US successfully tests Minuteman 3 ICBM

[Dante80]

While Nuke warhead test, including weaponize uranium is another thing...… US have not test a single nuclear warhead since 1950s.

This is incorrect. US stopped nuclear tests in the early nineties, and was a major contributor on getting the CTBT signed.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

This is incorrect. US stopped nuclear tests in the early nineties, and was a major contributor on getting the CTBT signed.

I think he’s confusing above ground testing which ended ~1962. Certainly below ground continued until the time you mentioned.

 

[jhungary]

This is incorrect. US stopped nuclear tests in the early nineties, and was a major contributor on getting the CTBT signed.

I was talking about surface testing. Which was what the North Korean is doing. US stop doing underground testing in 1991, but signed Limited Nuclear Test ban in 1950s and stopped all surface nuclear test in 1963.

 

[Dante80]

I think he’s confusing above ground testing which ended ~1962. Certainly below ground continued until the time you mentioned.

Yes, it could be it.

I was talking about surface testing. Which was what the North Korean is doing. US stop doing underground testing in 1991, but signed Limited Nuclear Test ban in 1950s and stopped all surface nuclear test in 1963.

All North Korea Nuclear tests are underground.

I still don't understand the argument btw. What does surface testing in particular has to do with this? Nuclear weapon testing as a part of proliferation is agnostic as far as the mode of testing is concerned. Especially since an actor like North Korea is not a signatory to the NBTs and is also not bound by them (same goes for Pakistan and India, btw).

 

[jhungary]

Yes, it could be it.



All North Korea Nuclear tests are underground.

I still don't understand the argument btw. What does surface testing in particular has to do with this? Nuclear weapon testing as a part of proliferation is agnostic as far as the mode of testing is concerned. Especially since an actor like North Korea is not a signatory to the NBTs and is also not bound by them (same goes for Pakistan and India, btw).

Not all test were underground, there are EMP testing, and you can only do EMP testing in an airburst. Intelligence suggested there were some ground det as well, approximately 200 meters above ground, and North Korean government did issue a travel ban on resident around test site to enter Pyongyang, which indicate fallout/other contamination occur during blast, which usually indicate above ground testing.

And above ground test and underground test is very different.

You can only test maximum effectiveness (Non-miniaturized warhead) above ground. Basically, a nuclear test may or may not involve miniaturized warhead (hence the whole ICBM argument I mentioned before) also, underground test only good when you have enough computing power to calculate and simulate the result. Not to mention environment impact between above ground and under ground testing.

 

[Dante80]

Not all test were underground, there are EMP testing, and you can only do EMP testing in an airburst. Intelligence suggested there were some ground det as well, approximately 200 meters above ground, and North Korean government did issue a travel ban on resident around test site to enter Pyongyang, which indicate fallout/other contamination occur during blast, which usually indicate above ground testing.

The Ryanggang explosion was deemed not to be nuclear in nature by all actors (even those that would love to proclaim it as such) and no "EMP testing" with nuclear warheads on the atmosphere has ever been conducted in N.Korea (their threat for an EMP burst weapon is not the same as actively testing for said capability). All 6 known tests were verified to be underground in their Punggye-ri site (and were pretty closely and meticulously observed and analysed).
Have in mind that it is pretty impossible for N. Korea to hide a nuclear test for a number of objective reasons. One of the reasons for that is simply because underground tests can leak radiation on to the atmosphere (at the time of the test or later). That is one of the ways we have verified some of them happening in N.Korea (the other is mainly seismic observations).

The above are facts. Cite specific sources to the contrary.

I wholeheartedly agree that underground, surface, under-water and atmosphere tests are different. They are designed to test different things, and as you very rightly said underground tests are much harder to gain good data from and advance the state of the art, due to a number of reasons.

Moreover, I still don't get the argument with regards to proliferation btw. N.Korea, Pakistan or India are not signatories of the NBTs.

ps: We are heavily OT here.

 

[T-Rex]

So its alright for US to test an ICBM that covers the entire world but somehow not OK for others to do the same or bring the US into range.

The US is guided by hypocrisy at all levels. This is the country which established itself by annihilating the native indians. They have excuses to justify all their crimes.

 

[sparten]

There is no reason for the motor to fail really if the rocket is maintained properly (and it is). Solid rocket motors are extremely simple affairs considering, we are essentially talking here about a nozzle with a seal. The thrust parameters for the stages are pre-baked on the propellant itself (by adjusting web thickness and surface area via the grain geometry), and there are essentially no moving parts (gimballing is extremely easy on this type of application).

The state of the art btw in this category has not really progressed much in the years since Minuteman came out. Today, you can leverage the SLS based 5 segment SRB improvements to introduce a lighter casing material (filament-wound composites) as well as a slightly more energetic propellant mix. You can also remove the asbestos that was used in the past, for enviromental reasons (which is a little ironic btw...since we are talking about ICBMs here).

Other than that, there is not much more you can do. A new GBSD program will mostly concentrate on the RV, post-boost control systems, and warheads.

A solid rocket motor which has been packed away in a climate contolled warehouse and not been touched since leaving the factory floor, maybe.

A Minuteman motor, which has been based in a silo for years, has faced thousands of freeze, thaw cycles, been exposed to humidity and wear and tear from being on alert?

 

[Dante80]

A solid rocket motor which has been packed away in a climate contolled warehouse and not been touched since leaving the factory floor, maybe.

A Minuteman motor, which has been based in a silo for years, has faced thousands of freeze, thaw cycles, been exposed to humidity and wear and tear from being on alert?

One of the benefits of staging your weapon into a silo is (limited) environmental control and the ability to have much better diagnostics on-site. Moreover, the whole idea of testing the system periodically at Vandenburg (like this article reports) is to validate the effectiveness, readiness, and accuracy of the weapon system, as well as to support the system's primary purpose, nuclear deterrence. Lastly, the ICBM PRP program makes sure that the problem you are describing cannot really exist in the first place.

The system we are talking about is mature, well studied, extensively tested and thoroughly upgraded. It has been around for close to 50 years now in its latest iteration (as far as propulsion is concerned), and it is understood in considerable depth (both in its current form, and in its Minotaur LV variant).

It is actually relatively easy for AFGSC to prolong even further the remaining life of the system btw via a SLEP if it so desires.

 

[jhungary]

The Ryanggang explosion was deemed not to be nuclear in nature by all actors (even those that would love to proclaim it as such) and no "EMP testing" with nuclear warheads on the atmosphere has ever been conducted in N.Korea (their threat for an EMP burst weapon is not the same as actively testing for said capability). All 6 known tests were verified to be underground in their Punggye-ri site (and were pretty closely and meticulously observed and analysed).
Have in mind that it is pretty impossible for N. Korea to hide a nuclear test for a number of objective reasons. One of the reasons for that is simply because underground tests can leak radiation on to the atmosphere (at the time of the test or later). That is one of the ways we have verified some of them happening in N.Korea (the other is mainly seismic observations).

The above are facts. Cite specific sources to the contrary.

I wholeheartedly agree that underground, surface, under-water and atmosphere tests are different. They are designed to test different things, and as you very rightly said underground tests are much harder to gain good data from and advance the state of the art, due to a number of reasons.

Moreover, I still don't get the argument with regards to proliferation btw. N.Korea, Pakistan or India are not signatories of the NBTs.

ps: We are heavily OT here.

Well, the problem is, even with Satellite Technology, you cannot discount a low yield ground det to a medium-high yield underground det. As I said, both ground det and underground det would have released radiation into atmosphere and cause seismic reaction. So that does not actually mean either way.

Do bear in mind North Korea tested their nuke in early 2000s (I think 2003 or 2006, I need to double check the year.) Underground test can of course leak radiation, but not in that scale to impose travel ban to a large area. That wasn't done during the Fukushima radiation disaster. Which mean the "fallout" scale is large enough to blanket the whole area, which is something you won't have in an underground det, because it would have been controlled by the tunnel.

As for actual proof, there are no actual proof of either way, we can all guess and the actual source of information is basically what North Korea told us (Which whether or not it is trustworthy from a rouge state illegally testing nuclear weapon itself is a big question) and the western response by guessing what they actually did with little information we have collect. Which is why whenever we hear the western news outlet reporting NK nuclear testing, they always say "Believe to be xxxKt underground det" instead of "It is a xxxKt underground det"

But you are right, we are going seriously off topics