Fusion weapons

Discussion in 'Strategic Forces' started by roma, Aug 10, 2009.

  1. roma

    roma NRI in Europe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    Likes Received:
    1,864
    Anyone around can advise if the Nation is developing such and are these indeed capable of causing much greater damage than fission-based nukes ?
     
  2.  
  3. Rage

    Rage DFI TEAM Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    5,410
    Likes Received:
    971
    Come again? Do you mean pure fusion thermonuclear devices? Fission weapons were the primeval kind of nuclear weapons ever built.

    Why the nation should be "developing fission weapons" (when it already has them - since as early as 1974 with the polonium-beryllium "Smiling Buddha") is a gratuitous (perhaps, accidental) question.

    With the 45 kiloton Pokhran-II detonation in 1998, India received its first potential fusion/ boosted weapon device. The Shakti-I infact, was a two-stage thermonuclear device with fusion boosted primary, intended for a missile warhead, with a 200 kt deployed yield. Therefore, a fission-fusion nuclear device is already in India's posession- for well over a decade.

    Pure fusion weapons or hypothetical hydrogen bombs have been the unrequited dream of scientists for decades. It would require the removal of the fission primary (or elementary stage) required to ignite the fusion of deuterium and tritium. Inducing a fusion reaction requires a high power density, the kind that can only be initiated by powerful laser devices, magnetic confinement devices or fission reactions, as in current multiple-stage thermonuclear weapons. To date however, they remain only a theoretical possibility.

    Some cursory research reveals that in 1998, the U.S. Department of Energy released a restricted data declassification decision stating that "the U.S. does not have and is not developing a pure fusion weapon and no credible design for a pure fusion weapon resulted from the DOE investment".
     
  4. pyromaniac

    pyromaniac Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
  5. Flint

    Flint Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,583
    Likes Received:
    25
    Rite...I've corrected the thread title.

    Roma...your spellings are atrocious. Just dropping a hint here.
     
  6. roma

    roma NRI in Europe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    Likes Received:
    1,864
    No escaping having to develop a mega bomb like the czar Bomb

    the czar bomb was 57 Meg and too large to be on a misslile or other known delivery system.

    so a smaller say 20-25 Meg might be more suitable and deliverable via missile.

    Considering China has 4 Meg device, india cannot be satisfied with 200k - 400K devices - psychologicaly less deterrent value as well :

    So india need to develop a little more in this area even to the extent of sacrificing some of the other conventional weapions develpment .

    Ok if not 20 Meg ( which was just a manner of speaking ) then at least to be on par with our northeastern neighbour so say 6 or 8 Meg should be fine and easily deliverable by missile .

    this is a special present for our northeastern neighbour only !
     
  7. bhramos

    bhramos Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2009
    Messages:
    13,208
    Likes Received:
    6,640
    Location:
    Telangana/India/Bharat
    20 Meg which Missiles are capable of taking such a huge war head in India,?
    other then Agni series are any missile capable of taking such huge war heads?
    are we developing any other N-capable missile at present?
     
  8. corpus

    corpus Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    1
    i believe we r right n the middle of a massive controversy regarding the 200KT thermonuclear warhead.. moreover even if Mr. Santhanam's claims are false it is widely known india has no operational thermonukes. most of indias 40-50 warheads are 15 -20 kt fission warheads and a few 45 kt fission warheads...
     
  9. K Factor

    K Factor A Concerned Indian Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,316
    Likes Received:
    139
    This is highly debatable/questionable. There is no documented proof on the yield of Chinese thermonukes.
     
  10. roma

    roma NRI in Europe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    Likes Received:
    1,864
    pushing the need for a biggie and its delivery system ( to be developed )

    bra - you are right in that question. So what im trying to do here is to push the idea that it shold be done. To heck with other countries' opinions and all theat NPT junk say. because when we face china all of a sudden our western friends are suddenly no where to be seen ... we have to face our defence capability on our own so we do what we have to. so i feel the biggie is one indispensable tool.
     
  11. roma

    roma NRI in Europe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    Likes Received:
    1,864
    we need to change that for the reasons stated in my post above

    Corpus , youre most probably right , so what im trying to say is that we need to change that for the reasons stated in my post above
     
  12. roma

    roma NRI in Europe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    Likes Received:
    1,864
    we have to assume they have it

    we have to assume they have it ; and have an answer to it dont you think,

    after all the brits develped a 1.5 Meg thermo nuke way back in 1961 and knowing that china pursues such weapons with the utmost seriousness it is not unreasonable they have something equiv to a 4 Meg thermo.
     

Share This Page