Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 21 Aug 2008 12:43

Austin wrote:Ramana I think these extended range guided rocket ( one may call it missile as well depending how one would like to define it as these days every thing has intelligence/guidance in it from anti-aircraft bullet to missile ) which has intelligent or guided warhead like anti-tank with IIR/MMW seeker or sub-ammunition or even a small UAV.

The difference by definition between Rocket and missile is that Rocket is a passive unguided "Astra", where as one that has any active control during flight the "Astra" is by definition a missile. So a rocket's trajectory is cast in stone once it lease the barrel, where as a missile's trajectory is not determined at the moment of launch, the missiles brain my change it in flight.

Just my 2 naya paisa.

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 21 Aug 2008 13:16

All semantics onlee.

The ruskies call everything with a rocket motor as a rocket onlee (at least per babelfish). Any object that is propelled at something with the intention of damage can be called a missile.

Would anyone go about designing something different solely because the title of the spec calls a "missile" v/s a "rocket"? Isn't the spec of range, payload and accuracy that counts?

sombhat · Post by **sombhat** » 21 Aug 2008 14:21

Such differences have been blurred by the growth of technology. Just as there is hardly any difference between the latest PC and a 1 yr old server. High end rockets with guidance etc. are almoast the same as low end missiles (Scud type).
Gramatically, even a piece of plastic thrown at cricketers by the Eden crowd qualifies as a missile.

Drevin · Post by **Drevin** » 21 Aug 2008 14:31

A rocket self destructs harmlessly without destruction to life or property. Whereas a missile self destructs with harmful intent.

Another, a rocket can carry a human being, whereas a missile will never be used to ferry a human being

except offcourse in James Bond movies

Ok, a rocket can be partially reusable whereas a missile is meant for single-use unless the missile is a piece of plastic at eden gardens

derkonig · Post by **derkonig** » 21 Aug 2008 19:06

AoA,
bliss to also look up Raakit Mard & Mijjile Malish to know more...

Nitesh · Post by **Nitesh** » 22 Aug 2008 15:06

http://www.ddinews.gov.in/Homepage/Home ... s/rwrw.htm

India and Russia plan to launch the serial production of the jointly developed aerial version of BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles after the completion of field trials next year.

"We are planning to complete the tests of cruise missiles for Sukhoi Su-30MKI fighters and are planning to launch their simultaneous serial production at our facilities in India and Russia," CEO of Indo-Russian JV Sivathanu Pillai said.

Talking to reporters on the sidelines of Moscow International Arms Show in Moscow Pillai said the filed trials of the cruise missile will be completed next year, which could be fitted on a whole range of aerial weapon platforms.

BrahMos Aerospace, pursuing aggressive export strategy, has put up an impressive display of its naval and land versions of the cruise missile three times faster than the much-hyped US Tomahawk cruise missile and is nine times more destructive due to massive kinetic energy.

New Delhi-based BrahMos Aerospace JV between DRDO and Russian NPO Mashinostroyenia is already supplying naval and land versions of the BrahMos cruise missiles to the Indian Navy and Army.

India and Russia also currently working on the submarine launched land attack version of BrahMos capable of enemy targets in the coastal areas.

kvraghavaiah · Post by **kvraghavaiah** » 22 Aug 2008 16:02

A rocket is unguided.Rockets are used as alternative to bomb shells and bullets.
A launch vehicle is a guided space vehicle. Ofcourse, sometimes even launch vehicles are called rockets.
A missile is a guided destructive weapon.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 22 Aug 2008 21:56

Shoot to Kill

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 23 Aug 2008 18:51

China and India Make Smerch Rockets

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 23 Aug 2008 23:59

From the above

India has had little success with military equipment production, and has had problems producing Russian Su-30MKI fighter jets and T-90S tanks, English Hawk training jets and French Scorpene submarines.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 24 Aug 2008 00:04

looks like another hatchet job, coming on the heels of the announcement of the Pinaka ER.

narmad · Post by **narmad** » 24 Aug 2008 11:28

Now, missiles at ‘high-risk’ spots
New Delhi, August 23 Perceived threat at important installations leads Defence ministry to set up anti-aircraft missiles
Anticipating air threats in the Capital, security agencies have shortlisted seven important installations to deploy anti-aircraft missiles to raise the air defence.
According to a circular issued by a joint director of the Intelligence Bureau to the Ministry of Home Affairs on June 24 — Newsline has a copy — the strategic targets in which the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has recommended deployment of anti-aircraft weapons are: Safdarjung Airport, Shankar Vihar, Air Force Auditorium, Akash Officers Mess, Rashtrapati Bhawan, Vayu Bhawan, and Air Force Station-Race Course.

Which missiles are to be placed ?

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 24 Aug 2008 12:00

astra has nothing to do with nsg or congress. why draw political angles at each and every corner ?
anyway, I don't remember a single instance when a missile test in India has taken place on a pre declared date. could be any # of reasons, even weather conditions. FWIW, it has been stormy in the BoB area recently.

Err because of Garma-garmi-e-tajposhi-e-Musharaff I forgot to monitor weather conditions.............so no test yet?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 24 Aug 2008 12:17

nope. nsg negotiations haven't stopped them from testing the nag and the pinaka tho'.

srai · Post by **srai** » 24 Aug 2008 14:53

narmad wrote:Now, missiles at ‘high-risk’ spots
New Delhi, August 23 Perceived threat at important installations leads Defence ministry to set up anti-aircraft missiles
Anticipating air threats in the Capital, security agencies have shortlisted seven important installations to deploy anti-aircraft missiles to raise the air defence.
According to a circular issued by a joint director of the Intelligence Bureau to the Ministry of Home Affairs on June 24 — Newsline has a copy — the strategic targets in which the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has recommended deployment of anti-aircraft weapons are: Safdarjung Airport, Shankar Vihar, Air Force Auditorium, Akash Officers Mess, Rashtrapati Bhawan, Vayu Bhawan, and Air Force Station-Race Course.

Which missiles are to be placed ?

I think it will start with Igla MANPADs systems first (as I don't see any other "spare" SAM inventory with the IAF right now for point defense). Then maybe one squadron (2 systems) of the 18 Spyder SAM system on order could be utilized when they arrive.

Jagan · Post by **Jagan** » 24 Aug 2008 23:27

Dont know if posted earlier

from Sainik Samachar

Lady scientists of the Agni Program

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 25 Aug 2008 01:00

Wow. Impressive picture of the creators and their creation.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 25 Aug 2008 01:17

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 26 Aug 2008 07:12

India poised to make a big stride

India is poised to make big stride in missile technology in the coming years, said Project Director, Agni -II of the Defence Research and Development Organisation, Ms Tessy Thomas.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 26 Aug 2008 08:27

Gerard wrote:[url=http://www.newindpress.com/NewsItems.as ... la&Topic=0]
She is the first women director and the first malayali to be the part the Agni missile project.

First Malayali .........

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Aug 2008 23:54

The Name Remains The Same

(Login required)

Posted by Douglas Barrie at 8/28/2008 12:16 PM CDT

Indian defense executives took the opportunity of a recent weapons exhibition in Moscow to once again raise the issue of a “successor” to the Indo-Russian Brahmos rocket-ramjet powered cruise missile.

However, given the performance aspirations for the weapon - dubbed Brahmos-2 – the name would likely be the only commonality with the present Brahmos.

The Brahmos is a variant of the NPO Mashinostroenia 3M-55 Onyx (SS-NX-26) anti-ship missile. It has a cruise speed on the order of Mach 2.6. Sivathanu Pillai, the CEO at the Brahmos company, has repeatedly suggested the follow on – Brahmos-2 – will be a hypersonic weapon. Brahmos is a partnership between NPO Mashinostroenia and India’s Defense Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).

The 3M-55 is a capable weapon but neither the propulsion system nor the airframe design or materials are remotely suitable for a hypersonic weapon. Scramjet or hybrid ramjet propulsion would be required for an air-breathing weapon, with advanced materials technology, possibly including active cooling, needed to deal with the temperatures generated at such speeds.

Exactly how Brahmos-2 relates to the DRDO’s Hypersonic Technology Demonstrator Vehicle (HSTDV) program has also yet to become clear.

Pillai told the Russian news agency Interfax that he also wanted the Brahmos-2 to be “invisible”.

While this could present an issue in the infra-red spectrum, given airframe heating, NPO Mashinostroenia already has a track record in working on passive and active low observable technology in the radio frequency spectrum for high altitude cruise weapons.

Its 3M-25 Meteorit strategic cruise missile, which was never fielded, was associated with a plasma-generation system believed to be intended to reduce the radar cross-section of the missile by shielding the air intake and possibly the nose section.

Russia has a long-standing interest in hypersonic cruise missile technology, while India is also exploring technologies applicable to this area through the likes of the HSTDV. Brahmos-2, should it ever progress, could prove to be a very interesting weapon.

Picture Credit D.Barrie/AW&ST

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 29 Aug 2008 17:24

India’s Astra missile flight test in September

India will conduct the guided flight test of air-to-air missile Astra next month at Chandipur-on-sea in Orissa, a top defence official said Friday.

‘We have kept the launch window open for the flight test with the guidance systems of Astra from Sep 10-15. We will conduct the test on any one of the days when the weather is favourable,’ defence scientist V.K. Saraswat told IANS here.

State-run Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) has already completed the control flights of Astra, designed for an 80-km range in head-on mode and 20 km-range in tail-chase mode.

The beyond visual range missile has been integrated with the carrier aircraft Sukhoi-30 MKI. Integration with other fighter jets (Mirage 2000 and MiG 29) will be taken up after the guided test to verify its accuracy in destroying manoeuvring targets.

‘The results of various tests conducted in the development stages have been positive. The feedback has enabled us to prepare for the guided test and subsequent induction into the Indian Air Force (IAF),’ Saraswat said at a defence conference on ‘Networking and network-centric operations’, organised by the Computer Society of India.

www.sindhtoday.net/south-asia/16436.htm

asbchakri · Post by **asbchakri** » 29 Aug 2008 17:35

sanjaychoudhry wrote:
India’s Astra missile flight test in September

India will conduct the guided flight test of air-to-air missile Astra next month at Chandipur-on-sea in Orissa, a top defence official said Friday.

‘We have kept the launch window open for the flight test with the guidance systems of Astra from Sep 10-15. We will conduct the test on any one of the days when the weather is favourable,’ defence scientist V.K. Saraswat told IANS here.

State-run Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) has already completed the control flights of Astra, designed for an 80-km range in head-on mode and 20 km-range in tail-chase mode.

The beyond visual range missile has been integrated with the carrier aircraft Sukhoi-30 MKI. Integration with other fighter jets (Mirage 2000 and MiG 29) will be taken up after the guided test to verify its accuracy in destroying manoeuvring targets.

‘The results of various tests conducted in the development stages have been positive. The feedback has enabled us to prepare for the guided test and subsequent induction into the Indian Air Force (IAF),’ Saraswat said at a defence conference on ‘Networking and network-centric operations’, organised by the Computer Society of India.
http://www.sindhtoday.net/south-asia/16436.htm

That does mean the missile will be fired off a Su 30 MKI in flight or is it another ground test

Nitesh · Post by **Nitesh** » 29 Aug 2008 18:31

when didi astra became part of IGDMP?

The Hyderabad-based Defence Research & Development Laboratory (DRDL) took nearly five years to develop the 150-kg tactical missile at an estimated cost of Rs.10 billion under the integrated guided missile development programme of the DRDO.

Possessing such a futuristic weapon will propel India into an elite club of countries such as the US, Russia, France and Israel.

The forgotten to add chinkis

sunilUpa · Post by **sunilUpa** » 29 Aug 2008 21:37

India to conduct third interceptor missile trial in November

Bangalore, Aug 29 (IANS) India is preparing to conduct the third trial of its advanced interceptor missile in November from the Chandipur-on-sea interim test range in coastal Orissa, a top defence official said Friday.“Preparations are on to conduct the interceptor missile test for building an indigenous defence shield in early November. It is aimed at intercepting and destroying ballistic missiles from a long range,” defence scientist V.K. Saraswat told IANS here.

“We have already conducted a test in endo-atmosphere at a distance of 48 km. We are aiming at much higher altitude in exo-atmosphere, which is 50-75 km above the earth,” said Saraswat, chief controller of research & development of the missile programme at the Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO).

I am bit confused, wasn't the first test (PAD) described as exo-atmosphereic test previously?

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 31 Aug 2008 00:21

Cross posting from nuke thread:

Oh BTW this refurbished W76 on US Trident will be riding on a new blunt noses ablative heatshield that resembles Agni-II RV. The US Fleet Ballistic Missile have all these years relied on heat sink based RV design with sharp tip (using graphite tip).

These were some nuclear experts like "David Allbright" that pronounced Indian Agni's blunt shape to argue for its expected inaccuracy and primitiveness. The fools are eating crow manure now I guess. The following picture is from BR website: "US Trident ICBMs now switching to blunt nose separating shockwave Mk4A RV design. Uncanny similarity with Indian Agni-RV"
The Eastern RV gyan will now be repackaged as originally coming from leading Yamri Khan musharraf.

The slim Mk4A reentry body for the W76-1 warhead. The administration plans to produce 2,000 between 2007 and 2021.

The news.
Y-12 completes first unit for Trident warhead after long delay

By Frank Munger (Contact)
August 13, 2008

OAK RIDGE - Federal officials today confirmed that workers at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant had completed the first set of refurbished parts for the W76 warhead.

The milestone is an indication that the life-extension project is back on track after unspecified technical problems delayed Y-12's work on the warheads for more than a year. The Oak Ridge plant specializes in so-called secondaries - the second stage of thermonuclear warheads.

W76 warheads are deployed on Trident submarine missiles, and they are considered an essential part of the U.S. nuclear defense strategy in the post-Cold War era.

"My understanding is the first production unit (of the W76) has been diamond-stamped here within the past couple of week," Bill Ostendorff, the principal deputy administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, said today during a visit to Y-12.

Ostendorff participated in ceremonies related to modernization efforts at the Oak Ridge plant, which was constructed during the World War II Manhattan Project.

The federal executive took a seat in a backhoe and knocked a hole in the roof of Building 9733-3, one of the wartime facilities that's being demolished at Y-12 to reduce maintenance costs and make way for newer facilities to be constructed.

A series of buildings that once constituted the plant's "Engineering Row" were deemed surplus last year after the opening of the new Jack Case Center, a 412,000-square-foot office structure that now houses much of the plant's engineering staff and administrators.

Over the past six years, more than 280 buildings - covering about 1.2 million square feet of floor space - have been demolished at Y-12. The activity is similar to what's taking place at other parts of the U.S. nuclear weapons complex. The Oak Ridge plant was hailed today as a leader in "transforming" the complex to a smaller, more efficient model for the 21st century.

The W76 life-extension program is expected to take years to complete. Workers are taking apart old warheads that were manufactured many years ago and refurbishing parts to make sure the weapons work as intended if they're ever used.

There have been numerous news reports and much speculation during the past year about what delayed work on the W76, with some reports focusing on a mysterious material code-named "fogbank."

Ted Sherry, the federal manager at Y-12, confirmed the production milestone but would not discuss details of the W76 work.

"We had a technical issue that required a lot of support from other sites, as well as drawing on a lot of expertise here at Y-12," Sherry said. "It involved reconstitution of an old process. It's quite challenging to reconstitute something you haven't done in awhile."

Ostendorff added, "We are pleased that we've been able to resolve these issues. But I think one should not underestimate the challenge of stopping a production process and then many years later trying to resume it. That's been tough."

Baljeet · Post by **Baljeet** » 31 Aug 2008 22:27

Arun Boss
I have always enjoyed the gyan from you. This find, made my day. Would you call it plaigrism? We are the ones who perfected this technique, after 10-15 years emperors' experts are eating their words. Must be easy for them since they are expert on eating their words.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 31 Aug 2008 23:02

Arun Saar,

This calls for a BR or wikipedia article to document it for eternity

.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 31 Aug 2008 23:09

Baljeet-ji, I was onleee rubbing salt to nose of gora badshah. But our Aero-expert narayayan didn't seem to like the "Atishoukti Alankaar" of my post on the nuke thread. And my mention of experts like "David Half-bright" kind of psy-op spinners/jadoogar. I guess 200kt scalable TN fizzle salt is still hurting many egoes.

Since it is all about missile I am cross posting 2 posts from nuke thread.

narayanan wrote:

Excuse me, but the computational scheme called Moretti Time-Marching Finite Difference Solution to the Blunt Body Hypersonic problem, was developed in the 1960s/70s precisely for the purpose of ICBM re-entry vehicles. That was to put on a routine basis, what had until then been done by wind tunnel or field flight experimentation.

What is shown here is a very simple cone with a hemispherical nose. This is by far the most common shape for the noses of all hypersonic vehicles. Exactly where, may I ask, have you seen sharp-nosed hypersonic re-entry vehicles?

I am all for giving credit to desi innovations wherever deserved, but what you have posted above is, shall we say, a bit far-fetched and credibilitiologically in the nonlinear yield stress regime?

Of course, I am sure this is what Karna fired at Arjuna's chariot in the Mahabharatha war, 1,750,000,000 years ago. A slight error in the drag prediction resulted in it hitting only Arjuna's crown.

As for David Albright's authority to comment on hypersonics or anything else technical, I think someone else has already commented on those very clearly. (Was it Scott Ritter?)

And its rebuttal.

Arun_S wrote:
narayanan wrote:

Excuse me, but the computational scheme called Moretti Time-Marching Finite Difference Solution to the Blunt Body Hypersonic problem, was developed in the 1960s/70s precisely for the purpose of ICBM re-entry vehicles. That was to put on a routine basis, what had until then been done by wind tunnel or field flight experimentation.
US did the research but never changed their RV from a hybrid of heat sink and ablative. This IMHO is the first time US is deploying separating shock ablative nose cone RV for fleet ballistic weapon (I.e.not using heat sink at all). Breathing modernism again.

No boasting of the bad and incompetent Indian "Scout" copycats in DRDO or the empty boast of Prafools of BARC, just that for a change Chacha is behind the curve, suffering from cost of undoing the concrete poured to build thousands of warheads standardized to proven but old technology. Not often one gets to rub the nose of Chacha.
What is shown here is a very simple cone with a hemispherical nose. This is by far the most common shape for the noses of all hypersonic vehicles. Exactly where, may I ask, have you seen sharp-nosed hypersonic re-entry vehicles?
Check for yourself the details and the tip diameter of W76 to see if it is sharp nosed or blunt separating shockwave type. Revisit other Fleet BM also and see what you find.

For more on aforesaid non linear yield stress regime pls refer to: "From Polaris to Trident: The Development of US Fleet Ballistic Missile technology" By SPINARDI, Cambridge University Press.

neerajb · Post by **neerajb** » 31 Aug 2008 23:23

US did the research but never changed their RV from a hybrid of heat sink and ablative. This IMHO is the first time US is deploying separating shock ablative nose cone RV for fleet ballistic weapon (I.e.not using heat sink at all). Breathing modernism again.

Arunji would you please elaborate on these two RV designs i.e. heat sink and ablative types. Kind of bouncer for us layman people.

Cheers....

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 01 Sep 2008 04:37

Boss its is a very busy day, & week for me. Can you pls first try some Googling and then ask more specific question?

disha · Post by **disha** » 01 Sep 2008 08:57

neerajbhandari wrote: Arunji would you please elaborate on these two RV designs i.e. heat sink and ablative types. Kind of bouncer for us layman people.

Cheers....

You might want to read up all on re-entry in this wikipedia article. It talks about heat sink and ablative types RV designs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_reentry

Sontu · Post by **Sontu** » 01 Sep 2008 17:42

>"US Trident ICBMs now switching to blunt nose separating shockwave Mk4A RV design.
>Uncanny similarity with Indian Agni-RV".

If this is so...then my humble question is "Why our DRDO's Agni 3 TD has a sharp nose cone design on it ?"

Regards,

kit · Post by **kit** » 01 Sep 2008 20:41

better for a sub launched SLBM ?

neerajb · Post by **neerajb** » 01 Sep 2008 21:15

Sontu wrote:>"US Trident ICBMs now switching to blunt nose separating shockwave Mk4A RV design.
>Uncanny similarity with Indian Agni-RV".

If this is so...then my humble question is "Why our DRDO's Agni 3 TD has a sharp nose cone design on it ?"

Regards,

Agni-III with single new warhead requires a bigger RV body that can adapt with the large diameter motor. Compared to Agni-II this RV is shorter, more voluminous and 3.6 meter long. The large base diameter makes it unviable for high speed reentry, thus this could be a payload adapter section that jettisons the real RV located in the front part. The high ‘β’(Ballistic coefficient[110]) RV in combination with an all carbon composite body enables higher re-entry speed even with a light weight payload. The sharp high ‘β’ RV-Mk.3 design employs distinctly smaller 17 cm diameter blunt nose about 1.7 meter long and half angle of 10°. The high ‘β’ RV in combination with an all carbon composite body enables higher re-entry speed even with a light weight payload[111].

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MISSILES/ ... 20AGNI-III

Cheers....

Baljeet · Post by **Baljeet** » 01 Sep 2008 22:55

Arun Boss
There are some Bharat Vansaj who will always think that unless our products and design are not validated by western tech experts must be crappy. I am still wondering where is James Rubin now, who stood in front of all media and claimed, "We are not going to question the analysis of experts who say, Indian Nuclear tests have fizzled out, these tests were more of bravado than technological success". These half brights and Rotter's have their place to keep keep us in good humor.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 02 Sep 2008 14:19

Baljeet wrote:Arun Boss
There are some Bharat Vansaj who will always think that unless our products and design are not validated by western tech experts must be crappy. I am still wondering where is James Rubin now, who stood in front of all media and claimed, "We are not going to question the analysis of experts who say, Indian Nuclear tests have fizzled out, these tests were more of bravado than technological success". These half brights and Rotter's have their place to keep keep us in good humor.

Baljeet-Ji,
Unfortunately almost all Indians (including yours faithfully) took what was told by GOI and DAE scientists as the Brahma Satya (you see we onleee brought up in socialist NCERT schools). Till about an year ago more data points and more serious study of the subject matter has completely turned around my position, and I am alarmed at India seriously risking its security with the empty DAE boast/bravado of Thermonuclear test Shakti-1. Only 17-20 kt Indian weapon is credible, there is no high yield (read >50kt) light weight weapon that carried any credibility in the eyes of the powers who need to be deterred. Playing nuclear poker with shitty cards in hand is suicidal because the sucker's bluff will be called. And the countries that matter know what is in Indian hand.

All that ABV statement that we now have big bum was empty bravado (to cover DAE failure of Shakti-1 big bum). The ABV should have not withdrawn permission to test big bum in 2002. IMHO history will judge him harshly for that. Unsettling but true. Thus my persistent call to test ASAP and in no way give up limit the right to test at US-India Civil Nuclear deal.

Bottom line India has small useful bums.

The Half-brites are NPA ayothullaha whose religious creed is that dark skinned India does not have Divine right to own nuclear weapons. Useful idiots in hands of supremacist puppeteers.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 03 Sep 2008 05:47

Pls note that my participate in the BRF discussion is in personal capacity and all views there in are my personal views. This is in line with the terms of use of BRF for all poster. The only time I am not acting in personal capacity is when I donn the "Administrator" hat to deal with forum administration issue. And I make it a point to explicitly state that by first donning the Admin hat to ensure there is no ambiguity to the reader when I switch role from BRF participant to BRF Admin.

The above posts of mine like almost all posts of mine are my personal view, that for what it may worth be informed or uninformed viewpoint.

In nutshell my position is:

A large yield nuclear weapon has not been demonstrated by India. For the Indian deterrent capability to be convincing in perpetuity this needs to be done. For that further tests are needed. Alternatively or in-addition a credible institution with LIF (Laser Ignition Facility) be built to produce results that explicitly demonstrate mastery of high-yield and low mass weapon, and its effectiveness be guaranteed by sustained use of LIF to ensure the knowledge and the stockpile remains effective and true of the projected capability. Sustained LIF and supporting institutions is required for as long a duration as credible deterrence is needed for next few decades.

LIF in the hand of Physicists and mathematicians enables testing of material properties for all aspects of fission and fusion weapons/material as these weapons are built or deteriorate when kept in stockpile for many years, by use of numerical model of fission/fusion weapon.

ranganathan · Post by **ranganathan** » 03 Sep 2008 06:26

What about the boosted fission devices? Do they work or were they also duds?

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 03 Sep 2008 09:08

What is your peronal estimate of yields of PoK-2? There seems to be veiw on Board, perhaps misunderstood by me:-

pok-2-S1-Thermo Nuclear-25kt

pok-2-S2-Fission Bomb-25kt