Pakistan's Kushab 2 nuclear reactor likely in operation

[sparklingway]

we must to warn the world for stopping the spying of our assets.otherwise to get the anti-satellite system for destruction of their satellite

Was that supposed to be sarcastic?

 

[IceCold]

we must to warn the world for stopping the spying of our assets.otherwise to get the anti-satellite system for destruction of their satellite

You destroy their satellite and prepare yourself for a retaliatory nuclear strike. The best way to stop some one from spying on to your assets is to place powerful jammers around that area which may block the transmission. Other then that there isnt much you could do about it.

 

[Super Falcon]

well it wont be easy for them to just bomb us with nukes even we destroy their satelites because russia and china already sent their anti satellite system ready to destroy us satllites if war got with usa

 

[Sinnerman108]

You destroy their satellite and prepare yourself for a retaliatory nuclear strike. The best way to stop some one from spying on to your assets is to place powerful jammers around that area which may block the transmission. Other then that there isnt much you could do about it.

Kind Sir,

would you please care to elaborate on these "Jammers" you are suggesting be put to use ?

 

[IceCold]

Kind Sir,

would you please care to elaborate on these "Jammers" you are suggesting be put to use ?

Something of this sort

US Satellite Jamming System

U.N. tells Iran to end Eutelsat satellite jamming | Reuters

 

[IceCold]

well it wont be easy for them to just bomb us with nukes even we destroy their satelites because russia and china already sent their anti satellite system ready to destroy us satllites if war got with usa

First Pakistan is not Russia or China, second in case of a war you cannot predict the response of your enemy and while both China and Russia have the nuclear deterrent against the US, we don't.

 

[sparklingway]

Something of this sort

US Satellite Jamming System

U.N. tells Iran to end Eutelsat satellite jamming | Reuters

You searched "satellite jamming" on Google and posted the first two responses without realizing what you were posting and the fact that you were inherently wrong to claim that there are any possible ways to block reconnaissance satellite/earth observation satellites from viewing any locations.

What you posted are examples of systems aimed at jamming/limiting the communications of a specific satellite. It cannot in any way, nor are there any other means possible as of now, to jam/limit communications of a large number of satellites viewing from different positions. You cannot limit the power of a satellite to take pictures of where it wants to nor can you in any possible way create some fancy sort of jamming environment around a location. Earth observation satellites can be countered only by effective camouflaging. Naivety pushes one to believe that there are jammers to everything.

 

[AbuSalam]

U can use Jammers to blind radars..but for optical high resolution camera's you need to dense fog the area

 

[fatman17]

NARAYAN LAKSHMAN

Satellite image of the reactor: Photo: Special Arrangement

Pakistan may be operating a second nuclear reactor under the country's nuclear weapons programme, according to an expert at the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security.

Paul Brannan, Senior Analyst at ISIS, today told The Hindu that GoogleEarth satellite images showing steam distorting the view of some cooling tower fan blades at the second plutonium production reactor at Khushab “indicates to me that the reactor is in some state of initial operation such as a power start-up.”

Explaining that the steam was emerging from “mechanical drafting cooling towers” beside a visible, rectangular reactor structure, Mr. Brannan said that as the operation of the reactor progresses, he would expect to see more steam emerging from the adjacent MDCTs.

According to Mr. Brannan's report, in February 2010 Zia Mian of the International Panel on Fissile Materials said that Pakistan had completed construction of the second Khushab reactor. The statement by Mian cited a recent visit to the site by the Prime Minister where he reportedly congratulated engineers for “completing important projects.”

THIRD REACTOR

Mr. Brannan said that Pakistan had started constructing the Khushab-II reactor back in 2002 and in 2007 construction activity for a third reactor was noticed in satellite images. “We have been following the construction of the second reactor in particular,” Mr. Brannan said, adding that “they had been expecting it to begin operation around this time.”

When asked whether his report of March 24 had received any reaction from the United States government he said, “I haven't heard a word.” However he added that in 2006 when ISIS showed the U.S. administration initial images of Khushab-II they had a “muted” reaction, with a statement to the effect that the U.S. called upon Pakistan no to use nuclear developments for military purposes.

Mr. Brannan however cautioned that given that “only few nations in the world have nuclear production capability, the start-up operation of the second Khushab reactor, leading to a possible doubling of plutonium output in Pakistan, is significant.”

Keywords: nuclear reactor, Pakistan

The Hindu : News : Pakistan's nuclear reactor likely in operation

Pakistan Special Weapons Facilities

Pakistan has two parallel and competing special weapons programs. The initial program, which began in the late 1970s, was focused on uranium enrichment centered at Kahuta. More recently this program has enlarged its portfolio to include the Ghauri [Nodong] missile delivery system, which is flight tested at the nearby Tilla Jogian [Malute] test site. Apparently initiated in the mid-1980s following problems with the uranium program, the plutonium program is centered around the unsafeguarded nuclear reactor at Khushab, and has probably focused on the development of a nuclear warhead for the M-11 missiles stored at the nearby Sargodha Central Ammunition Depot . Pakistan's nuclear weapons tests were conducted at two locations in the Chagai Hills.

The location of Pakistan's nuclear weapons stockpile cannot be determined from open sources. Pakistan is believed to somewhere between two and three dozen nuclear weapons. Reportedly, most of these weapons are stockpiled as separate uranium and plutonium cores and detonation assemblies, rather than fully assembled weapons. The storage procedures were altered in early October 2001, when the American bombing of Afghanistan began. The stockpile was reportedly dispersed to six new secret locations around Pakistan. The new stockpile procedures were intended to facilitate the rapid assembly and deployment of the weapons.

 

[fatman17]

Nuclear Weapons Doctrine

On 22 November 2008 President Asif Ali Zardari said Pakistan will not be the first to use nuclear weapons adding that despite their differences, Pakistan and India have a great future together. Zardari said in reply to a question "We shall take Pak-India relationship to a new level," President Asif Ali Zardari said in his video address to the Hindustan Times Leadership Summit, broadcast live for the conclave in New Delhi, "I do not feel threatened by India and India should not feel threatened from us," he said. Zardari said, “I am against nuclear warfare altogether.” When asked if Pakistan would adopt the policy of no-first-use of nuclear weapons, he said, “Most definitely, yes, we hope we will never get into that position (of using nuclear weapons). I am for a South Asian Non-nuclear Treaty. ... I can get my Parliament to agree to it right away,” he said. “Can you (India) get your Parliament to agree to it?”

Linking the two was a non-starter in India, and Zardari’s comments did not appear to represent a doctrinal change. Former Indian Ambassador to the UN Arundhati Ghose, who played a pivotal role in New Delhi not signing the CTBT, told The Sunday Express, “It seems that it’s a general answer and is not a change in the nuclear doctrine of Pakistan’s establishment. He is not speaking of no-first-use policy, and by making it dependent on the South Asian treaty, it’s rhetoric. This is nothing new.”

India, which announced a no-first-use policy soon after the 1998 nuclear tests, had proposed a no-first-use treaty to Pakistan but Islamabad rejected it, saying that its nuclear weapons program was India-specific and it would keep its options open. Pakistan in turn pushed for a South Asian treaty to freeze nuclear weapons in the region. India rejected this, saying it had a wider concerns which includes China.

Pakistan did not have a "No First Use Policy". Pakistani nuclear weapons would be used, according to Director-General Strategic Planning Division (SPD) Lt-General (retd) Khalid Kidwai, only “if the very existence of Pakistan as a state is at stake”. This was detailed by Gen. Kidwai as follows:

Nuclear weapons are aimed solely at India. In case that deterrence fails, they will be used if
a. India attacks Pakistan and conquers a large part of its territory (space threshold)
b. India destroys a large part either of its land or air forces (military threshold)
c. India proceeds to the economic strangling of Pakistan (economic strangling)
d. India pushes Pakistan into political destabilization or creates a large scale internal subversion in Pakistan (domestic destabilization)"

 

[IceCold]

You searched "satellite jamming" on Google and posted the first two responses without realizing what you were posting and the fact that you were inherently wrong to claim that there are any possible ways to block reconnaissance satellite/earth observation satellites from viewing any locations.

If you had read my post before hitting the reply button you would have realized that i clearly mentioned something of this sort not that this is it. I didn't just post the link out of the thin air without reading or searching, i read them and knew what i was posting. The idea behind what i was talking about was that this concept isnt alien in the first place but one does not hear about such systems because of the secrecy of such systems and the reason is well mentioned in my first link, even US itself does not recognize the existence of any such system because it does not want other countries to follow lead.

What you posted are examples of systems aimed at jamming/limiting the communications of a specific satellite. It cannot in any way, nor are there any other means possible as of now, to jam/limit communications of a large number of satellites viewing from different positions. You cannot limit the power of a satellite to take pictures of where it wants to nor can you in any possible way create some fancy sort of jamming environment around a location. Earth observation satellites can be countered only by effective camouflaging. Naivety pushes one to believe that there are jammers to everything.

I clearly know what i posted and no need for you to highlight. I have posted here for a reason which i have given above. And may i know on what basis are you concluding the highlighted part?
The information on jammers, ones that can jam a transmission or communication of a satellite is very rare and countries who do posses such systems does not accept its existence but to believe such systems don't exist or the very idea is an alien concept is in itself naive.

 

[IceCold]

U can use Jammers to blind radars..but for optical high resolution camera's you need to dense fog the area

And here we have one more. Seriously man instead of making stupid comments how about you refute what i have posted.

 

[sparklingway]

If you had read my post before hitting the reply button you would have realized that i clearly mentioned something of this sort not that this is it. I didn't just post the link out of the thin air without reading or searching, i read them and knew what i was posting. The idea behind what i was talking about was that this concept isnt alien in the first place but one does not hear about such systems because of the secrecy of such systems and the reason is well mentioned in my first link, even US itself does not recognize the existence of any such system because it does not want other countries to follow lead.

I was commenting on the technical possibility of such a system being remote for a reconnaissance satellite can be looking from any possible angle. The communication jam for a satellite would be effective if it were transmitting anything from ground, which is not the case or if there were anyway to use a satellite to disrupt communications of a nearby satellite in space. The latter option while entirely possible in ineffective for a jamming satellite as such cannot be used to shield any number of enemy satellites observing the location.

I clearly know what i posted and no need for you to highlight. I have posted here for a reason which i have given above. And may i know on what basis are you concluding the highlighted part?
The information on jammers, ones that can jam a transmission or communication of a satellite is very rare and countries who do posses such systems does not accept its existence but to believe such systems don't exist or the very idea is an alien concept is in itself naive.

I might have misunderstood the comments posted by you. My apologies for that.

I realize the secrecy but I was commenting, as I said, on the technical possibility. List any other scenarios and possible options for blocking an area from the cameras mounted on a satellite please.

 

[IceCold]

List any other scenarios and possible options for blocking an area from the cameras mounted on a satellite please.

This is from an article published by telegraph in 2006 stating that such an attack did take place on a US satellite and Chinese are actively working on the program to blind a satellite while it passes over China.

The document said that China could blind American satellites with a ground-based laser firing a beam of light to prevent spy photography as they pass over China.

According to senior American officials: "China not only has the capability, but has exercised it." American satellites like the giant Keyhole craft have come under attack "several times" in recent years.

Full article is here:

Beijing secretly fires lasers to disable US satellites - Telegraph

 

[Sinnerman108]

IceCold

You are not making sense, and please do not post some thing which
you do not understand or are not able to stand by or prove.

Looking at your ranking, you must be doubly careful.