Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 24 Sep 2009 00:03

oops probelm solved at last

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 Sep 2009 00:09

so hear ye hear ye - good old bear had a dead man's hand machine that would wipe the khanate off the grid
should the rodina go down. we need something along similar lines for PRC.

http://www.wired.com/politics/security/ ... ntPage=all

The point of the system, he explains, was to guarantee an automatic Soviet response to an American nuclear strike. Even if the US crippled the USSR with a surprise attack, the Soviets could still hit back. It wouldn't matter if the US blew up the Kremlin, took out the defense ministry, severed the communications network, and killed everyone with stars on their shoulders. Ground-based sensors would detect that a devastating blow had been struck and a counterattack would be launched.

The technical name was Perimeter, but some called it Mertvaya Ruka, or Dead Hand. It was built 25 years ago and remained a closely guarded secret
.........
Perimeter ensures the ability to strike back, but it's no hair-trigger device. It was designed to lie semi-dormant until switched on by a high official in a crisis. Then it would begin monitoring a network of seismic, radiation, and air pressure sensors for signs of nuclear explosions. Before launching any retaliatory strike, the system had to check off four if/then propositions: If it was turned on, then it would try to determine that a nuclear weapon had hit Soviet soil. If it seemed that one had, the system would check to see if any communication links to the war room of the Soviet General Staff remained. If they did, and if some amount of time—likely ranging from 15 minutes to an hour—passed without further indications of attack, the machine would assume officials were still living who could order the counterattack and shut down. But if the line to the General Staff went dead, then Perimeter would infer that apocalypse had arrived. It would immediately transfer launch authority to whoever was manning the system at that moment deep inside a protected bunker—bypassing layers and layers of normal command authority. At that point, the ability to destroy the world would fall to whoever was on duty: maybe a high minister sent in during the crisis, maybe a 25-year-old junior officer fresh out of military academy. And if that person decided to press the button ... If/then. If/then. If/then. If/then.

Once initiated, the counterattack would be controlled by so-called command missiles. Hidden in hardened silos designed to withstand the massive blast and electromagnetic pulses of a nuclear explosion, these missiles would launch first and then radio down coded orders to whatever Soviet weapons had survived the first strike. At that point, the machines will have taken over the war. Soaring over the smoldering, radioactive ruins of the motherland, and with all ground communications destroyed, the command missiles would lead the destruction of the US.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 24 Sep 2009 00:13

shravan wrote:Perils of minimal deterrence
Bharat Karnad
24 Sep 2009

So this is what was referred to in Bharat Karnad mail to Arun_S, and boy is it brutal.

He is massacring RC, nothing that Arun_S said on the forum comes close.

the longstanding fiction of India’s mastery over the science of fusion weapons purveyed by R Chidambaram, adviser to the prime minister on science and technology and, formerly, chairman, Atomic Energy Commission

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 24 Sep 2009 00:13

shravan wrote:Perils of minimal deterrence
Bharat Karnad
24 Sep 2009

Perils of minimal deterrence

India is lucky that in the decade since the 1998 tests when the Indian government trumpeted the country as a ‘nuclear weapon state’ boasting of thermonuclear armaments in its inventory, no country called its bluff. In the context of deterrence as a high-powered game of poker, luck is a statistical incidence for a player with a weak suite. It will eventually run out.

The coordinator of the 1998 series of nuclear tests K Santhanam has authoritatively shown up the Indian government’s thermonuclear claims as pretension torpedoing, in the process, the longstanding fiction of India’s mastery over the science of fusion weapons purveyed by R Chidambaram, adviser to the prime minister on science and technology and, formerly, chairman, Atomic Energy Commission. By referring, moreover, to the ‘hard data’ regarding the tests Santhanam says he has, the other shoe is yet to drop. Chidambaram & Co must be sweating bricks — the reason why they have been silent, even as the Manmohan Singh regime’s urge to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and close the testing option altogether lies buried. Instead of doing the right thing and having a committee of eminent physicists, including stalwarts from the retired nuclear community, examine the test data and the design details of the hydrogen device, national security adviser M K Narayanan’s talk of a BARC group having already done this job and — surprise, surprise — pronounced the fusion test a success, has only stoked the disbelief freighted with anxiety.

Most significantly, Santhanam disclosed that none of the high yield thermonuclear weapon designs in the 100-kiloton to 300-kiloton range that Chidambaram had repeatedly assured the government and the military had been realised have, in fact, been weaponised. This is a devastating denouement to a story that has the makings of a gigantic fraud perpetrated on the country, a fraud based on a scientific conceit of Chidambaram’s that Indian nuclear weaponeers are able to do what their counterparts in the more advanced countries cannot, namely, configure the complex hydrogen bomb based solely on simulation, not sustained and rigorous explosive testing. It is another matter that India’s supposed simulation prowess is suspect considering that simulation requires extensive test data to write the software and computing speeds in thousands of trillions of operations per second to replicate the variables of a fusion reaction — neither of which the country possesses. Moreover, absent tests, facilities for large scale inertial confinement fusion and for dual axis radiographic hydro testing to enhance the yield by, say, improving the system for injecting tritium gas in the boosted fission trigger in an H-bomb, are unavailable in the country.

But, what is so special about thermonuclear weaponry? For one thing, the hydrogen bomb can inspire dread and is truly ‘frightening’ — the essence of deterrence as mind game and something Herman Kahn, the pioneering theorist of deterrence, said was the prime requisite. And, most importantly, the H-bomb is four times more destructive than a fission weapon and costs only a third as much. With limited resources and fissile material stockpile, India will be strategically better off with a mainly thermonuclear arsenal, each warhead providing enormously bigger bang for the buck.

Supporters of the government’s ‘no more testing’ line, incidentally, are also, without exception, adherents of ‘minimal’ deterrence. Acknowledging that India’s thermonuclear cupboard is virtually bare, these worthies now argue that: (1) weapons capable of 150-300 KT, leave alone megaton, yields are not needed because 60-80 KT fission weapons are adequate; (2) instead of one thermonuclear missile on target, India can fire three missiles, each with a 15-25 KT warhead and, in a supportive hypothesis, (3) delivery accuracy is more important than weapon yield.

An Indian arsenal featuring only 20 KT weapons will do for Pakistan but is guaranteed to fail against China. Besides, India does not have 60-80 KT fission weapons. If these are to be acquired, it will mean scaling up the only proven weapon in the armoury — the 20 KT variety. But scaled up fission bombs/warheads will still need to be tested. If testing is deemed politically infeasible for fission weapons as for fusion weapons, then a big question mark will continue to hang around the Indian deterrent.

The fundamental problem with triggering a salvo of missiles with small yield warheads in the place of thermonuclear missiles is that it is inherently illogical to make the effort of investing in and obtaining 5,000 km Agni intermediate range ballistic missiles (IRBMs) and, in the future, an 12,000 km intercontinental range ballistic missiles or even long range cruise missiles, and then arm these with puny warheads. It skews the cost-benefit calculus. The minimalists think otherwise given their simplistic take on deterrence, which is high risk-acceptant. Costs may be irrelevant once a nuclear war breaks out, but isn’t the purpose of a nuclear deterrent to prevent nuclear war credibly but also as economically as possible? Secondly, there will be that many more fission weapon-armed missiles to secure and keep safe on the ground. Thirdly, against well-defended value targets, such as Beijing, several missiles will need to be fired to penetrate missile defences and to overcome attrition in flight and inaccurate terminal guidance.

Finally, just the threat of incoming Chinese Dongfeng-21 IRBMs carrying warheads in the 1-3.3 megaton range would so psychologically cripple Indian political leaders with only 20 KT firecrackers to bank on, they will likely throw in the towel.

The Armed Services have been shaken up by Santhanam’s outing the weapons programme as fraudulent and the thermonuclear deterrent as hollow. It will be reasonable for them to demand that nuclear weapons principally meet rigorous military performance standards and not, as happens at present, perform mostly on paper or on computer screens — the sort of thing that apparently satisfies the scientists who are not in the firing loop, retired bureaucrats and policemen (as NSA and what not) who offer strategic counsel such as is on display but are safely out of harm’s way, and political leaders making crucial nuclear weapons-use decisions. The pity is that while the military is starting to get a grip on the situation, the retired civil servant-types and politicians, who understand little about nuclear weapons and even less about deterrence dynamics, are predisposed to make the wrong strategic choices because they accept the misleading, short term-oriented, West-pleasing, advice offered by promoters of minimal deterrence.

About the author:

Bharat Karnad is professor at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi, and author of India’s Nuclear Policy

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Sep 2009 00:14

Manish_Sharma wrote:Wanted you on record because you have been pro testing but somehow ignoring this point, which I took as acceptence (wrongly).
But I did contribute rightly or wrongly above.

I still dont get why you want me on the record. Is there any agenda? Your explanation doesnt cut ice. I mean of all the great people in and out of the forum why do you want to pin me down?

I replied for I thought you were a nanha mujahid lost in the myriad pages, but your reply makes me wonder. Especially the usage of word "FINALLY".

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 24 Sep 2009 00:16

We have an insider

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 24 Sep 2009 00:44

Sanku wrote:
Manish_Sharma wrote:Still I feel happy since Raj Malhotra has informed me of the 20kt warheads weighing 250 kg. Four of these over Shanghai and Beijing each will do quite nicely.
Please remember you are talking about that damage to China in response to total destruction of at least 4 major Indian cities and a complete nuclear strike on Mil targets including nuclear facilities.

Fair trade off?

No Sanku not fair, but 20 warheads 1 each on Agni 2 will be over 20 Military targets + refineries, ports.
Then 60 warheads 3 each on Agni 3s go over 20 cities. I think from China's pov it should deter them. As it will cripple the lizard really really badly. So their leadership which is seeking to overtake US in 20 years wouldn't want that happening. This will set them back by at least 100 years.

Are they ready to take that over what AP or because India has surged ahead in making small cars?

Not to say with Prithvis and Brahmos taking out the railbridge to Tibet.

Although the results for India will be far more disastorous. With 4 major cities and and I don't know how many others gone. Army and top leadership gone. The country in total chaos. While We have 15 crore Porki population with army intact and 20 crore BD vultures ready. Aurangzeb's dream of India becoming Dar-ul-Islam will fructify. Whatever population is left will be at the mercy of Vatican and Arabs. Whosoever will convert will be helped other left to die.

So no, not for the sake of fair nuke exchange with Lizard but for the Civilization which has survived for 90 thousand years (yes this is not a typo) I repeat 90 thousand years, Given the world Meditation, Nirvana, Upanishadas, Vardhman Mahaveer the cocept of Enlightenment (Supreme Awakening), Advaita. The only country in the world which has told the man that no god and heaven is not after death.
Just awaken now with meditation and you are in Moksha.
The country of Ashtavkra, the country which didn't crucify even Charvakas for being atheists and saying "Rinam kritva Ghritam Pivet" (Borrow the money and drink ghee there is no god no truth no spirituality).
Imagine this country becoming a country of terrorists praying, killing and hoping to have sex with 72 virgins in the heaven after death.

Children of Samudragupta who was not only the greatest general but also a great musician and great poet a great drama writer. Not to mention Ashoka, chandragupta and Vikramaditya

Heirs of Vishnugupt Chankya, No to forget Aryabhat, i have also forgotten the name of Indias most famous Surgeon of 3000 years before.

No it is not a fair trade, but I would rather have china survive 90%, but complete obliteration of S.Arabia, porkis and BD. Sounds a terrible thing to say but that's how I feel.
So no, my hapiness is based upon the fact that well fed and prosperous China will not want to be crippled.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Sep 2009 00:49

Please compare the cavity radius of POKI and that stated in the radio-chem of S-I..

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 24 Sep 2009 00:53

ramana wrote:
Manish_Sharma wrote:Wanted you on record because you have been pro testing but somehow ignoring this point, which I took as acceptence (wrongly).
But I did contribute rightly or wrongly above.
I still dont get why you want me on the record. Is there any agenda? Your explanation doesnt cut ice. I mean of all the great people in and out of the forum why do you want to pin me down?

I replied for I thought you were a nanha mujahid lost in the myriad pages, but your reply makes me wonder. Especially the usage of word "FINALLY".

No no agenda Ramana! I was asked about this point and I said what was on my mind. So when you answered I that I was mistaken by writing in brackets (wrongly). Can we drop it? If it seemed that I was picking your name then I apologies sicerely.
FINALLY meant now I can drop this point if it is rebutted by either you or Arun_S.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Sep 2009 00:54

OK. Its Charaka, the surgeon I mean.

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 24 Sep 2009 01:02

K Subrahmanyam says that 60-80KT fission bombs have been fabricated. Bharat Karnad says only 20KT bombs are there. Total confusion.

Tanaji · Post by **Tanaji** » 24 Sep 2009 01:04

Manish_Sharma wrote: No no need for 4 Agnis Tanaji, Arun_S has told in this thread that Agni can carry three MIRVs so 2 Agnis carrying 3 petals each over the city. Lets say 4 reach and to don't due to ABM or sizzle etc. As you told 20-26 each type Agni we have, 20 Agni IIs with 1 petal and 20 Agni IIIs with 3 petals each = 80 warheads.
This was average aam admi logic.
Hope nobody puts water on it and make me worried again.

Er, that was the point I was making.

I know Arun_S states that there are MIRVs on Agni. His expertise in this area is far more than mine, and I respect him for that. He may very well be correct in his assertion which also may be based on inside info as well. However, it is also equally true that to date, there has been no public test of a MIRV. The GoI has never acknowledged a MIRV, the armed forces have never witnessed a test of the said vehicle. Given that MIRVs can be tested without sanctions, it is curious that there are no tests. Yes, I am aware that multiple satellite launches aboard PSLV have the same technology, still, this is different than a full test.

We are basing a hypothetical device on a hypothetical warhead, for now.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Sep 2009 01:11

Even the 60kt -80kt is also hypothetical. It has come down in one week to 25kt by same author.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 24 Sep 2009 01:15

But Tanaji BR has accepted his pov on Agni and Prithvi, that's why he has been given the job of creating the Missile pages. Let's see: since he is not happy with whatever data on TN test is their so he is totally into testing again and into exposing whosever is hiding. Now why would such a person say that Agni is MIRVd when it is not, I don't think he would be easily convinced.

Anyway I choose to believe!

Masaru · Post by **Masaru** » 24 Sep 2009 01:18

Perils of minimal deterrence

Brilliant exposure of the fraud that the so called MCD is.

The fundamental problem with triggering a salvo of missiles with small yield warheads in the place of thermonuclear missiles is that it is inherently illogical to make the effort of investing in and obtaining 5,000 km Agni intermediate range ballistic missiles (IRBMs), and then arm these with puny warheads. It skews the cost-benefit calculus. The minimalists think otherwise given their simplistic take on deterrence, which is high risk-acceptant. Costs may be irrelevant once a nuclear war breaks out, but isn’t the purpose of a nuclear deterrent to prevent nuclear war credibly but also as economically as possible?

With limited resources and fissile material stockpile, India will be strategically better off with a mainly thermonuclear arsenal, each warhead providing enormously bigger bang for the buck.

Not surprisingly the Chinese realize this cost-benefit trade-off very well and have built their around 200kt - 1Mt TN devices.

Finally, just the threat of incoming Chinese Dongfeng-21 IRBMs carrying warheads in the 1-3.3 megaton range would so psychologically cripple Indian political leaders with only 20 KT firecrackers to bank on, they will likely throw in the towel.

Glad that this scenario is brought out. Gurus here articulate quite well the potential psy-deterrence of multiple small devices, on the enemy. But the more imp. question is the effect of the fizzle deterrence on the decision calculus of the planners on Indian side when facing an initial salvo of multi MT weapons along with a warning of more such salvos if enemy demands are not met. The doctrine of counter-value targeting as opposed to counter-force targeting any way leaves the rest of the enemy weapons safe for a second salvo.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 Sep 2009 01:19

Bharat Karnad limit is bound to be what K Santhanam stated. Anyone accepting the statement of Santhanam is restricted to beating up on who did/does not act on what Santhanam says/stated.

Even in the latest Santhanam write-up there is nothing new from a technical PoV. I would like him to address the crater - that too a 72 meter radius crater - topic.

The only valid point I see in Santhanam's statement is that there should be an independent committee to review the S-1 data. How that can happen I do not know. Rest of what he says is not worth a read, since it mostly caters to political views or to set the record straight.

Tanaji · Post by **Tanaji** » 24 Sep 2009 01:24

Manish,

I think someone stated on earlier pages of this thread that Arun_s believes that the said webpage is out of date and needs a revamp. He is waiting to see how things develop before he makes the change.

We may not like it, but there is zero clarity on Indian nuclear posture. Our CMD can be boiled down to

"If we are nuked, we will somehow deliver nukes to the aggressor". These may be by aircraft, missile or row boat, and it may be only one warhead that does 20 Kt and weighs 1200 kg. Note that GoI has never spelled out what "unacceptable" means either. Only the statement in quotes is verified truth, rest is "educated guesses" to put it politely or kite flying.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 Sep 2009 01:28

The Armed Services have been shaken up by Santhanam’s outing the weapons programme as fraudulent and the thermonuclear deterrent as hollow.

Everyone who was supposed to or was paid to KNOW about a TN in "war planning" KNEW that there was no missile anywhere in India that carried a TN. So, what kind of planning did they do for all these years?

IF there was no TN capability it should have come out long back - for the simple reason, as per Santhanam, there is no TN on a missile.

RC perhaps fooled them for the first year or two. At some time when the missiles came out and they started placing 20 KT nukes in the tip, someone (I hope) would have brought up a TN?

Most significantly, Santhanam disclosed that none of the high yield thermonuclear weapon designs in the 100-kiloton to 300-kiloton range that Chidambaram had repeatedly assured the government and the military had been realised have, in fact, been weaponised.

Indian "government and the military" must have plenty of dumb people on the top. 11 years they got fooled and did not realise that a TN was there ............................... only in the form of words from RC.

Masaru · Post by **Masaru** » 24 Sep 2009 01:32

Manish_Sharma wrote: No Sanku not fair, but 20 warheads 1 each on Agni 2 will be over 20 Military targets + refineries, ports.
Then 60 warheads 3 each on Agni 3s go over 20 cities. I think from China's pov it should deter them. As it will cripple the lizard really really badly. So their leadership which is seeking to overtake US in 20 years wouldn't want that happening. This will set them back by at least 100 years.

Are they ready to take that over what AP or because India has surged ahead in making small cars?

Not to say with Prithvis and Brahmos taking out the railbridge to Tibet.

So you expect no ABM, no counter measures from the Chinese side, and assume all the devices will reach their intended targets? No consideration for CEPs of the missiles, flawed targeting data/intelligence, fizzle-warheads? What about potential degradation in a counter force first-strike as according to the NFU doctrine the above scenario means a first-strike has already occurred? And, now that all the crackers are expended, what happens to deterrence vis-a-vis Porkis, who probably have a bigger arsenal, not to mention more punitive strikes from Chinese.

Relevant portion from BK's article

The fundamental problem with triggering a salvo of missiles with small yield warheads in the place of thermonuclear missiles is that it is inherently illogical to make the effort of investing in and obtaining 5,000 km Agni intermediate range ballistic missiles (IRBMs) and, in the future, an 12,000 km intercontinental range ballistic missiles or even long range cruise missiles, and then arm these with puny warheads. It skews the cost-benefit calculus. The minimalists think otherwise given their simplistic take on deterrence, which is high risk-acceptant. Costs may be irrelevant once a nuclear war breaks out, but isn’t the purpose of a nuclear deterrent to prevent nuclear war credibly but also as economically as possible? Secondly, there will be that many more fission weapon-armed missiles to secure and keep safe on the ground. Thirdly, against well-defended value targets, such as Beijing, several missiles will need to be fired to penetrate missile defences and to overcome attrition in flight and inaccurate terminal guidance.

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 24 Sep 2009 01:33

Many members are claiming that anything greater than 25KT is not really needed since the pain of even a few 25KT weapons will be as unbearable as a few MT weapons.

Many highly accomplished people have a tendency to reinvent the wheel. Enamored by their own intellect, they refuse to follow and sometimes even refuse to make attempts to understand why certain actions were done in a particular way. I am referring to the MT weapons owned and operated by at least three (US, China, Russia) of the P5 and the capability to deploy these weapons maintained by the other two (Britain, France).

If, as the honorable members state, that anything greater than 25KT is not really needed, why did these powers make herculean efforts to develop these weapons? and why are they still maintained today?

--
The answer ofcourse is, that its silly to look at these weapons as purely war making devices, after all, who wins if a nuke is used?

These weapons create strategic space within which policies can then be implemented.

What strategic space has the limited Indian deterrent created for India?
(1) Can we deter China from a long duration, limited border war? - No
(2) Can we deter Pakistan from sub-liminal conflict? - No
(3) Have our weapons created space for us at the high table? - No
(4) Have our weapons given us the heft to maintain peace and influence events in our neighborhood? - No

In contrast, the Pakistani weapons have created space for them in which they can pursue a policy of destablization through unconventional warfare without fear of a military escalation! (regardless of what the blowback from such a policy is, its a policy that they have chosen to implement and the required conditions for following such a policy were created by their nuke).

Having said that, one cant simply commit new acts without having some goals in mind! So what can be achieved if India indeed possesses a city buster. (I am leaving out the exact KT or MT value..)
(1) Can we deter China from a long duration, limited border war? - Yes. Even if there is a low probability of escalation, the events that follow will be absolutely horrendous to the Chinese Communist party. Everything they have created in the past 60 years will be lain to waste. Indeed, they will be colonized by western powers and Japan all over again. [Note that such an outcome cant be guaranteed by a 25KT weapon.]

(2) Can we deter Pakistan from sub-liminal conflict? - Yes. Once we have the capability to inflict pain on the entire world, our problems become the worlds problems. We would have created strategic space, within which to pursue border wars and punitive strikes.

(3) Have our weapons created space for us at the high table? - Yes.

(4) Have our weapons given us the heft to maintain peace and influence events in our neighborhood? - Yes.

--

Before members go on tangents about how much suffering a 25KT weapons shall create, please ask and try to answer the question as to why the P5 acquired and maintained - and continue to do so in an interconnected world - City Busters*.

(*) say, 250KT-MT level weapons.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 24 Sep 2009 01:36

we can join the race to kill the asteroid with a 200KT thermo. Obama administration will still ask for CTBT. ready? may be, but our political junkies (MMS, advani, mrs. sphagetti et al) will have to be first thrown out of responsibilities for this to happen. we are politically weak.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 24 Sep 2009 01:38

why did these powers make herculean efforts to develop these weapons?

To keep abreast
Some like breast agumentation
Some like breast reduction

The important thing is to have breast to beat on.
Also why?

***
US denies visa to Atomic Energy Commission chief
The United States has denied a visa to the Atomic Energy Commission chairman R Chidambaram under its new policy, effected immediately after the Pokhran tests in May.

US officials, however, claim the visa was not denied as such, but that Chidambaram withdrew his request.

Chidambaram wanted to visit the US to attend an international conference on crystallography.

Sources said though the US encourages free movement of people, following the nuclear tests, it has begun to screen applications carefully on a case-to-case basis.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Sep 2009 01:39

The people who formulate the strategies (retired and serving bureaucrats/babus) are all tired after fighting the battles with uncle for so long since 1971. They want peace/settlement in their lifetime. They should have tested before 1968. They could have tested after 1980 takeover of Afghanistan to show their independence. They could have done it right after end of Cold War or mid-90s after PRC proliferation.

Finally they feel lets get the tests over(Brajesh Mishra) and sign an accomodation. They used the NDA govt to get this hurdle thru and BARC messed up the only chance they could get for own unexplained reasons. They (babucracy-retired and serving) are now in a pickle when the rest of the people (forces) are asking fight with what? So they (Babucracy) justify coming down from 150kt -> 60kt-80kt -->25kt. That is why I said "Deterrent ke liye kuch be chalega!" What is the point of keeping a guy ten years after he has retired except to ensure there is no one to find out the mess.

In the run up the ATV, a couple of years ago, there were reports of even 300kt being bandied about. So vessel and vehicle planning was done on that basis and its all now zilch.

And some people tried to say that armed services got that idea from BRF!

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 24 Sep 2009 01:42

Are we ready for war in Tibet yet?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Sep 2009 01:45

NRao wrote:
The Armed Services have been shaken up by Santhanam’s outing the weapons programme as fraudulent and the thermonuclear deterrent as hollow.
Everyone who was supposed to or was paid to KNOW about a TN in "war planning" KNEW that there was no missile anywhere in India that carried a TN. So, what kind of planning did they do for all these years?

IF there was no TN capability it should have come out long back - for the simple reason, as per Santhanam, there is no TN on a missile.

RC perhaps fooled them for the first year or two. At some time when the missiles came out and they started placing 20 KT nukes in the tip, someone (I hope) would have brought up a TN?

Most significantly, Santhanam disclosed that none of the high yield thermonuclear weapon designs in the 100-kiloton to 300-kiloton range that Chidambaram had repeatedly assured the government and the military had been realised have, in fact, been weaponised.

Indian "government and the military" must have plenty of dumb people on the top. 11 years they got fooled and did not realise that a TN was there ............................... only in the form of words from RC.

They well might have said the delivery vehicles and the platforms come and there is no doctrine either. So it was like "Come back tomorrow when you need them!" And they did with the launch of the Arihant. Before that there was the bogus de-mated arsenal which ensured the armed forces never see the real thing until they need it! And if they did they would give them the S-2 bomb for A/c delivery. Arihant is first time they need to see mated warheads. You cant demate on submarine!

And who created this feku strategy? Its the very babucrats who pretend to be scientists when convienent.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 24 Sep 2009 01:46

Sanku wrote:
Manish_Sharma wrote: To start Metro trains in Delhi it was BJP govt. under Khurana who brought the rule that whatever property comes in the way of Metro will be taken out. No appeal possible, no no courts nothing. Take whatever money is given and move.

And here we had the biggest experiment in the History of India, compromised 'cause of 600 houses in desert of rajasthan. Just 600 houses in DDA Delhi would have made a fortune for the villagers.

.

Isnt it telling Manish! Isnt it telling?

It is very very telling, but even while writing it the doubt the doubt that came to mind is again about the Khan satellites and small time window

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Sep 2009 01:46

John Snow wrote:Are we ready for war in Tibet yet?

If PRC starts one Indian Armed Forces wont be found wanting. I dont know about the govt. They might still pull a JLN and blame the forces.

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 24 Sep 2009 01:48

John Snow wrote:
why did these powers make herculean efforts to develop these weapons?
To keep abreast
Some like breast agumentation
Some like breast reduction

The important thing is to have breast to beat on.
Also why?

***

I would suggest that this was done on specific requirements by the players, in order to create room to pursue their policy objectives.

Much as we like to think that they were stupid for doing this, and we desis with our 'superior intellect' will not make these 'mistakes', the pursuit of MT level nukes by the P5 was neither a mistake nor posturing.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 Sep 2009 01:50

Many members are claiming that anything greater than 25KT is not really needed since the pain of even a few 25KT weapons will be as unbearable as a few MT weapons.

Many highly accomplished people have a tendency to reinvent the wheel. Enamored by their own intellect, they refuse to follow and sometimes even refuse to make attempts to understand why certain actions were done in a particular way. I am referring to the MT weapons owned and operated by at least three (US, China, Russia) of the P5 and the capability to deploy these weapons maintained by the other two (Britain, France).

If, as the honorable members state, that anything greater than 25KT is not really needed, why did these powers make herculean efforts to develop these weapons? and why are they still maintained today?

At the same time, there are events where a countries pro-nuke establishments wanted to use them with the aim of wiping out the enemy. On queries from the political leadership if they can be guaranteed that NO enemy missiles will come back in retaliation, the pro-nuke folks could not provide that security with certainty.

That is deterrence - one, single nuke. For most politicians one nuke is unacceptable. Granted that in the case of US-RU that one nuke could be 2MT or whatever.

The point being at what is deterrence to China is what India has to compute and be prepared with that.

And, to your point "why are they still maintained today", there are a variety of reasons, but do note that Obama is for total nuclear disarmament - granted even he figures it may not happen in his life. There are political leaders that are willing to give up the nukes and there are people of nations that want to give up large armed forces - forget nukes.

Do not think that the last word has been spoken/written on this topic even in the West.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 24 Sep 2009 01:50

With Arihant the concept of recessed deterrence is out of the hutch into the sea.

Or Arihant will not be destroyer of enemies but just a light house mobilica replica!

****
Dont forget Mere Apne dialogue of Vinod Khanna vs Shatru

"Mere paass be pistole hai"

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Sep 2009 01:53

Manish_Sharma wrote:
Sanku wrote:---
To start Metro trains in Delhi it was BJP govt. under Khurana who brought the rule that whatever property comes in the way of Metro will be taken out. No appeal possible, no no courts nothing. Take whatever money is given and move.

And here we had the biggest experiment in the History of India, compromised 'cause of 600 houses in desert of rajasthan. Just 600 houses in DDA Delhi would have made a fortune for the villagers.

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

Isnt it telling Manish! Isnt it telling?

It is very very telling, but even while writing it the doubt the doubt that came to mind is again about the Khan satellites and small time window

Manish, the village was evacuvated in early morning of May 11 1998. The tests were in the afternoon (~3:45 pm) after the winds died down. So there was no issue of people being hurt. Please do look up the news of evacuvation at the village. After the tests the jholawalla brigade of the DDM went to the village to show damage and made a lot of noise.

Again why did K.Santy expect a 72m crater at that depth of 230m for S-I. Or was he hallucinating from the desert heat? Or didnt the BARc team tell him what they were testing as it was sacred poop or classified waste?

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 24 Sep 2009 01:53

Somehow I have a hard time buying the claims of disbelief allegedly from military and government sources now, when Santhanam pointed out that the TN does not really exist. Surely, anyone with moderate training in science and weaponry would know that any successful test has to be repeatedly observed before before it can be assumed to perform reliably. There is no shortage of such hard headed people - for proof just consider the tortuous qualification trials the Army conducts on any weapon prior to induction. So it is unlikely that these folks would have assumed that the TN exists because of the one test, successful or not, in 1998.

I believe the intent in 1998 was not to create a deployable TN, but rather to a) force the Americans to negotiate and b) keep the option open to field a TN after further testing at a future date. If these were the goals, then the test series was certainly successful.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 24 Sep 2009 01:56

I am getting a little tired of "experts" cherry picking data to support claims.

Karnad in that e-mail to Arun claims to have based his whole assessment on what he says RC promised and even when he questioned the yield and the scalability yet he says more tests are needed to scale a tested fission device upwards ?

Ramana, if you go by who said what:
Santhanam said 25kT then 15kT then back up again
KS said 60-80kT but then cited 25KT
Karnad cites 20KT.

This attempt to squeeze blood from a stone must stop.

Because somebody does not mention a specific yield, it doesn't mean it does not exist. What of 10kT, 12, 26 ? An unending spiral of numerical nonsense will occur.

There was a comment also that a 43KT fusion device weighed only 50kg. No deployed multi-kiloton device ever weighed that little - please see:

http://www.radiochemistry.org/history/n ... _knothole/
"Test: Simon
Time: 12:30 25 April 1953 (GMT)
04:30 25 April 1953 (local)
Location: Nevada Test Site (NTS), Area 1
Test Height and Type: 300 Foot Tower
Yield: 43 kt

This was a test geared toward developing the TX-17/24 thermonuclear weapon design. The TX-17 and TX-24 were the physically largest and heaviest weapons, as well as one of the highest yield weapons, ever deployed by the United States. The test device, code named Simultaneity, was much smaller and lighter however. It had a diameter of 35.4 inches and a length of 224 inches, with a total weight of 11,000 lb (5000 kg). It used a redesigned RACER primary with 2 kg of enriched uranium added to the design tested in Nancy. This addition boosted its yield by almost a factor of two. The predicted yield was 35-40 kt."

I say again 700-1000kg is excessive for a 20KT warhead and frankly sounds exactly like the POK-1 device nothing more.

That is not what was tested in 1998. That device was much lighter and I repeat the complete non-rebuttal of Perkovich's comments of the design being reduced to 170-200kg.

Everybody in this debate has an agenda and everyone is cherry-picking data to suit their own viewpoint.

To date we have no clearer idea of the Indian nuclear arsenal save and except there may be no deployed TN weapons - anonymous sources won't cut it now.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 Sep 2009 02:00

They well might have said the delivery vehicles and the platforms come and there is no doctrine either. So it was like "Come back tomorrow when you need them!" And they did with the launch of the Arihant. Before that there was the bogus de-mated arsenal which ensured the armed forces never see the real thing until they need it! And if they did they would give them the S-2 bomb for A/c delivery. Arihant is first time they need to see mated warheads. You cant demate on submarine!

And who created this feku strategy? Its the very babucrats who pretend to be scientists when convienent.

Very well. Two things though.

Then the statement RC was responsible for all this does not hold. It has to include a ton of other people.

De-mated nukes - are they not under the Armed forces?

____________________

The report authored by Santhanam in 1998 should have passed through the heads of the Armed Forces? He claims they were there in that voice meeting. Face value is OK - I can certainly understand that, but over such a long period of time and so many people? Incredulous.

Something does not jive here.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 24 Sep 2009 02:02

Karnad cites Air Marshal Bhavani as indicating a change from the de-mated posture to a "good position".

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Sep 2009 02:05

vera_k wrote:Somehow I have a hard time buying the claims of disbelief allegedly from military and government sources now, when Santhanam pointed out that the TN does not really exist. Surely, anyone with moderate training in science and weaponry would know that any successful test has to be repeatedly observed before before it can be assumed to perform reliably. So how come, these folks assumed that the TN exists because of the one test, successful or not, in 1998?

I believe the intent in 1998 was not to create a deployable TN, but rather to a) force the Americans to negotiate and b) keep the option open to field a TN after further testing at a future date. If these were the goals, then the test series was certainly successful.

In that case why they advised the morotarium? Recall Brajesh Mishra and his statements that he was told the test series was adequate by APJK? The thing is if the GOI decides to order tests do they have anythig to test or will it be a no show?

-------------------------
Sanjay, It would be helpful if you cite who made what comments. Those lower numbers are not sated for they dont exist. The KS and KS 25kt is for the underperforming S-I . The Karnad 20kt is for the S-2. Note no one says 15 kt anymore. There is a case of keeping the testing option open. That is what is being articulated.

KS and a whole group of people dont want it.

Others(KSanty et al) want to keep it open.

This is the agenda. Are there more ?
-------------
NRao off course its a whole gaggle of babucrats. They never do anything alone. There has to be a precedent and a protocol. So faking started long ago.

The 1998 report from K Santy would be seen by APJK who was DRDO Secy then. And recall DRDO is a civlian organization.
--------------
Sanjay who is this new player now?

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 24 Sep 2009 02:05

We could have done it like Chinese Pakis and Khans involving the Forces in every effort of the atomic development, the only involvement of Navy ended in a fiasco.

like this

Gen Leslie Groves and Robert Oppenheimer

Imagine Gen Paddy's designated deputies with RC, It would have been a wonderful world.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 24 Sep 2009 02:11

ramana wrote:In that case why they advised the morotarium? Recall Brajesh Mishra and his statements that he was told the test series was adequate by APJK?

The moratorium was the halfway house to the accession to the CTBT that the Americans were asking. They would have offered it up if they thought the Americans were willing to negotiate. Brajesh Mishra's support for the moratorium would not have depended on what APJK said in this case. Rather, saying the test series is adequate was needed in order to placate the Indian people who have not been fully informed.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Sep 2009 02:14

vera_k wrote:
ramana wrote:In that case why they advised the morotarium? Recall Brajesh Mishra and his statements that he was told the test series was adequate by APJK?
The moratorium was the halfway house to the accession to the CTBT that the Americans were asking. They would have offered it up if they thought the Americans were willing to negotiate. Brajesh Mishra's support for the moratorium would not have depended on what APJK said in this case. Rather, saying the test series is adequate was needed in order to placate the Indian people who have not been fully informed.

So its always mushroom treatment* for Indian people by Indians and outsiders?

* Keep them in dark and feed them manure.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 24 Sep 2009 02:16

Ramana, what do you mean by who is "this new player" now ?

I refer to Santhanam by name - he cites 25KT saying such a weapon was deployed on multiple platforms and then dropped it to 15kT saying that is not enough.

Then Santhanam comes up with this new S2 yield of 20-25kT.

What Santhanam also said is that no Indian weapons between the yields of 150 and 350KT exist.

Let's go further,
Subramanyam indicated 60-80kT would suffice. Then in a subsequent article speaks of deterrence being possible even with 25kt weapons.

Karnad on the other hand is inconsistent in his comments on India's TN weapons. I cited references from his latest work that called into question any conceivable viability of the TN's working and then goes on to claim all his assessments are based on what RC promised which are scaled up S-1 designs ?

There are multiple agendas at work beyond the "test"/ "don't test" that have nothing to do with anything so noble but there is the DAE/BARC-DRDO divide which was festering for years and has now come into the open - a push perhaps for DRDO to take over warhead design ? Then there are the personalities.