Pakistan's terrible idea to develop battlefield nukes

[RazorMC]

The thermonuclear test of 1998 was a fizzle. While the boosted fission trigger probably worked, the second stage could not be ignited properly and it fizzled.

India will have to conduct another set of tests to prove its claim that it has a thermonuclear device ready. India has voluntarily imposed a test ban. Also, its agreement with US would be breached and nullified if India conducts another set of nuclear tests.

This is the dilemma. Whatever your claims about thermonuclear weapons, without further tests, these would be untested devices and its deterrence value would almost be zilch. Agni 5s and 12000 KM future missiles would be mere shurlis, unless fresh tests are conducted.

India has probably thought this out too. Their nuclear-sub acquisition didn't raise many eye-brows and neither will missile tests. What response did that "Smiling Buddha" generate?

And the problem is not the test bans or the international response (which has always been null anyways), but India reaching the technological level of actually testing the H-bomb.

 

[The Deterrent]

self delete

 

[VCheng]

Boosted fission weapons don't have any stages AFAIK. Its just a tritium core inside the Plutonium core. Rest assured the thermonuclear test was a failure.

The Teller-Ulam design is a multistage weapon:

 

[The Deterrent]

self delete

 

[VCheng]

.........., but it is a sort of "pure" fusion weapon.
Boosted Fission weapons and Fusion weapons are of two different breeds. Boosted Fission don't give a yield higher than 200~300kt, but Fusion ones can give upto 100Mt yield (Tsar Bomba).

There is no such thing as a "pure" fusion weapon; they all have a primary fission stage.

 

[Ticker]

Boosted fission weapons don't have any stages AFAIK. Its just a tritium core inside the Plutonium core. Rest assured the thermonuclear test was a failure.

Boosted fission trigger.

 

[ares]

The thermonuclear test of 1998 was a fizzle. While the boosted fission trigger probably worked, the second stage could not be ignited properly and it fizzled.

India will have to conduct another set of tests to prove its claim that it has a thermonuclear device ready. India has voluntarily imposed a test ban. Also, its agreement with US would be breached and nullified if India conducts another set of nuclear tests.

This is the dilemma. Whatever your claims about thermonuclear weapons, without further tests, these would be untested devices and its deterrence value would almost be zilch. Agni 5s and 12000 KM future missiles would be mere shurlis, unless fresh tests are conducted.

Israel has never tested its nuclear weapons, would you say It's weapon's deterrence value is zilch?

Has US ever tested its W-88 warheads or the Chinese have tested its nuclear weapons in last 3 decades..
So are we to assume weapon designs which have not live tested, do not work?

Why aren't nuclear weapons(like all new missiles) being tested lately..is it because there has been no new innovation, in the design of nuclear weapons...or is it because with the advent of supercomputers, advanced simulations live testing of weapons is no longer required?

Even if assume thermonuclear test was a fissile..Indian scientist have had one and half decade to analyse mountains of data collected during those test and rectify the problem.

 

[The Deterrent]

There is no such thing as a "pure" fusion weapon; they all have a primary fission stage.

Probably I didn't use the right words.
The Fusion weapons (with primary fission stages) are the ones known as Hydrogen Bombs (don't mean to educate anyone, just can't find the right words). Examples are Ivy Mike test, Tsar Bomba etc.
Whereas the in the boosted-fission weapons, a tritium core is introduced inside a plutonium one. For example the Item test. A quick read: Boosted fission weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Design:

 

[Ticker]

India has probably thought this out too. Their nuclear-sub acquisition didn't raise many eye-brows and neither will missile tests. What response did that "Smiling Buddha" generate?

And the problem is not the test bans or the international response (which has always been null anyways), but India reaching the technological level of actually testing the H-bomb.

I sincerely wish that they do.

We have also imposed a voluntary test ban. But we also added a caveat - till India doesn't test again.

And then we will also have a mega ton device tested and ready.

I am sure, over a period of time, we will also have nuclear subs.

 

[The Deterrent]

Boosted fission trigger.

My mistake

 

[Ticker]

Israel has never tested its nuclear weapons, would you say It's weapon's deterrence value is zilch?

Has US ever tested its W-88 warheads or the Chinese have tested its nuclear weapons in last 3 decades..
So are we to assume weapon designs which have not live tested, do not work?

Why aren't nuclear weapons(like all new missiles) being tested lately..is it because there has been no new innovation, in the design of nuclear weapons...or is it because with the advent of supercomputers, advanced simulations live testing of weapons is no longer required?

Even if assume thermonuclear test was a fissile..Indian scientist have had one and half decade to analyse mountains of data collected during those test and rectify the problem.

There is ample open source material about Israel testing a device in South Africa under the apartheid regime. The French help is also not a secret anymore.

What I said was, an untested device - this coupled with an earlier failed test does not present credibility till another proven test and therefore, the credibility factor in deterrence value.

You can have as many untested devices as you like. Don't compare yourself with the Americans and Chinese who had conducted numerous tests and have the kind of data needed for lab testing.

 

[notorious_eagle]

Israel has never tested its nuclear weapons, would you say It's weapon's deterrence value is zilch?

Has US ever tested its W-88 warheads or the Chinese have tested its nuclear weapons in last 3 decades..
So are we to assume weapon designs which have not live tested, do not work?

Why aren't nuclear weapons(like all new missiles) being tested lately..is it because there has been no new innovation, in the design of nuclear weapons...or is it because with the advent of supercomputers, advanced simulations live testing of weapons is no longer required?

Even if assume thermonuclear test was a fissile..Indian scientist have had one and half decade to analyse mountains of data collected during those test and rectify the problem.

Please don't compare India or Pakistan to China, Russia or US. They are nuclear powers and we are all just 'wanna bes'. The US, China and Russia have collected an abundance of data over their years of testing. This data when compiled into super computers gives them real time simulations. India does not has access to an abundance of data unlike these nations. Lets not put Israel into this equation, their is proof that they conducted a test in South Africa and whatever data that the US has, Israel can easily get its hand on that data. Thus, India's claim of achieving thermo nuclear status are only a utopian dream unless India carries out live tests.

 

[DARKY]

The thermonuclear test of 1998 was a fizzle. While the boosted fission trigger probably worked, the second stage could not be ignited properly and it fizzled.

India will have to conduct another set of tests to prove its claim that it has a thermonuclear device ready. India has voluntarily imposed a test ban. Also, its agreement with US would be breached and nullified if India conducts another set of nuclear tests.

This is the dilemma. Whatever your claims about thermonuclear weapons, without further tests, these would be untested devices and its deterrence value would almost be zilch. Agni 5s and 12000 KM future missiles would be mere shurlis, unless fresh tests are conducted.

Boosted Fission Device was NOT tested during 1998 tests.
It was tested and validated way back in 80s.

The Device tested was a Pure Thermonuclear weapon.

Triggers are not expected to produce 30KT equivalent explosion... on experimental small scale designs... which are slated to achieve 43-45KT... maximum.

Even with that weight it is much ahead from any Pakistani warhead design.. which are vintage fission based.

Those fizzled warheads has given India capability to mount its missiles with MIRV each capable of destroying a big city.

 

[Contrarian]

The exact purpose of nukes is to assure, absolute fear in the heart of an adversary. That has been achieved. If you think Pakistan is incapable of manufacturing TN warhead and having the balls to act on it, you're sadly mistaken! Simple fact is, if we are no more, no one around us should be there either. That is what is taught at Command College, not how to pu**y-foot decisions and have an orgasm over the consequences.

You try to strangle us, just before we die, we take the air out of your balloon as well. Simple as that. Doesn't matter how good your tech and strategy is, our bombs blow as good as yours, and the kaboom is equally as loud.

Dude, you think way too much. One small nuke from our side, and one small one from your side, both sides will be shitting in their pants. Game over. Economy dead. Every one goes back home.

Simple question: Is the defeat of Pakistani Army the equivalent of destroying Pakistan? What makes you think India wants or has ever waged a war of annihilation? Would India destroy Pakistani cities for the heck of it? Or Pakistani civilians?

Then why is the loss of Pakistani Army's prestige as a win-all, conquer-all army means loss of the people?

Why then would you say that you are being taken out or that you are being strangled? Defeat of Pakistan Army would simply mean a peace agreement in which you forfeit Kashmir. Now in any case, you donot have Kashmir, so what difference does it make?

Is it because unlike other nations that have an army, Pakistani Army has a nation? And Pakistani Army would be more than willing to
1 - Nuke it own country
2. - Nuke Indian territory

to save itself?

Response to 1 might be a tac nuke on Pakistani territory
Response to 2 might be strategic strike which Pakistan is not capable of surviving due to sheer small size.

They would be more than willing to sacrifice the People of Pakistan because they cannot bear that they got defeated by India?

 

[dr.rehan]

Simple question: Is the defeat of Pakistani Army the equivalent of destroying Pakistan? What makes you think India wants or has ever waged a war of annihilation? Would India destroy Pakistani cities for the heck of it? Or Pakistani civilians?

Then why is the loss of Pakistani Army's prestige as a win-all, conquer-all army means loss of the people?

Why then would you say that you are being taken out or that you are being strangled? Defeat of Pakistan Army would simply mean a peace agreement in which you forfeit Kashmir. Now in any case, you donot have Kashmir, so what difference does it make?

Is it because unlike other nations that have an army, Pakistani Army has a nation? And Pakistani Army would be more than willing to
1 - Nuke it own country
2. - Nuke Indian territory

to save itself?

Response to 1 might be a tac nuke on Pakistani territory
Response to 2 might be strategic strike which Pakistan is not capable of surviving due to sheer small size.

They would be more than willing to sacrifice the People of Pakistan because they cannot bear that they got defeated by India?

Look at your own news agency:

Pakistan World's 3rd Great Nuclear Power - Report by IndiaTv - YouTube

Pakistani army has a nation, coz our nation supports it. & yes we would nuke the shitts out of your country, without hesitation.