Pakistan has more nuclear warheads than India: report

[Mrc]

That many we have. Stop worrying

Very deep dual meaning post

 

[El Sidd]

Very deep dual meaning post

I wrote my answer swept away in the currents of different dimensions swirling deep in all parallel Universes too.

Fikar not. Samaan pora Hai

 

[Trango Towers]

As if you don't start abusing India in any of the threads, huh ?? Look buddy, writing comments about each others nation is a different thing, because we have a lot of difference of opinion w.r.t our nations.

But getting personal is another thing. Hope you got the point.

When you abuse Pakistan it's worse than abusing me. Hopebyou get the point and unless you understand that nothing will change. right back at you

 

[Tom M]

When you abuse Pakistan it's worse than abusing me. Hopebyou get the point and unless you understand that nothing will change. right back at you

And the feeling is mutual when you start abusing another person's nation as well. Now please don't tell me you never start abusing other nation first. I can show you countless number of your post, where you had started the provocation initially. Hope you understand.

 

[Trango Towers]

And the feeling is mutual when you start abusing another person's nation as well. Now please don't tell me you never start abusing other nation first. I can show you countless number of your post, where you had started the provocation initially. Hope you understand.

You have the time .... enjoy

 

[LeGenD]

Boss worse scenario is 8kg per plutonium reactor .... 6 mg per warhead gives you 6 war heads with 4 plants only function 40 percent of time .... that leaves equal or more capable uranium unaccounted for...

So where did you get capabilities of making 2 warheads per year as per your original post????.


Do u even read what u post or u just a copy paste machine....


I remember u are the same guy who wanted to destroy sea skimmer in Arabian sea using oth radars....


Kindly atleast try to read what you post before destroying threads

I have cited the article of brigadier Naeem Salik for a reason in this thread. Did you bother to read and understand it? What makes you think that a Pakistani nuclear warhead require only 6 kg of enriched plutonium to build? What makes you think that Pakistani nuclear reactors are producing 36 kg of enriched plutonium per year? What makes you think that the entirely of 36 kg of plutonium is being made available to Pakistani nuclear scientists to develop nuclear weapons?

The above are all valid questions that you should ponder over.

REPEAT:-

"Neither India nor Pakistan has ever declared how many warheads they maintain, or how much fissile material they have. All the estimates found in various publications are speculative. Even the most professionally calculated quantities of fissile material make estimates based mainly on the capacities of the production facilities in the two countries, and are forced to make assumptions about many functional parameters. For instance, a 50-megawatt plutonium production reactor working at 100 percent capacity can produce 18.25 kilograms of plutonium per year. However, these plants normally run at a much lower capacity, and most calculations use a baseline of between 60 percent and 70 percent capacity. Running at this capacity, a 50-megawatt plant will produce around 11 to 13 kilograms per year, assuming that it can maintain the same efficiency through the entire 365 days. In practice, however, the plants may run as low as 40 percent to 50 percent capacity, producing up to 7 to 9 kilograms per year. Moreover, the reactors cannot run 365 days per year. Reactors shut down for refueling and routinely face technical snags, which are not accounted for in existing calculations. Calculating HEU production is even more complicated because analysts must guess the actual number of centrifuges in a particular plant, the enrichment capacity of each centrifuge (which is dependent on the diameter and height of each machine), the quality of the feed material, and whether the rotor is made of aluminum, maraging steel, or carbon fiber. None of these factors can be accurately estimated without intrusive inspections.24 Finally, it is hard to estimate what proportion of each country’s fissile material has been fabricated into warheads and what proportion is still being processed, or is being kept as reserve for future eventualities, including conversion into more weapon cores.

The amount of fissile material needed for a warhead is also a variable, dependent on the sophistication of weapon designs. The amount of fissile material per warhead that a given study assumes has a direct bearing on the bottom-line result for the estimated arsenal size that that study will find. For instance, the Global Fissile Material Report (GFMR) estimates that Pakistan currently possesses 170 kilograms of plutonium. If the GFMR assumed that Pakistan needed 6 kilograms of plutonium per weapon instead of 4 kilograms, it would make a significant difference in their final estimate; with 4 kilograms per warhead, the estimate would be 42 warheads, but with 6 kilograms per warhead, the estimate would drop to 28. The same clearly holds for HEU warheads; whether a Pakistani HEU-based warhead requires 15, 20, or 25 kilograms of HEU drastically changes the potential size of Pakistan’s arsenal. Compared to the thousands of nuclear tests conducted by great powers during the Cold War, India and Pakistan have only conducted six tests each. Neither has enough data to develop highly sophisticated weapon designs requiring lesser amounts of fissile material. It is, therefore, highly unlikely that the estimated size of Indian or Pakistani arsenals comport with reality. Another problem is that these studies, while categorizing India’s entire substantial stockpile of HEU as potential fuel for India’s nuclear-powered submarines, do not address Pakistan’s future HEU needs for naval propulsion. Pakistan is striving to develop the naval leg of its nuclear triad, which would ultimately include naval vessels propelled by nuclear fuel."

Link: https://carnegieendowment.org/2016/06/30/pakistan-s-nuclear-force-structure-in-2025-pub-63912

Are you able to digest all that?

Even if we assume that Pakistani nuclear reactors are able to produce 36 kg of enriched plutonium per year (assuming 60% operational capacity), there is no guarantee that the entirety of this output is made available to Pakistani nuclear scientists for development of nuclear weapons on annual basis, and there is no guarantee that Pakistani nuclear scientists are in the position to produce 6 nuclear warheads from 36 kg of enriched plutonium either (assuming utilization of 6 kg of plutonium for each warhead).

Brigadier Naeem's argument complements mine:

"Assuming the reactors run at 60 percent capacity, each would produce slightly less than two weapons’ worth of plutonium per year, toward a total output of around 36 kilograms of plutonium—six warheads at 6 kilograms per warhead—per year. This suggests that Pakistan could produce up to 60 plutonium warheads over the next decade. The gross total of warheads by 2025, both plutonium- and HEU-based, should be 220, based on available unofficial estimates: 120 warheads in the current arsenal, plus 100 additional warheads. Kristensen and Norris have likewise estimated the size of Pakistan’s arsenal in 2025 to be between 220 and 250 warheads.

Arriving at these figures entails making a number of assumptions about the number and capacity of Pakistan’s centrifuges; the efficiency of Pakistani plutonium production reactors; their uninterrupted operation throughout the year; the amount of HEU and plutonium needed for each warhead; Pakistan’s requirements for naval propulsion; whether Pakistan has been and will continue to convert all of the available material into warheads or maintain some reserve of fissile materials outside warheads; whether Pakistan has determined an upper figure for the size of its arsenal; and Pakistan’s capacity to produce and stockpile requisite delivery systems for all these warheads. Finally, these estimates all assume that Pakistan will continue to produce fissile materials until 2025, rather than ceasing production somewhere in the near future, having satisfied its operational needs."

Link: https://carnegieendowment.org/2016/06/30/pakistan-s-nuclear-force-structure-in-2025-pub-63912

Brigadier Naeem HAS NOT confirmed that Pakistani reactors are [actually] producing 36 kg of enriched plutonium per year, and the entirety of this output [is being] made available to Pakistani nuclear scientists for developing nuclear weapons afterwards. He has, in clearest terms, questioned the validity of prevalent methods of estimations about growth of Pakistani nuclear arsenal over the course of years and have conveyed that they do not conform to ground realities.

Instead of questioning my ability to reason, you should do your homework.

This is your original post which persumes at best case pak can produce 2 warheads per year....

At most... meaning at best

Can you counter my estimation with solid evidence? You cannot.

 

[Mrc]

What makes you think that a Pakistani nuclear warhead require only 6 kg of enriched plutonium to build? What makes you think that Pakistani nuclear reactors are producing 36 kg of enriched plutonium per year?

Kindly read your own link

Its saying in worst case scenario running at 40% capacity (a ridiculous efficiency for a nuke plant) a 50 megawatt reactor will produce 9kg... that into 4 gives u 36 kg

An in efficient design will require 6kg plutonium...efficient one will be around 4 kg

Read your post below

For instance, a 50-megawatt plutonium production reactor working at 100 percent capacity can produce 18.25 kilograms of plutonium per year. However, these plants normally run at a much lower capacity, and most calculations use a baseline of between 60 percent and 70 percent capacity. Running at this capacity, a 50-megawatt plant will produce around 11 to 13 kilograms per year, assuming that it can maintain the same efficiency through the entire 365 days. In practice, however, the plants may run as low as 40 percent to 50 percent capacity, producing up to 7 to 9 kilograms per year.

That's what I say that u don't even read what u post.... or don't have power to comprehend the meaning

Please also note you are posting assumptions of a single writer to negate findings of several international most prestigious bodies...

Also note khushab 5 is also under construction....

Either I am day dreaming or some one is

From your own post amount required for a war head

If the GFMR assumed that Pakistan needed 6 kilograms of plutonium per weapon instead of 4 kilograms, it would make a significant difference

Pakistan have the capacity to develop 2 nuclear weapons per year, at most.

Read the parts from your own posts and justify above

 

[LeGenD]

Kindly read your own link

Its saying in worst case scenario running at 50% capacity a 50 megawatt reactor will produce 9kg... that into 4 gives u 36 kg

An in efficient design will require 6kg plutonium...efficient one will be around 4 kg

Read your post below



That's what I say that u don't even read what u post.... or don't have power to comprehend the meaning

Please also note you are posting assumptions of a single writer to negate findings of several international most prestigious bodies...

Also note khushab 5 is also under construction....

Either I am day dreaming or some one is

Assuming 60% operational capacity throughout 365 days:

"Currently, Pakistan has four operational plutonium production reactors at its Khushab complex. Assuming the reactors run at 60 percent capacity, each would produce slightly less than two weapons’ worth of plutonium per year, toward a total output of around 36 kilograms of plutonium—six warheads at 6 kilograms per warhead—per year." - Brigadier Naeem

- which is UNLIKELY in practice because reactors are not operating at 60% capacity throughout 365 days in the first place. Additionally, exact quantity and enrichment capacity of centrifuges are not disclosed to the public. Accordingly, 36 kg output is questionable.

Secondly, where is the proof that the entirety of 36 kg of plutonium is being provided to nuclear scientists for production of nuclear warheads each year? YOU DO NOT HAVE THIS KIND OF PROOF.

Third, a nuclear warhead design may require up to 8 kg of plutonium for production. There isn't hard-and-fast rule about this matter. You think that information in public domain is absolutely truthful?

Fourth, Brigadier Naeem (a former SPD officer) carry more weight than various sources providing questionable estimations of Pakistani nuclear arsenal. He is an insider; they are not.

It is not my problem if you have reading comprehensions.

Finally, I provided an estimation. If you have a problem with it, go ahead and prove me wrong with solid evidence (not with questionable assumptions).

 

[Mrc]

Assuming 60% operational capacity throughout 365 days:

"Currently, Pakistan has four operational plutonium production reactors at its Khushab complex. Assuming the reactors run at 60 percent capacity, each would produce slightly less than two weapons’ worth of plutonium per year, toward a total output of around 36 kilograms of plutonium—six warheads at 6 kilograms per warhead—per year." - Brigadier Naeem

- which is UNLIKELY in practice because reactors are not operating at 60% capacity throughout 365 days in the first place. Additionally, exact quantity and enrichment capacity of centrifuges are not disclosed to the public. Accordingly, 36 kg output is questionable.

Secondly, where is the proof that the entirety of 36 kg of plutonium is being provided to nuclear scientists for production of nuclear warheads each year? ZERO.

A single article of Brigadier Naeem (a former SPD officer) carry more weight than various sources providing questionable estimations of Pakistani nuclear arsenal. He is an insider; they are not.

It is not my problem if you have reading comprehensions.

I give up

Installed capacity is at 100% 72 kg plutonium at 100 %

Also consider this is side show main plant is based on uranium... presumed equal or more capacity...

Worst case scenario would be 10 inefficient warheads

Best case is 50 highly efficiency ones...

2 warheads per year... sure possible ... and I m king of england

 

[Sheikh Rauf]

Pakistan şud have 300+ cüz enemy have large area. Just to be safe.

 

[El Sidd]

Pakistan şud have 300+ cüz enemy have large area. Just to be safe.

Pakistan has more. Dont worry.

 

[LeGenD]

The Khushab reactor provides Pakistan the ability to produce enough plutonium each year to fabricate at least one bomb, and perhaps as many as three to five bombs[depending on the efficiency of the bomb design and the reactor's actual output].

The actual plutonium output of Khushab is dependent on both the thermal power level, as well as the actual operating time. Pakistan's prior history of operating the Karachi Nuclear Power Plant (KANUPP), for many years Pakistan's only working nuclear power plant, suggests that the Khushab reactor may have a rather low operating availability. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the KANUPP lifetime energy availability factor (as of the end of 1997) was 28.6%, one of the worst performing nuclear power plants in the world. For the period 1989-1996 KANUPP’s capacity factor (the ratio of actual electrical production versus designed power) was only 34%. Although the CANDU reactor at KANUPP is of different design than Khushab, this history suggests that Khushab may produce substantially less plutonium than its theoretical capacity.

Link: https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/pakistan/khushab.htm

 

[Mrc]

The Khushab reactor provides Pakistan the ability to produce enough plutonium each year to fabricate at least one bomb, and perhaps as many as three to five bombs[depending on the efficiency of the bomb design and the reactor's actual output].

The actual plutonium output of Khushab is dependent on both the thermal power level, as well as the actual operating time. Pakistan's prior history of operating the Karachi Nuclear Power Plant (KANUPP), for many years Pakistan's only working nuclear power plant, suggests that the Khushab reactor may have a rather low operating availability. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the KANUPP lifetime energy availability factor (as of the end of 1997) was 28.6%, one of the worst performing nuclear power plants in the world. For the period 1989-1996 KANUPP’s capacity factor (the ratio of actual electrical production versus designed power) was only 34%. Although the CANDU reactor at KANUPP is of different design than Khushab, this history suggests that Khushab may produce substantially less plutonium than its theoretical capacity.

Link: https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/pakistan/khushab.htm

Noting that Pakistan has never provided public information regarding any of the Khushab reactors, Albright and Kelleher-Vergantini said terefore, the power output can only be estimated.


ISIS estimates the power of the original heavy water reactor to be about 50 MWth while reactors 2, 3, and 4 are believed to generate double or more the power of the first one, and are thus capable of producing more than double the amount of weapon-grade plutonium per year.

https://m.timesofindia.com/world/pa...ears-operational/amp_articleshow/45919653.cms

A 50 MW plant can generate 18 kg... real productivity of khushab can be 126 kg pr even higher dividing that with 4 kg per warhead gives you 31 / year

That would certainly be inline with nasr and babur launchers that have as many as 4 missiles per launcher... showing that engineers were definitely not worried about shortage of warheads

Kanup was 1950s design and is under civilian program... not under military ... don't compare apple with oranges

If any thing compare them with chashma ... a civilian power plant (into 4) 80 and above percent availability

https://www.iaea.org/PRIS/CountryStatistics/ReactorDetails.aspx?current=429


Go through tables in 2017 it ran at 97% efficiency data is verified by iaea as all 4 chashma reactors are under international safe guards as they are civilian reactors

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Just to add, Pakistan has had the capability to produce H-bombs & Thermonuclear weapons since at least early 2011:

http://isis-online.org/isis-reports...g-nuclear-weapons-time-for-pakistan-to-rever/

 

[El Sidd]

Just to add, Pakistan has had the capability to produce H-bombs & Thermonuclear weapons since at least early 2011:

http://isis-online.org/isis-reports...g-nuclear-weapons-time-for-pakistan-to-rever/

Isis lol

Anyhow

Dude only amreeka has the atomic bomb.