Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

[shiv]

If you asked me whose word I would trust over the validity of a nuclear test, I would choose Sethna's word over Kalam's any day. .

Yes but I would still not believe Sethna's word on why Kalam was popular even before he became President. Kalam's popularity and stature do not have to be questioned to make Sethna's words more effective. But Sethna does not seem to believe that his own words and his own stature are effective enough - he has to talk about Kalam's stature.

Sethna's words - even without his stating reasons for Kalam's stature are good enough. Does he really need to speak that way? Does he feel that Kalams's words can be countered only by bringing down his stature? Because of a stupid argument Sethna's word can be questioned by anyone who wants to do that, including the people on whom he has cast doubt.

[Kanson]

...
Pls tell what Kalam infact said anything on this...AFAIK, he didnt made any claims. He didnt projected him as N scientiest or talk in loft terms about N physics. In the current episode, he only said, based on detailed project review we analysed all the results and agreed with the yield. I dont know what wrong in saying this.

The "agreed yield" which Kalam is referring to is the same yield Chidambaram quotes
Pokhran-II tests were successful: Kalam

“After the test, there was a detailed review, based on the two experimental results: seismic measurement close to the site and around, and radioactive measurement of the material after post shot drill in the test site,” Mr. Kalam told PTI here.

“From these data, it has been established by the project team that the design yield of the thermo-nuclear test has been obtained,” said Mr. Kalam, who as Director-General of the Defence Research and Development Organisation spearheaded the nuclear tests in 1998.

I understand the definition of a fizzle to be that the designed yield is not achieved. Kalam's recollection of what happened soon after Santhanam's statement could only serve to invalidate Santhanam's claim. There was no need for Kalam's 'all is well' statement when he cannot be sure.

Oh gentleman, where Kalam "said all is well". Pls check again, he says the Project team which confirmed the yield.

[PratikDas]

Oh gentleman, where Kalam "said all is well". Pls check again, he says the Project team which confirmed the yield.

So if all he is saying is basically nothing at all then why does he need to make a statement in the first place? He should have kept quiet. This is exactly what Sethna is questioning. Santhanam took a very difficult step by coming out in the open. Kalam saying that the team agreed upon what we now know that the team agreed upon means absolutely nothing and is simply noise to Santhanam's signal.

[Kanson]

Oh gentleman, where Kalam "said all is well". Pls check again, he says the Project team which confirmed the yield.

So if all he is saying is basically nothing at all then why does he need to make a statement in the first place? He should have kept quiet. This is exactly what Sethna is questioning. Santhanam took a very difficult step by coming out in the open. Kalam saying that the team agreed upon what we now know that the team agreed upon means absolutely nothing and is simply noise to Santhanam's signal.

I guess you know that Kalam at that time held a position known as Scientific Advisor. And he is part of the POK-II

[PratikDas]

...
So if all he is saying is basically nothing at all then why does he need to make a statement in the first place? He should have kept quiet. This is exactly what Sethna is questioning. Santhanam took a very difficult step by coming out in the open. Kalam saying that the team agreed upon what we now know that the team agreed upon means absolutely nothing and is simply noise to Santhanam's signal.

I guess you know that Kalam at that time held a position known as Scientific Advisor

So that makes him a nuclear weapon yield expert?

[Kanson]

Das, now you are going on tanget.

[PratikDas]

Das, now you are going on tanget.

No Sir. First Santhanam's credibility is questioned because he rejected Kalam's words of wisdom. Then Sethna's credibility is questioned when he question's Kalam's words of wisdom.

Surprisingly, I would take Santhanam's and Sethna's word over Kalam's regarding a nuclear weapon test and yield any day. They have every right to reject Kalam's view of the same.

[Kanson]

Kalam's talk:

Q: You've been called the "Missile Man of India" and the "People's President." Is there an incongruity between your desire to empower the world with peace and making India a nuclear power?

A: I am innocent to the whole affair! I did not call myself these names! (laughs). When a nation is surrounded by weaponized nations, she has to equip herself. That's what India has done. To make the nation peaceful and prosperous, we need minimum security. That's what we have done.

I dont know why people are making such mischievous motives to Kalam. AFAIK, he never indulged in such a kind of things.

[Kanson]

Kalam's words of wisdom

Let me tell you once again. He didnt projected himself as N scientist. He only played his part.

[PratikDas]

Kalam's words of wisdom

Let me tell you once again. He didnt projected himself as N scientist. He only played his part.

What part might that be?

[Satya_anveshi]

Here is something that people have to consider if they are weighing the testing options (in the near term - 0-2 years); I am sure there may be several aspects that may still need to be covered. Any western nation having half the internal strenghts relative to weaknesses and external threat perceptions vis-a-vis opportunities as ours, will go build very credible and robust capabiity without any hiccups or questions.

Strengths:
• legitimate need in the overall security situation
• Proven, decent albeit limited deterrence already in place; (TN deterrence fixed; pending test/deployment); [TN deterrence required to make it credible, efficient and effective and compliant with Indian delivery systems]
• Technological power house, ABM capability, Submarine and Carrier building capability – in the league of top 4-5 nations of the world
• Immunity to sanctions: Proven ability to withstand sanctions with little or no negative impact; $1T market economy / WTO member
• Recent nuke deal; Engaged with global nuclear partners
• Clean proliferation record; Consistent and moral stand on NPT, CTBT, Global Nuclear disarmament
• Founder of NAM; significant diplomatic muscle in UN and other regional /multinational forums
• Sovereign testing rights preserved – no legally binding multilateral promise made to surrender testing option; No one will be surprised by the test; Logical extension to gain legitimacy forever

Weaknesses:
• Leadership; Leadership; Leadership – Lack of clear understanding, agreement, and communication on national priorities limit projection of national will (inwardly and outwardly)
• Nation still learning - Not so great track-record of delivering undisputable / unambiguous results/messaging
• Limited resources (financial, natural(fissile material), scientific);
• No or limited-multi-track development, Need robust review and evaluation process (can be fixed easily)
• May jeopardize nuke deal benefits before fructifying;
• Loss of credibility due to recent contradictory statements claiming no-tests needed; bilateral agreements barring (or accepting no requirement to) tests signed;

Opportunities:
• Large defense deals pending bids/announcements
• Civilian Nuke Deals; Confirmed participation from RU, FR, and USA (all NSG members)
• Carrots of further divestitures in power, infra, financial, legal, educational etc sectors
• agreements with non-NSG partners
• Global financial meltdown exposed severe weakness of US economy; deteriorating US-China economic situation; threat to dollar dominance
• Pak internal turmoil; Confirmed jihadi interest in Pak nuke assets and its threat to US and western interest besides Indian; Pak’s strategic depth gone kaput
• Continued focus from Iran and Burma towards building nuclear capability; Security situation will likely change in the medium term (5-10 years)
• Japanese nuclear restraint under critical stress - N Korean nuke capability clear and present danger to Japan;

Threats:
• Recent media coverage on Chinese incursions; Growing Chinese influence in neighborhood including in BD, Nepal, Burma and SL
• Upcoming discussion and proposal to attempt to enforce $hitty-Bitty / FMCT
• Current US admin sympathetic to NPA point of view
• Increased nuke threat to India - US-China proliferation to and via Pak proxy; Continued Chinese proliferation hara-kiri resulting in Noko test
• Paki reciprocation – likely (and perhaps equally unlikely due to US presence in Pak) of announcing tit-for-tat nuke test yet again and deployment of PU based nuke capability by Pak

[shiv]

So if all he is saying is basically nothing at all then why does he need to make a statement in the first place? He should have kept quiet. This is exactly what Sethna is questioning. Santhanam took a very difficult step by coming out in the open..

And Sethna botched it by talking about Kalam's stature rather than adding data to support Santhanam. Perhaps Sethna too should have kept quiet along with Kalam? He only managed to add more noise.

If he added new data about the alleged failure I would be happy to be pointed to that data.

[PratikDas]

So if all he is saying is basically nothing at all then why does he need to make a statement in the first place? He should have kept quiet. This is exactly what Sethna is questioning. Santhanam took a very difficult step by coming out in the open..

And Sethna botched it by talking about Kalam's stature rather than adding data to support Santhanam. Perhaps Sethna too should have kept quiet along with Kalam? He only managed to add more noise.

If he added new data about the alleged failure I would be happy to be pointed to that data.

He may not have revealed kilotons and depths, but he did say this to the Press Trust of India (not the TV interview with IBN live):

"What Santhanam said was absolutely correct," he added.

So he did support Santhanam's claim that the bomb fizzled.

[milindc]

So if all he is saying is basically nothing at all then why does he need to make a statement in the first place? He should have kept quiet. This is exactly what Sethna is questioning. Santhanam took a very difficult step by coming out in the open..

And Sethna botched it by talking about Kalam's stature rather than adding data to support Santhanam. Perhaps Sethna too should have kept quiet along with Kalam? He only managed to add more noise.

If he added new data about the alleged failure I would be happy to be pointed to that data.

Shiv,
The problem with 'TN test was success' team was that they started using Kalam's stature to further their claim. Brajesh Mishra stated that then Scientific Adviser Kalam told him that the test was success and he went by the claim. This forced the 'TN test was fizzle' team to question Kalam's credentials on his confirmation of TN was success.
Indian Hydrogen bomb was not a dud: Brajesh Mishra

According to media reports, Mishra said that Dr APJ Abdul Kalam, who was the scientific advisor to the Defence Minister in 1998, himself confirmed the nuclear test's success and gave a green signal for the Indo-US nuclear deal.
Santhanam was then working directly under Kalam.

[shiv]

Shiv,
The problem with 'TN test was success' team was that they started using Kalam's stature to further their claim.

If this is true, it is a perfect example of torn shirt vs open fly argument being utilized successfully to make suckers out of the fizzle team.

"The test was a success"

"Why?"

"Because Kalam says so! There!"

"Oh but Kalam is a useless guy!"

Do you see what has happened? The debate about yield has been successfully sidelined to an argument about Kalam's credentials.

What the fizzle team should have done is provide more data which did not appear other than Santhanam making the following statements

*summary*

1) S1 was 60% of design yield
2) Si had a 25 meter crater and yielded 25+2 kilotons
3) Only fission bombs of 25 kt are weaponized
4) Weaponization is of 15 kt fusion bombs

This data has not been denied directly by anyone from the sizzle side so far.

Nobody else has provided any new data so far and the arguments have centered around the credibility and curriculum vitae of various players. All that is peripheral to the issue and should be removed using Occam's razor.

[Raj Malhotra]

I think that Sanathanam may be saying that only "pure fission" bombs of 15kt are weaponised while FBF of 25kt and Tn of 25-350kt are in limbo

[shiv]

I think that Sanathanam may be saying that only "pure fission" bombs of 15kt are weaponised while FBF of 25kt and Tn of 25-350kt are in limbo

Malhotra-ji this whole thread is about what someone thinks someone else said. Just check the links to see exactly what Santhanam is supposed to have said to the media.

[Raj Malhotra]

I think that Sanathanam may be saying that only "pure fission" bombs of 15kt are weaponised while FBF of 25kt and Tn of 25-350kt are in limbo

Malhotra-ji this whole thread is about what someone thinks someone else said. Just check the links to see exactly what Santhanam is supposed to have said to the media.

He said per HT:-

Santhanam triggered the debate in August by saying the hydrogen bomb test’s explosive yield had been only 25 kilotonnes, and not the official 40-50 kilotonnes.

But he believes that India’s nuclear deterrent is not credible with warheads limited to 15 kilotonnes — the yield of a successful fusion bomb test.

I believe either the term 15kt or fusion bomb is a typo!

[NRao]

“Not A Fizzle, But Certainly Not What India Claims”

The author of the paper that claims that Pakistan has ramped up its nuclear arsenal with sophisticated bomb designs, with delivery systems directed against India.
Ashish Kumar Sen

Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Washington-based Federation of American Scientists, is in the news for an academic paper he has co-authored with Robert Norris, claiming that Pakistan has ramped up its nuclear arsenal with sophisticated bomb designs, and with its delivery systems directed against India. He spoke to Ashish Kumar Sen on the Pokhran-II controversy. Excerpts:

Do you agree with former DRDO scientist K. Santhanam’s assertion that Pokhran-II was a fizzle rather than a big bang?

Perhaps not a fizzle, but certainly not the 45-kilotonnes claimed. But an assessment is complicated by the fact that the tests on May 11, 1998, were conducted simultaneously.

On what basis do you say that the thermonuclear device could not have yielded 45 kilotonnes?

Indian scientists initially said the May 11 tests were 43, 12, and 0.2 kt. Later reports said 45, 15, and 0.2 kt. The three claimed explosions were simultaneous, but the total claimed yield of 45-60 kt yield is not reflected in the seismic signal (mb) of 5.2, which indicated a total yield of only 5-20 kt.

The seismic readings of May 11 blasts were said to be different in the West and in India. Is this possible?

Seismic signals change when they travel great distances through the earth, but seismologists compensate for this when they interpret the data. So, this is not something that would effect the yield assessment.


Based on your findings about Pokhran-II, do you believe India has an adequate thermonuclear (hydrogen bomb) deterrent?

I doubt India has a “thermonuclear” deterrent, but one that consists of single-stage (probably boosted by tritium) warheads.

Thermonuclear device tests conducted by countries such as China produced yields in the megatonnes. Is it possible for India to miniaturise the thermonuclear device to get a 45-kilotonne yield?

Theoretically yes, but why go through the trouble of developing a thermonuclear device if you only want 45 kilotonnes? Thermonuclear devices are for hundreds of kilotonnes—even megatonnes, not tens of tonnes.

So then, is a test that yields 45 kt considered a success?

Not a very successful one, if it’s a thermonuclear device.

Is it possible to attain success with just one thermonuclear test?

If success means producing a large bang, then yes it is possible. But if it means the weapons engineers and the military having sufficient confidence in the design, then probably not.

Does India need to conduct further thermonuclear tests to remove doubts raised by scientists?

If India wants to develop (and have confidence in) two-stage thermonuclear warheads, then it probably needs more tests, but if the goal is to have a credible nuclear deterrent then it doesn’t need more tests. The credibility is not about the type of warhead but whether India has shown that it can bring a nuclear device to explosion and that it has the delivery vehicles to deliver the warhead to its target.

[enqyoob]

x-post...

India's N-programme needs to be transparent: Chinese scholar

I finally begin to see why ramanaji banned smileys on this thread. ROTFL would be completely inadequate for that heading. Don't we have any gems from the Pakistani Scholars (hellooooo BENIS mullahs?) giving similar advice?

[Kanson]

Narayanan,

You may be interested to note that, if the designers were even taking this precaution def. they could took account of the village close to 5 km from the test epi center.

Link

The actual timing of the tests were dependent on the local weather conditions. It was hot in the Thar Desert in early May, it reached 43 C on the day of the test. But the critical factor was the wind. Although the tests were underground, they were shallow tests and the sealing of the shaft could not be guaranteed to be leakproof (a number of shaft seal failures had occurred in the U.S. despite much deeper burials). Winds blowing toward inhabited areas, as occurred on the morning on 11 May were not acceptable. But by early afternoon the winds had died down and the scientists decided to go ahead with the tests. Prime Minister Vaypayee and Brajesh Mishra, his Principal Secretary, had waited at the official residence since at least 9 a.m. to hear the test results. Kalam called at 3 p.m. to tell the Prime Minister that the winds were dying down and the tests could be conducted during the next hour.

[vishwakarmaa]

The author of the paper that claims that Pakistan has ramped up its nuclear arsenal with sophisticated bomb designs, with delivery systems directed against India.

Its part of psy-war. USA and western elites on whole, has built up a scare-hysteria amongst Indian elites. USA is telling Indian elites - "Don't take Pakistan lightly. They will blow you."

And, it works too. You will find many elites puppeting the theory that USA saved India from nuclear annihilation during Kargil war.

USA knows how to buy up corrupt Indian elites and keep the rest powerless through such hysteria build up. This tactic is what forced Vajpayee to back-off during Kargil war. It wasn't Vajpayee's fault only, it is a collective failure of Indian elites.

India has the weakest of all elites amongst the all powers. In comparison, Brazil is most fearless looking at its size and the posture they hold against powerful biggies.

The current elites think they can feel 'powerful' by buying foreign weapon gadgets. They don't want to walk on difficult path of indigenisation. They are getting hyponitzed with 'supeorpower' dreams being sold by their western masters.

The way SM Krishna responded in a meek manner to racial attacks on Indian Students in Aurstralia, is part of this mental weakness, which is common amongst elites.

The way a British lady is given 'special status' in Indian courts and media, treating her like an 'alien' and giving her 'special rights', is a part of this mentality to rate an Indian like a Dog and view Gora as 'superior' to Indian race. Russia or China doesn't suffer from such syndromes of treating 'White' as superior.

Unless India gets rid of these slave minded elites, it will always remain a puppet of one or another power.

[shiv]

He said per HT:-

Santhanam triggered the debate in August by saying the hydrogen bomb test’s explosive yield had been only 25 kilotonnes, and not the official 40-50 kilotonnes.

But he believes that India’s nuclear deterrent is not credible with warheads limited to 15 kilotonnes — the yield of a successful fusion bomb test.

I believe either the term 15kt or fusion bomb is a typo!

Thanks for the exact quotes and for being open about what you feel is a typo. However - there are people who believe that lots of other things may be typos

Now there is another curious thing. If 15 kt is the yield of our "reliable" (tested twice) fission bomb - where did 25 kt come from?

Let me hazard a guess.

Perhaps 10 kt came from fusion? I can always say "typo" if I am proven wrong

[Sanjay]

Gentlemen, this is a summary of my thoughts on this issue. I sent it as an e-mail to B. Raman and am posting it in as many places as possible for some feedback:

(1) Dr. Santhanam has claimed that the TN test achieved a yield of between 23-27 kilotons.

(2) If that statement is taken to be accurate - and let us assume that it is - that yield is substantially higher than that claimed by analysts in the West who using data and assumptions that were at times questionable suggested a much lower yield.

(3) Dr Santhanam in his op-ed piece claimed the deployment of 25 kiloton warheads on a wide scale.

(4) Subsequently he has said that India's deterrent consists only of 15 kiloton weapons - some consistency would be appreciated in this regard.

(5) What nobody has explained is why India has built missiles - with Santhanam himself in DRDO - with payloads of between 700 and 1500kg ?

(6) The other issue that has not been tackled is that of the primary stage of the TN device which has not been disputed as being a boosted-fission device and which, if Santhanam's figures are correct would have had to have a yield and produced a yield of between 15 and 17 kilotons.

(7) Taking Dr. Santhanam's words as being accurate some conclusions can immediately be drawn:
(a) India's weapons teams were not convinced of the TN test and did not weaponize any thermonuclear weapons
(b) India's deployed nuclear weapons weigh between 700kg and 1500kg - based on the Agni payloads
(c) Both fission and boosted-fission types that were tested worked.

(8) Admiral Suresh Mehta's words were very guarded:

"As far as we are concerned, scientists have given us a certain capability which is enough to provide requisite deterrence...the deterrent is tried and tested"

(9) No 15 kiloton or 25 kiloton fission or boosted fission device weighs 700-1500kg. At most the figures for those types will range between 170kg and 300kg with Indian design technology.

(10) Nobody - either critics or supporters - have yet assessed the possibility of the scalability of either the fission or boosted-fission weapons/devices tested. This aspect of Indian weapons research in the last decade is what needs to be examined if one is to assess the Indian nuclear deterrent.

(11) The French MR31 120kiloton warhead used on their SSBS-S2 IRBM was a pure fission warhead weighed 700kg using about 25kg of weapons-grade plutonium (which is a considerable amount). The successor warhead, the MR41 was a boosted-fission warhead for the MSBS M1 and M2 SLBMs and had a yield of 500 kilotons and weighed 700kg.

To what yield are India's fission and/or boosted-fission designs scalable ?
Do the large payloads of the Agni series lead to the inexorable conclusion that large fission or boosted-fission weapons are the ones deployed ?

Without an analysis of this question, everybody who is attempting to tell the world they know what India's deterrent consists of is merely whistling in the wind - adding nothing but noise to a debate that has seen Dr. Santhanam being described as a nuclear scientist (when he is not) and Dr. Kalam being told to shut up because he is not a nuclear scientist and which has seen the POK-1 1974 test team turn on the 1998 team without remembering that the yield of their test in 1974 was also hotly disputed.

There are no heroes in this drama. What India needs to do is ignore the rhetoric and analyse whether its fission and boosted-fission capability can reliably deliver warheads in the 50-100 kiloton class to the armed forces with confidence.

[Rahul M]

OT:

sanjay saar, I've a question for you in the armoured vehicles thread.

[samuel]

In other words, now that it is clear that the TN doesn't work, the right thing to do is to forget about it, question the credibility of the messenger, and focus on things that everyone agrees does. True, there are no heroes here.

S

[svinayak]

Here is something that people have to consider if they are weighing the testing options (in the near term - 0-2 years); I am sure there may be several aspects that may still need to be covered. Any western nation having half the internal strenghts relative to weaknesses and external threat perceptions vis-a-vis opportunities as ours, will go build very credible and robust capabiity without any hiccups or questions.

These are the questions which was before the nation for the last 30-40 years. Does it take that long to address it
Why do they keep coming back

[Sanjay]

Samuel, if India is did not test in the last 11 years what does the deterrent consist of because it exists and missiles are being produced and deployed.

Secondly, please understand if Iyengar and Sethna (the latter much more than the former) want to get into rants about who is entitled to say what, then they are simply behaving in a childish, boorish and offensive manner.

This does not mean there comments on the yields aren't true. It simply means that their behaviour is inappropriate.

[NRao]

(9) No 15 kiloton or 25 kiloton fission or boosted fission device weighs 700-1500kg. At most the figures for those types will range between 170kg and 300kg with Indian design technology.

So, ................ multiple 170/300 Kgs worth of nukes on one Agni?

[Sanjay]

No MIRVs yet developed or tested - yet Agni tested with 700kg warhead in 2001 and A-3 with 1500kg.

Consider larger fission or boosted-fission warheads.

It could also explain the slow Agni production rate - more fissile material needed per warhead.

As such I think 22-36 Agni 1 and 2 each have been produced to date.

Again, everything here is a bit of conjecture but it would be interesting - shorn of vitriol - to here Iyengar, Santhanam and Sethna comment on the ability to produce reliable larger fission and boosted-fission weapons.

[shiv]

er Sanjay "Whistling in the wind" is a nice expression although I personally like "fart in a hurricane".

Do you think PKI Iyengar was doing some such thing when he was talking of burning of (or did he say consumption of) 400 grams of Lithium Deuteride? There is a specific figure here - "400 grams" as specific as 25+2, or 45.

Were these media typos, or is someone a liar, or are some people choosing to ignore some statements that are inconvenient to certain viewpoints?

Maybe you have some sources who will tell you?

[Sanjay]

Let's just say I don't doubt that everyone is cherry-picking viewpoints - kind of like BR actually - but again shorn of recent vitriol, Iyengar has put foward an interesting case and I don't doubt his concerns. It is very possible that his figure is accurate as is Santhanam's.

Right now checking is in progress but I am not relying on a single source at all.

That is why I am very disappointed in the manner in which the dispute was aired and while I expect nothing from Mishra, I expected better from Sethna.

There is a civil way to disagree and dispute.

Mind you, I wish somebody would file a PIL in India to put Santhanam in the box - offering services pro-bono to cross-examine him !!

[NRao]

Sanjay,

Did someone say that India has credible deterrence - of any type?

MIRV will possibly be there in version 8. Version 1 is not yet out.

Is there an all weather road in Kashmir (where there should be at least two)?

[samuel]

For 11 years we thought we had a TN. What did we really have then? Could they have kept the bluff, err deterrent, up with only a 100-300KG payload delivery system? No. Has the army ever tested a nuclear warhead and certified it? (No, they trusted their scientists). If Santhanam's cooking things up, let's do a review and find out! This is not just some odd joker, right?

Yes a little posts back, I suggested stuffing Mr. Six's tiny balls in a sock and chucking them. If that is what they were doing, what was the problem with TN being declared a failure and keeping our options open in that regard. No need to test???

[ramana]

Sanjay,
You can post your questions here and he might even reply.

NRao they are working ont he all waether road. It takes time ~ 10 -12 years.

Yes they do have credible deterrent based on tested weapons. And MMS operationalized it with proper changes to doctrine.

[Sanjay]

NRao - not sure what you are trying to say.

Simple fact - Agni is in production and missile groups are using the thing.

It carries something and it isn't HE.

Samuel - it is increasingly clear that nobody believed a TN weapon was credible for the last decade.

You are entitled to your opinion.

A review would be nice but right now a clear assessment of where India is becomes vital.

Frankly, I don't see the two being in conflict.

Ramana, who's he ? Funny thing though the way these scientists can't disagree without character slurs, I don't know about India, lawyers in Trinidad disagree all the time and forget everything the minute we walk out the door.

But - what is your take on the scalability of the fission and boosted-fission capability ?

One of the things that was always taught to us was that so long as the basic design is not deviated from, you can stretch - within certain limits of course - a fission weapon reasonably easily.

[samuel]

Absolutely fantastic.

1. We all are leaning that everybody knew that the TN wasn't working in the last 10 years.

2. So, when they said after Pokhran that we need more tests they really said they did not need a TN for a deterrent.

3. If that were true, what would've been the problem with saying (back then or any time in the intervening 11 years); oh, our TN didn't work but we don't care. Our Agni et al. will deliver some multiple of 25KT, we've got all that covered (leading to more raised eyebrows).

4. How do you reconcile the Cheif's public comments about the need to know yield with this? He did not know the story of the better-than-advertised TNs?
S

[Babu Bihari]

....BB - There is a point I want to make about what we might want to label as "mistake by reporter". Ultimately what we all judge as "mistakes" by reporters or anyone else are based on the way we see things. All statements by everyone we are talking about in these threads come to us second or third hand via some "reporter" or other. Don't we all choose to ignore some reports and highlight others depending on how we want to view things?

Now try looking at it this way.

Santhanam is a patriot (as per reports)
Santhanam is telling the truth ( based on what he has said)
Santhanam is reported to have said India's deterrence is based on 15 kt bombs
Let us ignore the fusion or fission part to argue about it later

So please tell me what is the latest avatar of the truth? Does truth today make yesterdays speaker a liar. Then Santhanam could become a liar because he said 27 + 2 yesterday. Today it is 15.

But Santhanam is telling the truth - therefore we must blame the reporter in this case. We "feel" that yesterdays report is more true than today and todays report will make Santhanam a liar which we feel is wrong. Therefore the second report is a lie, and the reporter is the liar.

This is our level of satyamenva jayate.

HT reported-

The Department of Atomic Energy, which claims the test was a success, used radiochemical analysis. “My arguments are still solid, ” says Santhanam. There is no reason to be embarrassed about hydrogen bomb test failure, he says. “No country in the world succeeded in the first try.” But he believes that India’s nuclear deterrent is not credible with warheads limited to 15 kilotonnes — the yield of a successful fusion bomb test.

you may be right in that we all go by what we feel is right but i said it looks like a mistake by the reporter because "fusion bomb test" is used after the word "successful".

that sentence was not a verbatim quote by the reporter, otherwise it would have been in quotes. and had it been verbatim quote by the reporter, then why would santhanam call it a successful fusion test bomb, when he is already calling it a fizzle. thus it looks to me reporter meant - "....successful fission test bomb."

[shiv]

Yes a little posts back, I suggested stuffing Mr. Six's tiny balls in a sock and chucking them. If that is what they were doing, what was the problem with TN being declared a failure and keeping our options open in that regard. No need to test???

Samuel let me repeat what I believe to be a badly kept secret that I mentioned in one of these threads.

Given the level of engineering capability that now exists across most of the world and in most countries - the only thing tha separates a "Nucelar Weapons State" (NWS) and a non NWS is either a signature on some treaty, or lack of fissile material like enriched Uranium or Pu.

There was a ref - maybe the Goa paper that spoke of how handling of pure Plutonium balls above a particular mass would cause them to heat up and sizzle and that had actually happened on numerous occasions. In some book by Feynman he recalls a similar experience sitting near a pile of super-critical Uranium.

Building a nuclear weapon is relatively easy for a bunch of moderately competent engineers with some explosives expertise and a suitable 1960s level manufacturing industry. That is why desperate attempts are being made to
1) Stop people from making nukes or proliferating
2) Pretend that it is all damn tough
3) Prevent the spread of fissile material
4) Pretending that you have to belong to Brahmin caste to recite mantras - i.e you need thermonuclear bombs to claim that you actually have nukes.

This is balderdash. It's not that tough and the haves are fairly desperately clutching at straws trying to bolt the barn door after a herd of horses have escaped.

If you can get 25 kg of Pu to come together - it does not need much compression to produce a 20 kt bomb. Critical mass is less than 10 Kg I think. 25 Kg Pu is unsafe - but heck who cares - it is meant to be unsafe. Only in the US will the weapons storage guys have their asses sued off if there is an accident. Do you think that will happen in Talib-land or even India?

Nobody with half a brain in this world will believe that anyone with access to several hundred Kg of Plutonium does not have a working bomb. Tested or untested it will work.

[Raj Malhotra]

He said per HT:-

Santhanam triggered the debate in August by saying the hydrogen bomb test’s explosive yield had been only 25 kilotonnes, and not the official 40-50 kilotonnes.

But he believes that India’s nuclear deterrent is not credible with warheads limited to 15 kilotonnes — the yield of a successful fusion bomb test.

I believe either the term 15kt or fusion bomb is a typo!

Thanks for the exact quotes and for being open about what you feel is a typo. However - there are people who believe that lots of other things may be typos

Now there is another curious thing. If 15 kt is the yield of our "reliable" (tested twice) fission bomb - where did 25 kt come from?

Let me hazard a guess.

Perhaps 10 kt came from fusion? I can always say "typo" if I am proven wrong

I don't understand why are u getting antsy. If you feel, I am wrong, ok then. But obviously first line does not match the second line. Needless satire directed against each other does not serve any pourpose. Fissioin boms have been tested 6 times and if Arun_S says that spartk plug was boosted then it means that fission bombs were tested 7 times