scientific community wanted to make the complicated preparations that would involve so many explosions surreptitiously. In the Pokhran area there was only one shaft deep enough – several hundred metres – that suited the parameters for the thermonuclear device. The yield expectation was around 45 kilotonnes, three times as much as the bang Americans got out of Little Boy in Hiroshima.

A lot was riding on the thermonuclear device that was expected to take us to the threshold of making a serious nuclear bomb. It was a tricky experiment. There had to be simultaneous experiments in case the shaft collapsed. And if you ask weapon designers you will hear that nobody succeeds in a thermonuclear design the very first time a design is tested. It requires a large number of tests to obtain sufficient data on the equation of state for the high temperature and high pressure conditions. This is necessary for reposing confidence in design and assurance of performance. Our scientists had only one shot at it. The design for the bomb was made by the scientific crowd in Mumbai and the trigger device was designed by the DRDO lot. In the afternoon of May 11, Prime Minister Vajpayee presented the tests as objective reality to the country as well as the world. He declared that the “measured yields are in line with expected values.” He congratulated the scientists for a job well done.

Only, the scientific community which was part of the tests was not so sure. For the thermonuclear design seemed to have under-performed. This much was obvious as soon as the thermonuclear device was tested, from the readings of the various monitors that measured ground acceleration and other such parameters. There was another, telling, indication. When a device explodes it leaves behind a crater, which gives a hint as to what kind of explosion had occurred. To the scientists who assessed the size of the crater left behind by the thermonuclear device, it appeared as though the crater which resulted from the 12-15 kt fission weapon was bigger than the one left behind by the 45 kt thermonuclear device. The test had turned out to be more fizzle than bang. It was the bomb designers who made the claim that it was along expected values. DRDO kept quiet. It made its own analysis of the estimates of the yield and filed a report about it to the government. In DRDO’s estimation the yields were considerably lower than what the Mumbai crowd claimed.

To the world, however, they presented a united face. The government was aware of reservations about the claims made by the bomb designers. Scientific journals, mainly published abroad, did not buy into the story. Consequently, there appeared quite a bit of analyses on the explosion’s signature in the US and UK which contested the claim of the scientists. Then, quite suddenly the analyses stopped. One theory on why the analyses dried up went as follows: It was as if they figured out that if they went on stressing that the tests hadn’t worked, there would emerge a lobby in India that would say that not enough testing had been done.

Today, for voicing his doubts, K Santhanam, a former DRDO man who co-ordinated the Pokhran 2 explosion and who was the field director of the aborted 1995 explosion as well, has been criticised by R Chidambaram who, fellow scientists take the trouble to point out, positioned himself against actual nuclear testing a long time before Pokhran 2. They say he has consistently lobbied to bypass actual tests and settle for computer simulation and argued that the country should sign the CTBT even before Prime Minister Narasimha Rao stepped back from testing in 1995. Chidambaram apparently argued that the data collected from the 1974 Pokhran test was sufficient to go into computer simulation and there was no need to conduct another test. Scientists in Mumbai were shocked to find him peddling this line in New Delhi. How could the country’s defence be premised on data collected 21 years ago? Without testing there could be no assurance. Deterrence is, after all, dynamic.

Finally they got a unanimous resolution passed and sent to Chidambaram in Delhi saying that they would not settle for anything less than an actual test. Only then, say sources, did Chidambaram back off. Here is another anecdote that reveals a particular mindset: Retired scientists remember how implacably Manmohan Singh was opposed to testing, declaring at a Cabinet political affairs committee meeting which was debating a US suggestion that India float a resolution on the Fissile Material Cut Off Treaty, in the presence of Narasimha Rao, that “1974 was a mistake.”

Should we then believe Chidambaram and Abdul Kalam who should bear responsibility for the way they tailored their advice to their political masters or the current naval chief who, scientists argue, will not be able to tell a nuclear device even if one was sitting right in front of him or even if he recognised one would not be able to distinguish one end of such a device from the other. Chidambaram, the official custodian of government figures, has laughably challenged Santhanam to come out with the figures in support of his claim. Here was an experiment where all figures are secret. There was no peer review, no transparent procedure that allows the formation of a reliable consensus. Would Chidambaram, Kalam or anybody else in the leadership loop, their ceevees straining under the weight of government accolades, ever claim that the thermonuclear test was at best a partial success? Not a chance. For that would not have given the NDA government the excuse to say that it would not stand in the way of the CTBT coming into force. Nor could this current UPA government, headed by the same Manmohan Singh, have agreed to the 123 nuclear deal which says that if India tests the deal is off. All of which makes the CTBT only a formality.

It is interesting that this debate should play out even when the erstwhile leadership of the NDA is having difficulty reaching a public consensus on critical aspects of the Kandahar hijacking. And a former home minister is contradicted by his colleague a foreign minister. Why then should it surprise us if scientists have serious differences on the actual yield of the thermonuclear device?

However much the Congress titters at the way BJP now quarrels over what really happened at Kandahar it should start worrying seriously at the way our deterrence may have been compromised first inadvertently by the BJP and now deliberately by the UPA.

:wink: :wink:

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7031
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby JE Menon » 29 Aug 2009 04:35

There will be no signing of NPT or CTBT. :)

FMCT is not an issue. :twisted:

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby John Snow » 29 Aug 2009 04:35

Oh by the way ldev along with teen party is quite popular with mava

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5241
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby ShauryaT » 29 Aug 2009 04:38

It seems Brajesh Mishra and APJ Abdul Kalam accepted the word of RC led DAE/BARC and over rode the objections of the DRDO. Both reported back to their political masters, who wanted to hear a success to mollify world opinion but keep real options open.

So, the progression is from unilateral moratorium, we were offered the NSSP, that prevented another test and then to the IUNCA that made the unilateral moratorium a bilateral one and then subsequently a multilateral moratorium as part of the NSG exemption to the current state of being able to effectively test only if situation detoriates - translation only if others do.

The fact that a TN weapon has not been fielded, should speak volumes on the "confidence" of the one single test. KS seeing the trend lines and the pressures of the CTBT building up (JE Menon's confidence notwithstanding) and with a distinct possibility of not being able to test again - ever, went public with the information.

Our worst fears of the IUNCA are all coming true.

- India's TN test failed
- The US seeks to qualitatively cap India's nuclear capabilities through the CTBT
- The US seeks to cap India's quantitative numbers through FMCT and not leave India the option of declaring "any" nuclear facilities as part of the strategic side as per the separation

The implications of all this are very clear. India's missiles are unlikely to ever field world class MIRV weapons with ranges and payloads. Our capabilities to target PRC will be limited. Our capability to target any other part of the world will never exist.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13099
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby negi » 29 Aug 2009 04:46

V Sudarshan has made some pretty serious observations/claims without any references . :shock:

Chidambaram, the official custodian of government figures, has laughably challenged Santhanam to come out with the figures in support of his claim.


If above is true then chances of this being a GOI mischief to counter NPAs are very high. :|

--fixed quotes---
Last edited by negi on 29 Aug 2009 04:59, edited 1 time in total.

ss_roy
BRFite
Posts: 286
Joined: 15 Nov 2008 21:48

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby ss_roy » 29 Aug 2009 04:58

{garbage deleted}

Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 541
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby Avarachan » 29 Aug 2009 05:14

All is not lost. Let me cheer everyone up with a quote from the Christian theologian, Augustine of Hippo.

"An unjust law is no law at all."

(I disagree with many statements of Augustine, but I like this one.)

It's a way to resolve the problem of desiring to act dharmically yet at the same time doing what must be done to protect the Indian people.

In the meantime, I look forward to what A.K. Antony is up to. The man is not a fool: he can see the danger as well as we can. Vivek_Ahuja, I also eagerly await your posts.

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby John Snow » 29 Aug 2009 05:23

Only Indians and Indian leadership is capable of self goals and walking straight into the corner of maze and is amazing to see that happen again and again.

The conduct of some of the scientists especially from BARC is very close to treason because the nation depends on them to formulate the long term short term and immidiate strategies. No wonder the armed forces are reluctant to touch with a barge pole what DRDO/BARC claim to be world beaters.

Some lame excuses like BARC has to etch a PC board from copper clad plywood is no excuse that is exactly even in a advanced country like US researchers are equipped. Inventions are based on improvisation and innovations.

The doings at BARC are very political and groupisim has always been maximum, right from 1960s, I have cousins who graduated with MSc Nuclear Physics who went on to BARC work and get Ph D's. They used to talk to my father and what ever I could understand, it was clear if you belong to RR then you may not be well received in PKI group. I think this was less in TIFR...

When the world moved on to ICs which could be used as power amplifiers with 2W on single chip BARC was showing the world that they could make PN ( that too germenium) junction......

No wonder if you look at the contribution of BARC to BEL, BHEL. even NFC it is minimal, everything is imported and or collobration in manufacture.....

The time for tranparance and accountability has long past. I think there should be a select parliament committee to periodically review the work and publish the findings. If some state secrets are to be protected black them out and publish to citizens.

Some how I am now totally convinced that IA does not beleive it has deterent that will back it in case of crisis.

To ready one or two agnis with actual scientists and engineers from shop floors of DRDO and BARC guys during a crisis is least professional way to conduct war.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7031
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby JE Menon » 29 Aug 2009 05:27

deleted on reading page 15... noticed that the Raj Baldev has already been outed a full page after the article was posted... :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7031
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby JE Menon » 29 Aug 2009 05:47

>>JE Menon's confidence notwithstanding

notwithstanding is not the right word there... I'm not at all opposed to Santhanam's statement.

BTW, are you sure that a TN weapon has not been fielded?

General comment:

What worries me more than anything else is the shivering and trembling of the SDREs in their dhotis and from their low, dark and narrow praying spaces - even when some mofo or the other mentions CTBT in Washington.

Grow some backbone.

Sometimes I wonder if the Paks may be right... one hard blow in the right place at the right time, and we yindoos will be back to kissing the ass of the Mughals and pretending we were always their bestest friends. :twisted:

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5241
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby ShauryaT » 29 Aug 2009 05:51

JE Menon wrote:>>JE Menon's confidence notwithstanding

notwithstanding is not the right word there... I'm not at all opposed to Santhanam's statement.

BTW, are you sure that a TN weapon has not been fielded?
Nothing sure about it Sir. I just choose to believe certain individuals who have earned my trust on the matter.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7031
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby JE Menon » 29 Aug 2009 05:55

And that pretty much sums up the whole thread... We just choose a group we want to believe and believe that.

But still, that's OK I guess. That's what we are here for.

No need for "sir" and all that pls. No respect required.

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby John Snow » 29 Aug 2009 06:02

are we then to understand that the current dynamic duo of Narayanan and menon also screwed us right royally in being the shepards of Nuke deal?

Our problems are our own creation, as Indians we need to shutup and get our house in order before saying that Unkil put unbearable pressure, aunty pinched me on the shaft (for kaveri).

How do the Iranians, NoKo are able to manipulate unkils and aunties ( in case of TSP we know the GUBO technique is waht the turn to) unbearable pressure

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby vera_k » 29 Aug 2009 06:09

Who was responsible for certifying that the 1998 tests performed as per the design? What does this person or team have to say?

tripathi
BRFite
Posts: 168
Joined: 11 Dec 2008 12:35

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby tripathi » 29 Aug 2009 06:14

i think india tested russian made bombs in 1998 when its own design failed just to save its H&D. Now thats the intellectual dishonesty from indian scientists :shock:

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby enqyoob » 29 Aug 2009 06:23

And the Russian nukes fizzled? :eek: That's what u get for not depending on 400% indi-genius engineering.

tripathi
BRFite
Posts: 168
Joined: 11 Dec 2008 12:35

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist

Postby tripathi » 29 Aug 2009 06:33

Fizzled one was indian design fission devices were russian coz if they too were indian that wud ve been massive H&D blow to india.so just to be on safer side they tested proven russian design :wink:


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests