Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

[samuel]

Ramana-garu if we can seal the gates then we ought to let people bash each other up for a while and let it come down to the truth. Otherwise, we shove too much under the carpet and that may be our single biggest weakness. We'll deal with the fall out, but first lets get to the truth...when presented in clear terms the solution will be easy to defend.

[Raj Malhotra]

The hole in my analysis of fission bomb being 25kt is that why did Sanathanam only say BARC agreed with their analysis of Fission yield? He should have then fired the nuke, by adding that the "agreed yield" of fission bomb was 25kt and BARC "begged" that in public domain it should be called 10kt to save the chaddi of PC/TN. So the absence of this line in the article does damage to my guess.

[ramana]

ShauryaT - not quite. It means that if Arun is correct then S-2 had a 20KT yield and S-1 had a 27kt yield instead of its planned 45kT. It still means the FBF primary for S-1 worked.

What happened after that is still unclear.

The gap between the way DRDO seems to have read things for S1 and S2 and the way BARC declared them is indeed wide then. What the hell is going on? Either DRDO is stupid or BARC is hiding!

Also, if S2 was between 20-25 kt, a lower range extrapolation of yield of the 5.2 magnitude registered along with the no crater, shaft not destroyed, and the A frame intact would mean S1 fizzled - completely?

We need to hear from those at the test site on whether the SI primary worked. I dont think we should put that much burden on Arun. Right now being a conservative coot I have no faith on the SI primary.

[vera_k]

So a "test", whether it is 200kT or 200MT, won't be adequate. Invading some nation and killing a few hundred thousand of its residents, and calling that the "New Whirled Odor" or "Collusion of the Willing" would be required.

More than that, the willingness to send its own young people in uniform to distant corners of the world to die in large numbers in pursuit of national greed, killing the people there in the thousands.

It is not as if plenty of sacrifices of the sorts you mention haven't already been made over Kashmir and any of the other conflicts that matter to us. But what matters is a convincing victory, not what transpires in between. A "test" can be justified if it is a necessary component of ensuring victory and similarly it can be rejected if a test will detract from or not ensure victory.

[Kanson]

The hole in my analysis of fission bomb being 25kt is that why did Sanathanam only say BARC agreed with their analysis of Fission yield? He should have then fired the nuke, by adding that the "agreed yield" of fission bomb was 25kt and BARC "begged" that in public domain it should be called 10kt to save the chaddi of PC/TN. So the absence of this line in the article does damage to my guess

Not only it did damage to your guesses but to the theory that S2 is 25 KT.

Santhanam further went on to say all we have is only 15 KT. It all open session now. You can also quote say like multiple independent sources and say anything....and it become a new fact.

[Raj Malhotra]

ShauryaT - not quite. It means that if Arun is correct then S-2 had a 20KT yield and S-1 had a 27kt yield instead of its planned 45kT. It still means the FBF primary for S-1 worked.

What happened after that is still unclear.

The gap between the way DRDO seems to have read things for S1 and S2 and the way BARC declared them is indeed wide then. What the hell is going on? Either DRDO is stupid or BARC is hiding!

Also, if S2 was between 20-25 kt, a lower range extrapolation of yield of the 5.2 magnitude registered along with the no crater, shaft not destroyed, and the A frame intact would mean S1 fizzled - completely?

We need to hear from those at the test site on whether the SI primary worked. I dont think we should put that much burden on Arun. Right now being a conservative coot I have no faith on the SI primary.

I agree, our (non)credible (almost nil) deterrant is now based on pure fission 10-25kt bombs of say 100kg (device) weight. My guess is Agni-3/5 will carrry around 3-4 pure fission bombs of 10-25kt yield.

let us see:-

One one side PKI-Sanathanam-Homi Sethna-Srinivasan-Gopalkrishnan (indirectly referring to seismic wave tests, corrtex tests, referring to ARC tests etc)

On other side Abdul kalam, PC, Sikka, Kakodar, MMS, Brijesh Misra, BJP, Congress referring to believe PC tests.

My strong belief is that TN design started in 1980s and PKI is well aware of the design & shaft dept and that is why he knew from day one that it has fizzled.

[Arun_S]

I agree, our (non)credible (almost nil) deterrant is now based on pure fission 10-25kt bombs of say 100kg (device) weight.

100 kg for pure fission is overtly optimistic, few times of the quoted figure is more realistic.

[Raj Malhotra]

The hole in my analysis of fission bomb being 25kt is that why did Sanathanam only say BARC agreed with their analysis of Fission yield? He should have then fired the nuke, by adding that the "agreed yield" of fission bomb was 25kt and BARC "begged" that in public domain it should be called 10kt to save the chaddi of PC/TN. So the absence of this line in the article does damage to my guess

Not only it did damage to your guesses but to the theory that S2 is 25 KT.

Santhanam further went on to say all we have is only 15 KT. It all open session now. You can also quote say like multiple independent sources and say anything....and it become a new fact.

You are correct, there is lot of confusion in Sanathanam article, now if S-2-25kt is pure fission than S1-FBF/TN is only 15kt (which read with PKI means that even the primary did not work properly) and if S-2-pure fission is 15kt then S-2-Tn/FBF is 25kt (which would mean that primary may have worked). And what did BARC and DRDO agree on? From his article there is no meeting point. Unless they agreed on something which is different from public domain. Or unless Snanathanam himself mis-interpretated the S-2 results and BARC readily agreed but this theory does not gel with results from corrtex and (other?) tests. If we take S-1-TN-FBF as 15kt and S-2-Pure Fission as 25kt then Arun interference theory fails. If we take S-1 & S-2 as almost equal ~25kt then Sanathanams article has problems.

[Raj Malhotra]

I agree, our (non)credible (almost nil) deterrant is now based on pure fission 10-25kt bombs of say 100kg (device) weight.

100 kg for pure fission is overtly optimistic, few times of the quoted figure is more realistic.

I think there is some post somewhere in which a "minister" refers to our strategic payload as 100-250kg. Also I am referring to "device" and not to the "bomb". Even TN devices of USA are 40-100kg, so I would like to believe in Indian 100kg pure fission 25kt device. Note am assuming Agni-3/5 payload as 1500kg and saying 4 devices of 100kg each.

[Kanson]

I think there is some post somewhere in which a "minister" refers to our strategic payload as 100-250kg. Also I am referring to "device" and not to the "bomb". Even TN devices of USA are 40-100kg, so I would like to believe in Indian 100kg pure fission 25kt device. Note am assuming Agni-3/5 payload as 1500kg and saying 4 devices of 100kg each.

If we look very conservatively, the weight of 15 KT FBF will be something around 150 kg. But my understanding is it something less than 100 kg or close to 100 kg.

Similarly, 15 KT pure fission will be around 150 kg. This is consistent with global figures.

Sanjay tells that as per Tellis pure fission is somewhere around 170 - 200 kg. In my understanding it is little heavier.

[Arun_S]

100 kg for pure fission is overtly optimistic, few times of the quoted figure is more realistic.

I think there is some post somewhere in which a "minister" refers to our strategic payload as 100-250kg. Also I am referring to "device" and not to the "bomb". Even TN devices of USA are 40-100kg, so I would like to believe in Indian 100kg pure fission 25kt device. Note am assuming Agni-3/5 payload as 1500kg and saying 4 devices of 100kg each.

Note it is a 20-25 kt bomb not 12 kT.

[Raj Malhotra]

I think there is some post somewhere in which a "minister" refers to our strategic payload as 100-250kg. Also I am referring to "device" and not to the "bomb". Even TN devices of USA are 40-100kg, so I would like to believe in Indian 100kg pure fission 25kt device. Note am assuming Agni-3/5 payload as 1500kg and saying 4 devices of 100kg each.

If we look very conservatively, the weight of 15 KT FBF will be something around 150 kg. But my understanding is it something less than 100 kg or close to 100 kg.

Similarly, 15 KT pure fission will be around 150 kg. This is consistent with global figures.

Sanjay tells that as per Tellis pure fission is somewhere around 170 - 200 kg. In my understanding it is little heavier.

So adding your post to the Minister's

Fission device=15to 25kt=150kg=so around 3 in Agni-3/5
FBF device=15 to 25kt=100kg=so around 5 in Agni-3/5
TN device=?kt=250kg=so around 4 in Agni-3/5

Did you mean to say heavier or lighter?

[csharma]

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/nsa-d ... c/519324/0

NSA dismisses Santhanam's claims on Pokhran-II as 'horrific'

National Security Adviser M K Narayanan has termed a former DRDO scientist's claims on Pokhran-II nuclear tests as "horrific" and asserted that India has thermonuclear capabilities which have been verified by a peer group of researchers.


He said that the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), which comprises a peer group of scientists, had last week come out with the "most authoritative" statement on the efficacy of the 1998 nuclear tests and no more clarification was required from the government on the matter.


"They (AEC) were satisfied in 1998 and they were satisfied in 2009. Now what are you going to discuss?" he told on a private channel.


Narayanan said that the AEC, an independent Commission and the highest body in such matters, was asked to study the data of the 1998 nuclear tests once again in the wake of the controversy over the efficacy of the hydrogen bomb following the statements of former DRDO scientist K Santhanam.




"I think, we have done what we have done. Beyond that I do not know what we can do," he said.


Eminent scientists like C N R Rao, P Rama Rao and M R Srinivasan were members of the AEC and the doyen of the nuclear programme Raja Ramanna was part the apex nuclear body which went into the test results in 1998.


"The thermonuclear device had a yield of 45 kilotons. I have chosen my words carefully 45 kilotons and nobody, including Mr Santhanam who has absolutely no idea what he is talking about, can contest what is proven fact by the data which is there," Narayanan said.


The NSA claimed that a "very authoritative piece" about the nature of the tests written by AEC Chairman Anil Kakodkar and senior scientist S K Sikka was being "examined by physicists all over the world."


Narayanan said that former AEC chairman P K Iyengar had admitted that the yield of the thermoculear test "might have been 45 kilotons and had raised doubts on the fission and fusion reactions happening at the same time.


"All the atomic scientists are part of the establishment. Those who are sceptics, the same ones Dr Iyengar, Dr A N Prasad, the same ones were sceptical about the civil nuclear initiative," he said.


Narayanan said Santhanam was not privy to the information on which the test measurements were taken. "As the NSA, I know what the DRDO is supposed to do and what it knows. I think he is not merely exaggerating, I think he is talking something which is horrific," he said.


He said there was no need for a public debate on the issue as it required to have a clear idea of the explosive ballistics, neutron physics, material sciences and computer simulation. Asked about the doubt former Army Chief V P Malik had raised about the efficacy of the hydrogen bomb, the NSA said


"I think the person to answer that is the present chief and not the past chief on this matter."


"We have thermonuclear capabilities. I am absolutely sure. We are very clear on this point. If you hit a city with one of these you are talking about 50,000 to 1,00,000 deaths," the NSA said.


Narayanan said it was a matter of concern for the government the "kind of interested propaganda being put by various people" in media.


On US move to press for a UN Security Council resolution calling upon all countries to sign the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), he said that the issue had already been raised with the Americans who have assured India it would not affect the civil nuclear agreement. Narayanan said India also talked to countries with whom it has signed nuclear agreements against the backdrop of US bid to get G-8 group of countries to ban sale of enrichment and reprocessing technologies to non-nuclear states.


He termed as an "old story" ex-Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf's admission that Islamabad was deploying American military aid meant for fighting terrorism against India. He said Pakistan's acquisition of sophisticated weaponry from America in the last three to four years was more worrying than any modification of Harpoon missiles. Strongly refuting the need to rethink the 'no first use' doctrine, Narayanan said:


"It is a very well thought out doctrine. We are clear for various reasons. For us it is only a deterrent. We are committed to it."


On reports of Pakistan enhancing its nuclear arsenal, he said "the fact that the country which is not particularly friendly to us is building up its nuclear arsenal is certainly a matter of concern."

One thing that is significant is that the NSA is saying that we have thermonuclear capabilities. He is not just saying that RC or Kalam told me so.

[Kanson]

And I do remember Adm. Menon talking abt 12 MIRV for K-15.

Pls no serious jokes on this thread, some one can die from it.

Hahaha, I dont know who is the joker here, the one who babble without seeing what was written in the article or the one who dabbled that out. Pls reserve such scarcasm for Adm. Menon and India Today reporter who reported that.

Ahhhh ... first please provide the exact source / link that you attribute to Adm. Menon.

And I do remember Adm. Menon talking abt 12 MIRV for K-15. Prithvi PGM is precursor for that. That may not be feasible without the warhead being minaturised and of light weight.

It will be indeed hilarious to think of Prithvi style PG-muntion that has 12 MIRV muntion coming out of the 0.7m dia K-15 missile cone. I am amazed how cheaply you bought the Thames bridge and Eiffel Tower.

I am still awaiting reconciled reference/source to Kanson's gem on 12 MIRV on K-15 and Prithvi PGM is precursor for those tiny MIRV that have boom of nuclear deterrence !!

I was in two minds when the old thread got locked and people started to raise white flags in the new thread. I thank you for bringing this up to complete my unfulfilled task. It will be viewed as me giving a reply that starting a fresh one.

I do hear all your paan chewing, Urdu spouting and all that. Despite this, it is my fault to believe that you can able to understand what i wrote. I only dabbled. And my point still holds. There is TN and it is lighter and smaller. Fine, by insisting to correct the 12 MIRV figure to 8 MIRV figure, you are agreeing that it is 8 MIRV. That leads to the same conclusion as any warhead that can be accommodated in K-15 should be lighter and smaller. Payload figure and 8 MIRV figure gives the indication that it could be TN.

If someone was in your position to whom i would have casually remarked, what nerve you have to ask me source or evidence when there is no evidence for the bile that was thrown around by you.

As you are Webmaster to BR, i can only ask, Sir, on what moral standing you are asking me the source when there is nothing coming from your side for all the theories you put forward. All we are hearing are, "My sources", "Public", "private source" and now " multiple independent sources". OK, even this could be brushed aside considering the sensitive nature of information. I asked you long back in Indian Missile thread for the proof of your claim that Kalam proclaimed Agni-2 can reache 4000 km with 1 ton payload. I asked proof for this several times. Still you are giving me the proof.

Funny that you are asking link/source from me. If you ask me, I would humbly retort, you should never ask any source/link to anyone.

[Kanson]

If we look very conservatively, the weight of 15 KT FBF will be something around 150 kg. But my understanding is it something less than 100 kg or close to 100 kg.

Similarly, 15 KT pure fission will be around 150 kg. This is consistent with global figures.

Sanjay tells that as per Tellis pure fission is somewhere around 170 - 200 kg. In my understanding it is little heavier.

So adding your post to the Minister's

Fission device=15to 25kt=150kg=so around 3 in Agni-3/5
FBF device=15 to 25kt=100kg=so around 5 in Agni-3/5
TN device=?kt=250kg=so around 4 in Agni-3/5

Did you mean to say heavier or lighter?

I mean to say 170 - 200 kg figure for 15 kt pure fission device is heavier.

Regarding TN, it you take it conservatively then 250 kg relates to 250 kt.

[shiv]

The problem wit this subject is that for 100 people who read this thread only 5 people will bother to read up all available info. That means it will take 20 threads before the first 100 are well informed by which time we will have another 100 new entrants

If you want to argue about yields you will get nowhere. That has been seen consistently from 1998 on BRF. Even the last version of this thread died on the question of what were the exact yields. There is too much information scatter regarding yields

The only new information that we have got is what Santhanam said recently. I repeat

• S1 yielded only 60% design yield
• It was 25+2 kt
• It had a 25 meter crater
• Weaponization is of 25 kt fission bombs only
• Weaponization is of 15 kt "fusion" (Fisson?) bombs

On may 11 1998 we reportedly had 3 tests which have been defined as

• Thermonuclear - S1
  1974 vintage "weaponized" fission device - S2
  Subkiloton = S3

Since the yield for May 11 has been put as 5 kt to 60 kt depending on which source you look at, one can fix the relative values of S1 and S2 at any figure less than 60 kt (assuming that S3 is subkiloton of
zero yield)

If Pokhran 1975 was 8 kt AND if total yield on May 11 1998 was 25 kt - then the thermonuclear device yielded 17 kilotons

If Pokhran 1975 was 12 kt AND if total yield on May 11 1998 was 25 kt - then the thermonuclear device yielded 13 kilotons

If Pokhran 1975 was 8 kt AND if total yield on May 11 1998 was 43 kt - then the thermonuclear device yielded 35 kilotons

If Pokhran 1975 was 12 kt AND if total yield on May 11 1998 was 43 kt - then the thermonuclear device yielded 31 kilotons

You can do this guesswork for any published yield from any source and see what values you get.

[Raj Malhotra]

100 kg for pure fission is overtly optimistic, few times of the quoted figure is more realistic.

I think there is some post somewhere in which a "minister" refers to our strategic payload as 100-250kg. Also I am referring to "device" and not to the "bomb". Even TN devices of USA are 40-100kg, so I would like to believe in Indian 100kg pure fission 25kt device. Note am assuming Agni-3/5 payload as 1500kg and saying 4 devices of 100kg each.

Note it is a 20-25 kt bomb not 12 kT.

Again a question - your reference to 20-25kt is to pure fission ?

when you say bomb, you mean airdropped bomb? or nuke RV? or Nuke payload? or nuke device? or nuke physics package? As you would appreciate that all these weights would be different and any increase would have exponential effect on reducing the number of mushrooms on potential enemy.


My limited understanding of some terms

Air dropped bomb= Nuke configered to be mated to the aircraft and airdropped over rat land

Nuke payload = nuke RV + decoys + comms + ECM, ECCM + sensors + guidance etc

Nuke RV= Nuke that can seperate from missile and re-enter independently over rat land through atmosphere + power source etc

Nuke device = Nuke + fuse + safying+arming+fail safe

Nuke physics package = fissile material + explosive lenses + triggering mechanism (this physics package had fallen to around 40kg per FAS for USA 60kt TNs in 1960s itself)

[Kanson]

More scientists back Santhanam on Pokhran II
20 Sep 2009

Those who are sceptics, the same ones Dr Iyengar, Dr A N Prasad, the same ones were sceptical about the civil nuclear initiative," he said.

In that list Gopalakrishnan should be added. These are the same people went along with CPI(M) to block the N-deal.

[Manish_Sharma]

Question for Arun_S, If the S1 was supposed to be 45kt and

yielded only 27-30kt. Would that mean the design itselft was

faulted at giving 60% of the yield? In that case if India puts 3

petals of 300kt on MIRVd Agni, they would give 60% of the yield

let's say 180kt each with the fizzly S1 design or they would fizzle at

same yield of 27-30kt like S1?

[Raj Malhotra]

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/nsa-d ... c/519324/0

NSA dismisses Santhanam's claims on Pokhran-II as 'horrific'



"The thermonuclear device had a yield of 45 kilotons. I have chosen my words carefully 45 kilotons and nobody, including Mr Santhanam who has absolutely no idea what he is talking about, can contest what is proven fact by the data which is there," Narayanan said.


The NSA claimed that a "very authoritative piece" about the nature of the tests written by AEC Chairman Anil Kakodkar and senior scientist S K Sikka was being "examined by physicists all over the world." (my comment - till date - nobody has come forth to say "I checked" the calculations")

Narayanan said that former AEC chairman P K Iyengar had admitted that the yield of the thermoculear test "might have been 45 kilotons and had raised doubts on the fission and fusion reactions happening at the same time.

"All the atomic scientists are part of the establishment. Those who are sceptics, the same ones Dr Iyengar, Dr A N Prasad, the same ones were sceptical about the civil nuclear initiative," he said.

Narayanan said Santhanam was not privy to the information on which the test measurements were taken. "As the NSA, I know what the DRDO is supposed to do and what it knows. I think he is not merely exaggerating, I think he is talking something which is horrific," he said. (my comments - he is saying don't call the king naked and his comment that Sanathanam was not privy to info is ridiculus, he was meant to measure the yield and he did that)

He said there was no need for a public debate on the issue as it required to have a clear idea of the explosive ballistics, neutron physics, material sciences and computer simulation. Asked about the doubt former Army Chief V P Malik had raised about the efficacy of the hydrogen bomb, the NSA said


"I think the person to answer that is the present chief and not the past chief on this matter." (My comments- He is saying that ex-Army chief has no sense also to add to other people making absurd comments like Sanathanam, PKI, Homi Sethna, Prasad, Srinivasan, Gopalkrishnan)


On reports of Pakistan enhancing its nuclear arsenal, he said "the fact that the country which is not particularly friendly to us is building up its nuclear arsenal is certainly a matter of concern."

One thing that is significant is that the NSA is saying that we have thermonuclear capabilities. He is not just saying that RC or Kalam told me so.

I disagree - he is also talking about the claims of exclusive club only.

[Kanson]

"We have thermonuclear capabilities. I am absolutely sure. We are very clear on this point. If you hit a city with one of these you are talking about 50,000 to 1,00,000 deaths," the NSA said.

I asked this to Sanjay here yesterday: How we will proceed further, i a govt official declares we have TN bums.

Santhanam so far not produced any substantial evidence. He is only beating around the bush. Now it is going to boil down to one's word against the other.

[Raj Malhotra]

I think that TN yield being low has been talked about/leaked now since the proposal for Indo-US nuke deal. It is possible that PKI (with Sanathanam?) were talking privately about lot of things. Now with FMCT & CTBT looming Sanathanam has come out in the open

[Raj Malhotra]

The whole point of having a nuke is that it should never be used. Having a doubtful nuke actually increases the risk that bluff will be called by some mad man in the adversorial nation. Therefore we must have a very very clear demonstration of capability of TN of upto 200-500kt several times.

[vera_k]

How we will proceed further, i a govt official declares we have TN bums.

It does not matter much what the govt official says as neither Pakistan nor China believe we have TN weapons.

[Kanson]

How we will proceed further, i a govt official declares we have TN bums.

It does not matter much what the govt official says as neither Pakistan nor China believe we have TN weapons.

Sorry for asking the source Any official declaration from China/Pakistan on this ?

[Kanson]

I think that TN yield being low has been talked about/leaked now since the proposal for Indo-US nuke deal. It is possible that PKI (with Sanathanam?) were talking privately about lot of things. Now with FMCT & CTBT looming Sanathanam has come out in the open

That is only one theory. There is another theory which i wrote few pages back

[shiv]

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/nsa-d ... c/519324/0

One thing that is significant is that the NSA is saying that we have thermonuclear capabilities. He is not just saying that RC or Kalam told me so.

Well one way to bring down his credibility with a crash is to call him a liar and then keep insisting at every possible opportunity that he is a liar. Soon his lies will become so obvious that they are impossible to miss.

[Kanson]

In fact, National Security Advisor Sandy Berger told reporters the United States still had no confirmation of the test nearly 12 hours after the blast occurred. India calculated the orbits of spy satellites and then moved equipment at times when they believed nothing was overhead. India, several officials noted, has long had a space program and is capable of determining what satellites are in which orbit. "They were in our blind spot," said a senior military official. Moreover, intelligence officials note that the Indian nuclear weapons program is the "most secretive" of all Third World programs. "We know more about the North Korean program than we do about the Indian program."

Satellite Imaging Capability

The reasons, say officials in both Washington and New Delhi, are varied. India has its own satellite-imaging capability, which gives it an understanding of what can and can't be seen from space. It's nuclear program is kept separate from its military, which like many militaries is prone to boasting and leaking. And unlike many programs, India's is not as dependent on outside help. India has a large pool of trained nuclear scientists and electrical engineers and an industrial infrastructure capable of producing key equipment. Much U.S. intelligence on other nations' nuclear programs is derived from electronic eavesdropping on sales of equipment related to weapons development. India has prevented Western intelligence from recruiting spies in India by an aggressive program of counterintelligence that includes surveillance and even attempted recruitment of diplomats and suspected agents. "They are very, very good," said one official. "Remember, this is the same country that produced the scientists who designed the Pentium chips," added an official. "They don't need a lot of outside help. They can do it on their own."

All these gunning for information from the current episode leaves me to believe these people are not acting in the national interest.

[Raj Malhotra]

I think that GoI declaration that we have weaponised the TN would be first step.

The second step would be that somebody "independant" nominated by the GoI comes forth and says that "I checked" the calculations. Not that GoI simply says that believe PC as not believing him is heresy. Especially coming from NSA on whose watch our PM=Lioness got killed and he shamelessely continues after getting rajiv killed also. The comments presently coming from GoI are like a loser's stand. If they want to take on half a dozen "eminent" Indian scientists who were part of establishment (and some of them know what they are talking about), then half baked statements don't work.

In fact Abdul Kalam etc statements actually go against GoI, Kalam basically has said that "King informed me that he is not naked".

BM confirms that there was a dispute in 1998 itself but neither BM nor Kalam say that "calculations were checked or cross verified", they say that "on the basis of the statements of the king" we believe that King is not naked and anybody who wants that king should come out in pvt or public is heretic as coming out of king is against public interest even though enemy in on the door. People need not see the king to believe in him. It is adequte that they believe in "what we say" rather than "what they see". Conclusion ignore the winch and shaft believe in newspaper reports of village damage which may be just over-enthusiatic reporting (as wall cracks are common on village lands due to bad/non existent foundations. Did anybody check or measure that wall on which whole defence is based has a foundation? Or did somebody "meaure or calulate" the time at which the damage took place?

Sanathanam has done a jaswant on advani.

Re- Arun_S - It is clearly evident some eminent posters want to get thread locked. Don't get into flame war. (This does NOT refer to Kanson)

[vera_k]

Sorry for asking the source Any official declaration from China/Pakistan on this ?

The source is again in Tellis's book from 2001. Chapter 5 Page 516. There are two sources, one from Pakistan and one from China used in support of the quote below.

The Pakistani scientific community, however, has already publicly expressed its disbelief about the success of India's thermonuclear experiment, and while the Chinese strategic community has made no comparable public response, there is good reason to believe that its private estimates of New Delhi's achievements do not deviate substantially from the opinions expressed in Islamabad.

[archan]

So Tellis thinks the because China did not make a lot of noise at the time of tests, this is enough evidence that they don't believe it was a success? and we here are to take that as "proof"? Speculative sensationalism does not help the discussion at hand.
For all we know, some in the adversary camp might see the recent "revelations" as a trick played by the Indians to test the international atmosphere as they might be ready to test more potent stuff now. And who knows, they may be right.

[Kanson]

I asked for official declaration or any expression from diplomat from these two countries. What you provided is the opinion of Mr. Tellis. He didnt quote who said what. So it only can be considered his impression or opinion. He also said there is no FBF...and you heard Bharat Kanard saying we have 150 - 200 kt FBF. Whos right and whos wrong ?

[vera_k]

^^^

Actually, if you read the book, he does quote his sources.

Najeeb, "Indian H-Bomb test a failure, say Pakistani Scientists" is the Pakistani source.
Zhang, "China's Changing Nuclear Posture, Pg. 33, 34" is the Chinese source.

Chinese source

Chinese scientists also have doubts about India’s declared nuclear
capabilities. They detected the three low-yield (200, 300, and 500
ton) tests, but questioned whether India’s nuclear devices have been
developed into usable weapons. Because the international seismic
monitoring network did not even record the declared tests on May
13, Chinese scientists suspected that the declared yield of 500 tons
of TNT was actually less than 50 tons. Chinese scientists were uncertain
why India exaggerated its nuclear capabilities or whether it
would conduct more tests. One analysis made by Chinese scientists
was that the Indian tests attempted to perfect two designs: one for
an enhanced atomic bomb, using various boosters to increase the
yield of the plutonium core; the other for a thermonuclear device
with many times the yield of a simple atomic bomb. Based on the
available data, it seems that, despite Indian claims of success, they
did not succeed in igniting a thermonuclear reaction.

The quote above is further sourced from -

Tian Dongfeng, conference presentation, summarized in Bulletin
of the Center for American Studies, Fudan University, no. 2, 1998

[Kanson]

^^^ Glad that you provided source instead following the tradition like telling "My multiple independent public private sources". I haven't went through what Tellis wrote in that book. I ask you, apart from quoting from other sources, did he mention anywhere the Govt position of these two countries on our TN test. I only ask this as to update my understanding.

Irrespective of whatever claims, only matter that means business is deterrence. Rest all is time pass.

[Raj Malhotra]

I think that TN yield being low has been talked about/leaked now since the proposal for Indo-US nuke deal. It is possible that PKI (with Sanathanam?) were talking privately about lot of things. Now with FMCT & CTBT looming Sanathanam has come out in the open

That is only one theory. There is another theory which i wrote few pages back

My theory is supported by posts of Arun_S and (ravi-cv?) on BRF during that time.

[Raj Malhotra]

How we will proceed further, i a govt official declares we have TN bums.

It does not matter much what the govt official says as neither Pakistan nor China believe we have TN weapons.

Sorry for asking the source Any official declaration from China/Pakistan on this ?

Yes Pak officially declared it by Kargill war!

[Raj Malhotra]

The source is again in Tellis's book from 2001. Chapter 5 Page 516. There are two sources, one from Pakistan and one from China used in support of the quote below.

The Pakistani scientific community, however, has already publicly expressed its disbelief about the success of India's thermonuclear experiment, and while the Chinese strategic community has made no comparable public response, there is good reason to believe that its private estimates of New Delhi's achievements do not deviate substantially from the opinions expressed in Islamabad.

Hence Pak, China & USA don't believe we have TN only Indian public should rest (get killed) in peace

[Kanson]

Yes Pak officially declared it by Kargill war!

they why they didnt used the Nukes against us when they were beaten back.

Hence Pak, China & USA don't believe we have TN only Indian public should rest (get killed) in peace

So why USA surge ahead to stop the 2 countries kargil war into Nuclear war. It did the same during Op. Parakaram.

[Kanson]

My theory is supported by posts of Arun_S and (ravi-cv?) on BRF during that time.

Sorry for being mischievous here. Which post, the one before 2007 or afterwards or now. Becoz, the posts and the message are constantly changing. Yesterday sizzle, today fizzle. Yesterday 15 kt, then 8 kt and now 25 kt. I'm so confused. So you theory should also be changing i guess.

[vera_k]

I ask you, apart from quoting from other sources, did he mention anywhere the Govt position of these two countries on our TN test. I only ask this as to update my understanding.

Irrespective of whatever claims, only matter that means business is deterrence. Rest all is time pass.

No, there is no explicit statement of official positions if you are looking for one. But what we come to know is that their scientists have informed their governments that the TN test was not a success - by their assessment - a long time ago.