Deterrence

[Amber G.]

.
And the opponent didn't have even first strike capability...

No matter what you think your opponent may or may not have or use, always keep the big stick handy. And an even bigger stick in the store room

Better than hoarding big sticks and stones, why not learn from the Mahabharat — Arjun didn’t carry a pile of clubs, he had the Gandiv bow and sharp arrows. In modern terms, a precise automatic weapon is far better for defense than lugging around a warehouse of sticks.

(In any case as said above - serious scientists/engineers/military_experts today do not suggest multi-MT (let alone 100 MT) bombs are necessary. In fact, both physics and strategy communities view them as - wasteful of fissile material and .logistically impractical) I agree with current India's thinking/strategy about having multiple options about manageable sizes

[Vayutuvan]

Let us not forget mace of bheemasena. It is a massive weapon that can break chariots and can kill elephants.

[pravula]

.
And the opponent didn't have even first strike capability...

No matter what you think your opponent may or may not have or use, always keep the big stick handy. And an even bigger stick in the store room

Better than hoarding big sticks and stones, why not learn from the Mahabharat — Arjun didn’t carry a pile of clubs, he had the Gandiv bow and sharp arrows. In modern terms, a precise automatic weapon is far better for defense than lugging around a warehouse of sticks.

(In any case as said above - serious scientists/engineers/military_experts today do not suggest multi-MT (let alone 100 MT) bombs are necessary. In fact, both physics and strategy communities view them as - wasteful of fissile material and .logistically impractical) I agree with current India's thinking/strategy about having multiple options about manageable sizes

Actually, he carried a MT yield version of Brahmastra, ala Brahmashirastra, which was used as a MAD. Without it, that story would have ended differently...

[Manish_P]

That's the point

Amber ji, like Arjuna, can see only the eye of the fish, and wants the appropriate precision arrow

But the Mahabharata is so much more than even Arjuna....

[Amber G.]

Actually, he carried a MT yield version of Brahmastra, ala Brahmashirastra, which was used as a MAD. Without it, that story would have ended differently.

Nice to read Mahabharata... !

The Ashwatthama–Arjuna clash with the Brahmastra / Brahmashirastra is a perfect analogy for today’s ‘100 MT bomb’ talk. Two ultimate weapons facing off nearly destroyed the Earth, until wisdom intervened. Arjuna showed discipline and withdrew — Ashwatthama couldn’t, and his rage only brought tragedy to innocents. Likewise, massive doomsday bombs look impressive, but in practice they’re more dangerous to everyone, including their own side. Real strength lies in precision, restraint, and credibility — not in weapons that can’t be controlled once unleashed.

Building 100-MT bombs is like Ashwatthama firing a Brahmashirastra — impressive in rage, disastrous in reality, and no wiser than throwing fire in your own house.

Ashwatthama went for the Brahmashirastra — world-ending overkill. Arjun used Gandiv with precision. In today’s terms: why dream of 100-MT craters (Not to mention deadly fallout which does not respect national borders) when a precise missile does the job far better (and without burning down your own house)...

--- From Mahabharata, who might not be familiar with the whole story ..
(Reading the Mahabharata and understanding is quite useful - Brahmashirastra, which was considered catastrophic even then by epic standards...then .. see/read Vyas and other sages saying.."firing a Brahmashirastra in the middle of a crowded village — sure, it proves you have it.., but nobody sane thinks that’s the way to win"....Arjuna, with discipline and humility, withdrew his weapon as instructed..Ashwatthama, however, could not fully recall his, as he lacked the training ... Instead, he redirected it — tragically — in an attempt to wipe out the Pandava lineage. Krisna somehow saves Parikshit .. ityadi .... Moral was 'supreme weapons are a burden .. without discipline.. they cause devastation even to the wielder’s own side...)

---
महायुद्धास्त्रविनियोगो हानिप्रधानः।
गाण्डीवसदृशं तु लक्ष्ये निशितम् एव श्रोत्रियः।।

Transliteration:
"Using a supreme weapon in anger brings mainly destruction. Like the Gandiv bow, a precise strike at the target alone achieves purpose safely."

[pravula]

Actually, he carried a MT yield version of Brahmastra, ala Brahmashirastra, which was used as a MAD. Without it, that story would have ended differently.

Nice to read Mahabharata... !

The Ashwatthama–Arjuna clash with the Brahmastra / Brahmashirastra is a perfect analogy for today’s ‘100 MT bomb’ talk. Two ultimate weapons facing off nearly destroyed the Earth, until wisdom intervened. Arjuna showed discipline and withdrew — Ashwatthama couldn’t, and his rage only brought tragedy to innocents. Likewise, massive doomsday bombs look impressive, but in practice they’re more dangerous to everyone, including their own side. Real strength lies in precision, restraint, and credibility — not in weapons that can’t be controlled once unleashed.

Building 100-MT bombs is like Ashwatthama firing a Brahmashirastra — impressive in rage, disastrous in reality, and no wiser than throwing fire in your own house.

Ashwatthama went for the Brahmashirastra — world-ending overkill. Arjun used Gandiv with precision. In today’s terms: why dream of 100-MT craters (Not to mention deadly fallout which does not respect national borders) when a precise missile does the job far better (and without burning down your own house)...

--- From Mahabharata, who might not be familiar with the whole story ..
(Reading the Mahabharata and understanding is quite useful - Brahmashirastra, which was considered catastrophic even then by epic standards...then .. see/read Vyas and other sages saying.."firing a Brahmashirastra in the middle of a crowded village — sure, it proves you have it.., but nobody sane thinks that’s the way to win"....Arjuna, with discipline and humility, withdrew his weapon as instructed..Ashwatthama, however, could not fully recall his, as he lacked the training ... Instead, he redirected it — tragically — in an attempt to wipe out the Pandava lineage. Krisna somehow saves Parikshit .. ityadi .... Moral was 'supreme weapons are a burden .. without discipline.. they cause devastation even to the wielder’s own side...)

---
महायुद्धास्त्रविनियोगो हानिप्रधानः।
गाण्डीवसदृशं तु लक्ष्ये निशितम् एव श्रोत्रियः।।

Transliteration:
"Using a supreme weapon in anger brings mainly destruction. Like the Gandiv bow, a precise strike at the target alone achieves purpose safely."

The point I was trying to make was that without that brute/crude capability, there would not have been a MAD and the wise sages might not even have intervened and the weapon would not have been redirected.

[Amber G.]

Largest Brahmashirastra planned/announced by Edward Teller was a 10,000 MT. Wise sages intervened and it was never made. One was enough for whole Germany (instantly igniting everything within 400 kilometers).

People here talk about 100MT casually .. do they even realize dropping it, say in Lahore will also has vast devastation in Indian Punjab too..

[Manish_P]

Simply put the white sages don't think that SDREs have the discipline to control the use of their WMDs

[Manish_P]

Largest Brahmashirastra planned/announced by Edward Teller was a 10,000 MT....

Amazing. So it can be developed right.

Might be useful to try and knock off a large asteroid threatening a dinosaur extinction scale event.

[pravula]

Largest Brahmashirastra planned/announced by Edward Teller was a 10,000 MT. Wise sages intervened and it was never made. One was enough for whole Germany (instantly igniting everything within 400 kilometers).

People here talk about 100MT casually .. do they even realize dropping it, say in Lahore will also has vast devastation in Indian Punjab too..

That was also so big that it could not be moved. IIRC, it weighted as much as a Shield Carrier

Personally, he would have been at home in this current WH

[Amber G.]

^^^ Most of the details are classified.. from unclassified details/rumors we do not know even the exact type(design)..or even weight (estimated in hundreds of tons). Largest bomb yet tested - Tsar Bomba (Soviet hydrogen bomb) was 58.6 Mt yield weighing about 27 tons. Largest U.S. (I Think - can easily be checked) nuclear test was the Castle Bravo -- which yielded 15 megatons.

[pravula]

^^^ Most of the details are classified.. from unclassified details/rumors we do not know even the exact type(design)..or even weight (estimated in hundreds of tons). Largest bomb yet tested - Tsar Bomba (Soviet hydrogen bomb) was 58.6 Mt yield weighing about 27 tons. Largest U.S. (I Think - can easily be checked) nuclear test was the Castle Bravo -- which yielded 15 megatons.

Yes, its classified, and so is the weight of a Shield Carrier...Its all hypothetical...That was my point. It never moved past than a random remark/dong measuring comment with other bomb makers...

[srin]

Regarding how much bang our nukes should have, there is one thing I haven't seen in this discussion - MIRVs.

Assuming that our primary delivery system is going to be ballistic missiles (instead of manned aircraft) and assuming that MIRVs are going to be deployed on all the K-* and Agni missiles, it'd mean that we won't be delivering a single big fat MT range warhead. Instead it is going to be many (6 ? 10 ?) smaller warheads.

I know next to nothing about the nuke design, so does decreasing the warhead size decrease the yield correspondingly or will it cause a drastic reduction in the design yield ? Aka will having 10 petals on missile mean that instead of 1MT payload, we can do a max of 100 KT each ? Or will it be much less ?

Assume a thermo-nuclear (or boosted fission - or whatever the heck we tested in Shakti tests) bum.