Yield of May 1998 Pakistani nuclear tests,a comparison

[karakoram]

do you have any other link other then youtube its not working mate

 

[CyberForce786]

Kid does video makes you feel good, my advice rely on the data obtain from the seismic reading and watch hollywood movie for such video.

Here is what Wikeleaks reports says

Technical Aspects of Pakistan's Nuclear Testing

All evidence points to Pakistan's nuclear weapons program being smaller and less
ambitious than that of India.Pakistan reportedly used a simple weapon design based
on enriched uranium, which is said to be a less sophisticated approach than one based
on plutonium, such as India uses.Abdul Qadeer Khan, the head of Pakistan's
nuclear program and the "father" of its atomic bomb, said, "None of these explosions
[of May 28 and 30] were thermonuclear ... We are doing research and can do a fusion
blast, if asked." There are few, if any, other references to a Pakistani fusion, or
hydrogen, bomb program, and the impl ication that Pakistan could detonate a
hydrogen bomb soon seems doubtful.In contrast, India has done considerable work
toward a weapon of that type, as discussed above under "Technical Aspects of India's
Nuclear Testing."Note that a smaller program may suffice to meet Pakistan's
perceived strategic need of deterringIndia, while India, which sees China as a
potential threat to be deterred, may require a larger program.

By all accounts, Pakistan's weapons program relies extensively on foreign
technology. According to one source:
China ... provided blueprints for the bomb, as well as highly enriched
uranium, tritium, scientists and key components for a nuclear weapons
production complex, among other crucial tools. Without China's help,
Pakistan's bomb would not exist, said Gary Milhollin, a leading expert on
the spread of nuclear weapons. ...
Pakistan had obtained the plans from the Chinese Government in the
early 1980's.The bomb was simple and efficient, based on highly enriched
uranium, and it had been tested by the Chinese in 1966. United States
Government physicists built a model of the bomb and reported that it was
a virtually foolproof design. On May 28, 1998, Pakistan announced that it had conducted five underground
nuclear tests; it announced a sixth test on May 30.Yield estimates of the tests varied
widely.A.Q. Khan reportedly said one of the tests of May 28 had a yield of 30 to 35
kilotons, about twice that of the Hiroshima bomb. Samar Mobarik Mand, said to
be "the scientist who conducted Pakistan's nuclear test programme,"reportedly placed
the yield of the May 28 tests at 40 to 45 kilotons, and that of the May 30 test at 15
to 18 kilotons.

On the other hand, estimates based on seismic data placed the yield
of the May 28 tests at between eight and 15 kilotons.

U.S. officials reportedly "estimated the cumulative force of the Pakistani blast or blasts [of May 28] at between
2 kilotons and 12 kilotons, and most likely 6 kilotons ..." For the May 30 test, some
reports placed the yield between 12 and 18 kilotons, but the CIA was said to have
estimated the yield at between one and five kilotons. Seismic data indicated a yield
of between zero (no detectable signal) and one kiloton.

A later analysis by seismologist Terry Wallace placed the yield of the May 28 explosion (or explosions)
at 9 to 12 kt, and that of the May 30 explosion at 4 to 6 kt.
While Pakistani statements and seismic data agree that there was only one test
on May 30, the number held on May 28 is disputed. In early reports of May 28,
Pakistan claimed two or three tests. a number it quickly revised to five. U.S.
analysts questioned the higher number. "Instead of five, 'it appears at least two'
bombs were tested, said one U.S. intelligenceofficial..." Similarly, the New York
Times reported that "American intelligence officials said Pakistan had probably tested
only two weapons rather than the five announced."Wallace found seismic signals
that could correspond to two explosions, but discounts the plausibility of the second
one. Because the yield appearslower than announced, it is unclear if the devices
performed as intended. According to a press report, U.S. officials said that the
estimated yield of the Pakistani test or tests of May 28, put by that report at most
likely six kilotons, "isless than what U.S. intelligence experts had estimated as the
likely yield of even one of the principal bombs in Pakistan's arsenal, raising questions
about whether the device or devices exploded by Pakistan had performed as
expected." On the other hand, as noted above, the Chinese design is thought to be
"nearly foolproof." There are indications that the tests were of actual weapons, as distinct from test
devices.A.Q. Khan "described the devices tested as 'ready-to-fire warheads' that had
been miniaturized so they could fit onto Ghauri missiles..." He also indicated that
four of the five tests of May 28 were of low-yield tactical nuclear weapons.According to a press report, "Intelligence analysts believe a goal of the test [on May30] was to devise a bomb small enough to fit on a missile.Pakistan is believed to be close to that difficult goal.

Kid you got skills of copy and pasting use it fairly....

Why don't you take this sleeping pill for better sleep....
This pill is in the form of youtube link of bharti media, which is super authentic according to you....
And it says much about Nuclear Capability....

Parmadu Bam

 

[VCheng]

U.S. officials reportedly "estimated the cumulative force of the Pakistani blast or blasts [of May 28] at between
2 kilotons and 12 kilotons, and most likely 6 kilotons ..." For the May 30 test, some
reports placed the yield between 12 and 18 kilotons, but the CIA was said to have
estimated the yield at between one and five kilotons. Seismic data indicated a yield
of between zero (no detectable signal) and one kiloton.

Seismic data do not lie.

 

[Windjammer]

There's a video out there with actual rumbling sound of the nuclear detonation, check it out.

 

[Ragnarok connection]

Kid you got skills of copy and pasting use it fairly....

Why don't you take this sleeping pill for better sleep....
This pill is in the form of youtube link of bharti media, which is super authentic according to you....
And it says much about Nuclear Capability....

Parmadu Bam

Lol, thanks for your super investigation skills in finding that India Tv news report; in India we (at least the educated) take India Tv stuff as a laughter pill not as a sleeping pill.
I used to watch comedy stuff like this on India Tv and shows like CID when I was a kid, thanks for reminding me.

 

[CyberForce786]

Lol, thanks for your super investigation skills in finding that India Tv news report; in India we (at least the educated) take India Tv stuff as a laughter pill not as a sleeping pill.
I used to watch comedy stuff like this on India Tv and shows like CID when I was a kid, thanks for reminding be.

It doesn't matter....
You at least the educated....
Take your own source of info as laughing stuff or what ever....
But don't degrade others achievement, when you don't know any thing about them....

 

[Ragnarok connection]

It doesn't matter....
You at least the educated....
Take your own source of info as laughing stuff or what ever....
But don't degrade others achievement, when you don't know any thing about them....

No one is "degrading" your "achievement", data from seismographs was used to estimate the yield to 6-12 KT, most likely 6 KT. End of story, you can believe it to be anything... 30 KT, 100 KT, it doesn't change the yield of the true device does it?. So stop speculating.

 

[CyberForce786]

End of story, you can believe it to be anything...

Your case....
End of story, you can believe it to be anything....
It doesn't change the yield of the true device does it?. So stop speculating....

Now go and watch CID and POGO....

 

[Ragnarok connection]

Your case....
End of story, you can believe it to be anything....
It doesn't change the yield of the true device does it?. So stop speculating....

Now go and watch CID and POGO....

Quote my post, where I have speculated, if you think I have done so.

 

[Shazrah]

Alhamdulillah we the Pakistani can defeat u with unarmed as well even if as per ur wish we don't have any nuclear program ... As Afghanis did with Soviet and now doing with US ...
If u have any doubt then plz wait till the final battle...

 

[Ragnarok connection]

Alhamdulillah we the Pakistani can defeat u with unarmed as well even if as per ur wish we don't have any nuclear program ... As Afghanis did with Soviet and now doing with US ...
If u have any doubt then plz wait till the final battle...

Good story bro, thats why the Pakistan Army is building so many tactical nuclear missiles. BTW what does "Alhamdulillah" mean?

 

[CyberForce786]

Good story bro, thats why the Pakistan Army is building so many tactical nuclear missiles. BTW what does "Alhamdulillah" mean?

What he said is beyond your ability to understand....

 

[war&peace]

In 1998 when Pakistan detonated Nuclear devices,the claimed Yield was 36 Kilotons. But India and many other countries downplayed it and called it a "Fizzle not a bang" and claimed the actual Yield was a mere 6 Kilotons.
In this video we are comparing a 1962 French Nuclear test which was carried out in similar topography with Pakistani tests.
You will notice the similarities in the "Mountain shake" but Pakistani test kicks up more Debris than French test of 1st May 1962.
The French called it "Beryl" and declared Yield was 30Kt. By looking at the video,it can be deduced that since Pakistani test creates a "Bigger bang" it is an Indication that the Yield was greater than 30Kt or close to the claimed 36 Kilotons. Not 6 Kilotons as Indians claim.
For anyone interested in comparing Topography of test sites shown in the video.
French test site of In-Eker, Algerian Sahara Google Maps
Pakistani test site of Ras Koh in Balochistan Desert Google Maps

I like your comparison since visual comparison and perception also provide a lot of information and I would rather believe my eyes rather than a jealous hindu, or an idiot american and their instruments.

 

[shaheenmissile]

Seismic data do not lie.

Seismic data is good at detecting waveform which tells that the underground event isn't natural but man made,because of the shape of waves. But it isn't accurate in calculating the scale of the event. For example in detecting the magnitude of earthquake there is usually error of many points on Richter scale, and a quake is many hundred megatons or gigaton event.
Richter scale itself is not an exact science, it's more of an estimate.
Building the argument further may I mention here that on Richter scale kiloton events are even more erroneously estimated as it's a small event and seismic data based predictions are inaccurate to a much higher percentage compared to megaton event

 

[kbd-raaf]

Seismic data is good at detecting waveform which tells that the underground event isn't natural but man made,because of the shape of waves. But it isn't accurate in calculating the scale of the event. For example in detecting the magnitude of earthquake there is usually error of many points on Richter scale, and a quake is many hundred megatons or gigaton event.
Richter scale itself is not an exact science, it's more of an estimate.
Building the argument further may I mention here that on Richter scale kiloton events are even more erroneously estimated as it's a small event and seismic data based predictions are inaccurate to a much higher percentage compared to megaton event

Yes measurements on the Richter scale amongst other seismic testing procedures, do produce inherent type A errors. However they are on the magnitude of 5-10%, i.e. best case scenario, a yield between 6.6kT to 13.4kT equivalent.

But if the below makes sense to you, well then, nothing I or anybody else can prove will make you change your mind.

I shall explain your own logic to you in simple language, tell me if it makes sense...
Video A has triangular shaped mountain, with nuclear bomb detonated in tunnels
Video B also has triangular shaped mountain, with nuclear bomb detonated in tunnels
It is confirmed that Video A's bomb had a yield of 30Kt; now as video A and B's mountain 'appear' to be of the same shape and height, and video B has more dust flying and shaking, you conclude that video B's bomb has a yield of 30Kt or more.