Do we have thermonuclear warheads?

[Bussard Ramjet]

As for my judgement on the nuclear tests.

We know what is the official narrative. The official narrative is that in 1998 there were multiple nukes tested, with one of them being a thermonuclear warhead with a yield of 56 kt. These narrative is also that India has multiple deliverable warheads with yield as high as 200 kt.

But then again this is whole official narrative, which some people can argue is deliberately overstated to create deterrence. This reasoning doesn't seem to be unfair, and is justified.

What we do know is that India did tests, and the yields were definitely above 20 kt.

The questions than linger, that what is the reason that India chose to do a test of 56 kt of a thermonuclear warhead, when such yields can be derived from fission weapons as well. The test was for deterrence, and wouldn't it have been better to show the true power of thermonuclear weapons by perhaps a Mt yield.

I though have no doubt that thermonuclear weapons would be available in Indian arsenal, as it is not a particularly tough technology for a country as large as India.

I also have serious reservations about the claim that the 1998 tests were "perfect" and ""thermonuclear". They have to be either one of them, because it makes no sense to show deterrence with a thermonuclear warhead which produces as much yield as a fission device, and can be easily mistaken as one. The whole point of the tests were to show our capabilities and deterrence.

What I think is that perhaps the test was a bit of a fizzle, but India didn't get chance to test again, as it is a geopolitical nightmare to continue to test devices. I am sure that in the event of a conflict, or given India has the chance of testing few more times, it will be able to produce a 100 kt weapon.

Also, generally I refrain from commenting about any capabilities that have been tested, but nuclear weapons are totally different thing. Nukes evoke a very fearful and visceral response from the International community, particularly since the tests have largely been discontinued. Hence, no country wants to test them. For example Israel hasn't tested them as well but is confirmed to possess weapons.

 

[HongWu002]

LOL at India. Only has primitive atomic iron bombs dropped by aircraft. Pakistan has more advanced warheads.

 

[Manas]

As for my judgement on the nuclear tests.

We know what is the official narrative. The official narrative is that in 1998 there were multiple nukes tested, with one of them being a thermonuclear warhead with a yield of 56 kt. These narrative is also that India has multiple deliverable warheads with yield as high as 200 kt.

But then again this is whole official narrative, which some people can argue is deliberately overstated to create deterrence. This reasoning doesn't seem to be unfair, and is justified.

What we do know is that India did tests, and the yields were definitely above 20 kt.

The questions than linger, that what is the reason that India chose to do a test of 56 kt of a thermonuclear warhead, when such yields can be derived from fission weapons as well. The test was for deterrence, and wouldn't it have been better to show the true power of thermonuclear weapons by perhaps a Mt yield.

I though have no doubt that thermonuclear weapons would be available in Indian arsenal, as it is not a particularly tough technology for a country as large as India.

I also have serious reservations about the claim that the 1998 tests were "perfect" and ""thermonuclear". They have to be either one of them, because it makes no sense to show deterrence with a thermonuclear warhead which produces as much yield as a fission device, and can be easily mistaken as one. The whole point of the tests were to show our capabilities and deterrence.

What I think is that perhaps the test was a bit of a fizzle, but India didn't get chance to test again, as it is a geopolitical nightmare to continue to test devices. I am sure that in the event of a conflict, or given India has the chance of testing few more times, it will be able to produce a 100 kt weapon.

Also, generally I refrain from commenting about any capabilities that have been tested, but nuclear weapons are totally different thing. Nukes evoke a very fearful and visceral response from the International community, particularly since the tests have largely been discontinued. Hence, no country wants to test them. For example Israel hasn't tested them as well but is confirmed to possess weapons.

A thermonuclear device designed for 200kt yield was tested at pokhran site .

1. The yield was kept low at 50kt to protect the test site at pokhran to carry out more test next day which they did for sub kiloton test devices.

2. The design of Thermonuclear device tested was made keeping in mind it will be carried in nuclear missile . So the weight of warhead has to be in the range of 1 ton to 1.5 ton .

3. All megaton thermonuclear bombs weight more than 5 tons . And they are carried in strategic bombers which India doesn't posses. So it would've been pointless exercise for India to conduct test for megaton bombs .

4. Its always a bigger scientific challenge to design a low yield 200kt to 500kt thermonuclear bomb than to make a megaton bomb.

5. Even USA and Russian ICBMs with MIRV capability carry thermonuclear bombs with yield around 500kt to 1 ton , not more than that . So India conducted 200kt H bomb device which best suits its strategic plans . And remember the capability to deliver a 200kt H bomb by missiles like Agni with great precision would scare shit out of any adversary of India .

LOL at India. Only has primitive atomic iron bombs dropped by aircraft. Pakistan has more advanced warheads.

LOL what Pakistan tested in 1998 was a primitive nuclear fission bomb with uranium core of yield around 10kt like the one detonate by USA in Hiroshima in 1945. All its current warhead are uranium based.

While India tested more complex plutonium based fission bomb in its first nuclear test way back in 1974 . And then it conducted lot more complex nuclear fusion blast of hydrogen bomb in 1998 , some thing Pakistan never even tested so far. So its funny and very Pakistani to say has more advanced warheads than India .

 

[Chanakyaa]

LOL at India. Only has primitive atomic iron bombs dropped by aircraft. Pakistan has more advanced warheads.

Welcome to PDF. Chill Baby... !!!

 

[HariPrasad]

I just don't understand the overemphasis of the MARS mission. There are very few countries that have attempted a Mars orbiter mission. USA and USSR both did so years back, and were not successful in their first attempt. China is yet to make even its first attempt. I don't think European Space Agency made an attempt as well.

Also, no doubt Mars mission was an incredible success, but I don't like the over boasting that some Indians tend to do.

China attempted and failed miserably. European agency reached mars.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

LOL at India. Only has primitive atomic iron bombs dropped by aircraft. Pakistan has more advanced warheads.

This is a habitual troll. @Hu Songshan Please give him a warning.

China attempted and failed miserably. European agency reached mars.

China didn't attempt.

The only so called "attempt" was of a Chinese orbiter aboard a Russian spaceship. So it was the Russians that failed to do their part in the joint mission.

 

[Vyom]

As for my judgement on the nuclear tests.

We know what is the official narrative. The official narrative is that in 1998 there were multiple nukes tested, with one of them being a thermonuclear warhead with a yield of 56 kt. These narrative is also that India has multiple deliverable warheads with yield as high as 200 kt.

But then again this is whole official narrative, which some people can argue is deliberately overstated to create deterrence. This reasoning doesn't seem to be unfair, and is justified.

What we do know is that India did tests, and the yields were definitely above 20 kt.

The questions than linger, that what is the reason that India chose to do a test of 56 kt of a thermonuclear warhead, when such yields can be derived from fission weapons as well. The test was for deterrence, and wouldn't it have been better to show the true power of thermonuclear weapons by perhaps a Mt yield.

I though have no doubt that thermonuclear weapons would be available in Indian arsenal, as it is not a particularly tough technology for a country as large as India.

I also have serious reservations about the claim that the 1998 tests were "perfect" and ""thermonuclear". They have to be either one of them, because it makes no sense to show deterrence with a thermonuclear warhead which produces as much yield as a fission device, and can be easily mistaken as one. The whole point of the tests were to show our capabilities and deterrence.

What I think is that perhaps the test was a bit of a fizzle, but India didn't get chance to test again, as it is a geopolitical nightmare to continue to test devices. I am sure that in the event of a conflict, or given India has the chance of testing few more times, it will be able to produce a 100 kt weapon.

Also, generally I refrain from commenting about any capabilities that have been tested, but nuclear weapons are totally different thing. Nukes evoke a very fearful and visceral response from the International community, particularly since the tests have largely been discontinued. Hence, no country wants to test them. For example Israel hasn't tested them as well but is confirmed to possess weapons.

The point of the test was to get data for for designing needs. and get weapons devised from them. There is no further need for any new Nuclear device test as once you have captured enough data you can run computer simulation through it. Yes but for all those you need functioning design of the weapon which India demonstrated.

The Objectives of the test in pokharan 2 :

1. You need to prove the reaction happened
2. You need to prove the reaction extent was in line with the Yield.
   
3. The actual yield is irrelevant. If the design is proven the scale can be increased.
   
4. Indian Nuclear program had test its first in 1974, primitive design. yes. but they gained the physics and Knowhow behind it.
5. And today we have computers powerful enough which can carry out test simulations on design and yield.

Had we done a MT weapon yield device with no data capturing the tests would have been futile.

 

[Chanakya's_Chant]

I just don't understand the overemphasis of the MARS mission. There are very few countries that have attempted a Mars orbiter mission. USA and USSR both did so years back, and were not successful in their first attempt. China is yet to make even its first attempt. I don't think European Space Agency made an attempt as well.

Also, no doubt Mars mission was an incredible success, but I don't like the over boasting that some Indians tend to do.

Actually they both did - China's Yinghuo-1 launched along with its Russian counterpart, Fobos-Grunt - both never left the Earth's orbit and got stranded instead later followed by orbital decay and disintegration - though the official Chinese version says it was "lost".

But ESA's orbiter was successful in its first attempt itself (it was their lander that failed whose debris was later discovered by NASA's curiosity on the martian orbit) - their Mars Express orbiter is still operational in the martian orbit.

Yinghuo-1 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mars Express - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

Actually they both did - China's Yinghuo-1 launched along with its Russian counterpart, Fobos-Grunt - both never left the Earth's orbit and got stranded instead later followed by orbital decay and disintegration - though the official Chinese version says it was "lost".

But ESA's orbiter was successful in its first attempt itself (it was their lander that failed whose debris was later discovered by NASA's curiosity on the martian orbit) - their Mars Express orbiter is still operational in the martian orbit.

Yinghuo-1 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mars Express - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I know of China's "mission". And that's what I am saying. It was not a mission to Mars. It was just an orbiter. It was the russian part of the mission to take the orbiter to mars, and it failed. China hasn't launched a mission to mars yet.

Tell me, if Nepal gives its satellite to China to launch in orbit, and Chinese rocket fails, will you call it the failure of Nepal?

 

[scientien]

Tell me, if Nepal gives its satellite to China to launch in orbit, and Chinese rocket fails, will you call it the failure of Nepal?

Yes i'll,cause nepal failed to choose proper partner in project,instead of choosing high quality Indian service they choose cheap chinese service.

 

[HariPrasad]

This is a habitual troll. @Hu Songshan Please give him a warning.



China didn't attempt.

The only so called "attempt" was of a Chinese orbiter aboard a Russian spaceship. So it was the Russians that failed to do their part in the joint mission.

No russian rocket injected Spacecraft in orbit but china could not attempt orbital correction maneuvers.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

No russian rocket injected Spacecraft in orbit but china could not attempt orbital correction maneuvers.

Did you try to read anything?

Even the link is given above, and you had to just read the wiki page.

Yinghuo-1 - Wikiwand
Fobos-Grunt - Wikiwand

Yinghuo-1 was a Chinese Mars-exploration space probe, intended to be the first Chinese spacecraft to explore Mars. It was launched from Baikonur Cosmodrome, Kazakhstan, on 8 November 2011, along with the RussianFobos-Gruntsample return spacecraft, which was intended to visit Mars' moonPhobos.[2][6] The 115-kg (250-lb) Yinghuo-1 probe was intended by the CNSA to orbit Mars for about two years,[1] studying the planet's surface, atmosphere, ionosphere and magnetic field.[7] Shortly after launch, Fobos-Grunt was expected to perform two burns to depart Earth orbit bound for Mars. However, these burns did not take place, leaving both probes stranded in orbit.[8] On 17 November 2011, Chinese state media reported that Yinghuo-1 had been declared lost by the CNSA.[9] After a period of orbital decay, Yinghuo-1 and Fobos-Grunt underwent destructive re-entry on 15 January 2012, finally disintegrating over the Pacific Ocean.[5][10]



​

@HariPrasad I am waiting for your reply.

It is this attitude of dismissal that keeps us, Chinese and Indians, from talking earnestly.

Also, the spacecraft never even began its journey to Mars. The whole fault was Russian. The Chinese role of the mission didn't even start.

From Wikipedia:


Launch and orbital burn failure
China's Yinghuo-1 and the Russian Fobos-Grunt spacecraft were launched together aboard a Ukrainian Zenit rocket with a Fregat upper stage from Baikonur Cosmodrome, Kazakhstan, on 8 November 2011.[2][13] Shortly after launch, Fobos-Grunt was expected to perform two burns to depart Earth orbit and begin its journey to Mars. However, these burns did not take place, stranding the two spacecraft in their parking orbit.[8] Despite repeated efforts to contact Fobos-Grunt and rectify the problem, the spacecraft continued to lose altitude.[16] On 17 November, Chinese state media formally declared the Yinghuo-1 probe lost,[9] and Fobos-Grunt's orbit gradually began to decay.

Destructive re-entry
On 14 January 2012, it was reported that Fobos-Grunt and Yinghuo-1 were beginning their final descent into Earth's atmosphere, falling at a rate of several hundred metres per hour from their 147-kilometre (91 mi) orbital altitude.[10] The two spacecraft completed their re-entry and disintegrated over the Pacific Ocean on 15 January.[5]

Yes i'll,cause nepal failed to choose proper partner in project,instead of choosing high quality Indian service they choose cheap chinese service.

Chinese Long March rockets also have an exceptional success rate of launch.

 

[shaheenmissile]

Nop. Neither India nor Pakistan has Pure Thermonuclear weapons or Hydrogen Bombs in which most of the energy is derived from Fusion.
Both countries use Boosted fission device in which there is one or more fusion stage is involved.

 

[Imran Khan]

Reported.

 

[scientien]

Chinese Long March rockets also have an exceptional success rate of launch.

Then why dint they use Long March for there mars mission?