Design and Engineering of Agni VI missile is finished

[warrior monk]

talking about nuclear warheads only causes more confusion. No conclusions can be drawn as no reliable data or information is in public domain.

I did not started to talk about warheads the other gentleman first question me about ICF then veered to LIA made in China which I replied as we Indians are also working on that then we are going round and round about the data collected for solving the ignition problem to aged arsenal and stockpile stewardship

 

[warrior monk]

What is the weapon package for delivering a nuke,is it a gravity bomb or missile launch from Jaguar or Mirage

It was a special type of weapon called NABAP or New Armament Breaking Ammunition and Projectile . It was created for mirages and Mig 27s with loft bombing or something like that.
Now DRDO may also use Brahmos also for delivering FBF warhead though not much information is available.

 

[Bornubus]

It was a special type of weapon called NABAP or New Armament Breaking Ammunition and Projectile . It was created for mirages and Mig 27s with loft bombing or something like that.
Now DRDO may also use Brahmos also for delivering FBF warhead though not much information is available.

But we don't have the capability to miniatures the nukes to put in Brahmos ?

 

[AnantS]

@warrior monk : FBF on Brahmos? 200 KT is FBF right? The Max brahmos can carry is 500 kg.

Also I always wondered why did India test few sub KT weapons in Pokhran? Did they test some sub KT weapons for fitting in Artillery based munitions?

 

[warrior monk]

But we don't have the capability to miniatures the nukes to put in Brahmos ?

We do our fusion boosted fission warhead will weigh less than 300 kgs at 20 to 25 kt yield even our pure implosion type will weigh around 200 to 250 kg with 15 kt yield.

FBF on Brahmos? 200 KT is FBF right? The Max brahmos can carry is 500 kg.

Also I always wondered why did India test few sub KT weapons in Pokhran? Did they test some sub KT weapons for fitting in Artillery based munitions

FBF is the boosted warhead will weigh less than 300 kgs at 20 to 25 kt yield max . Yes they tested sub kiloton warheads in 98 . Don't know the weight of those warheads so can't say anything . But they were probably additional data gathering exercise for different fuels like U 233 or reactor grade plutonium based warheads . If it is true than we can make a large number of fission warheads not just from weapons grade PU but also reactor grade PU and the dangerous U 233 . During 98 we were desperate as we didn't have enough weapons grade plutonium and we thought we may have to use reactor grade PU and U-233 as fuel for large number of small yield warheads under 12 kt but now things have changed drastically. We could have the largest amount of U 233 from Thorium -232 and if the reports are true that we did test a subkiloton U 233 bomb then we can make a large amount of tactical warheads .

 

[no smoking]

Thanks to this beryllium we have now reduced the weight of our implosion type warhead and FBF warhead by 80 % now a 25 Kt fbf warhead probably will weigh 250 kgs max.

Do you have any official source to support that?
Or do you have any third party source to support that?

Let's keep to what you have today instead of you may have tomorrow. Currently your H-bomb is not working well. So your scientists may be able to pull the rabbit from the hat tomorrow, or more likely like other countries, take another 20 years and multiple successful tests to achieve that. Simply, you don't know.

Yes as well as no , the fission warheads were successful and weight and yield control can be done , coming to the fusion warhead the simulation will only test the unclean design in lab many many times , we needs testing if we want to reduce the weight , add another stage to increase the yield and probably reduce the amount of consumption of fissile material though use of ample amount of tritium which India makes by boat loads and fissile tamper can increase the yield . If we want to increase the yield or reduce the weight reliably then we will test but till then the unclean device with little more than 50 % burn of secondary which Santhanam himself said will give us 200 kt +/- 50 kt yield and sadly will weigh around 1 tonne .

Even based on your new claim, your real test of first hydrogen bomb was a fizzle. So, your "many times" lab test didn't give your right result, which means your lab test method got some problems. Until your scientists fix these problems, all your claim about reducing the weight without real test.


How to know your scientists fix the problem? Very simple, do another real tests after your further "many times" lab tests. Until these tests match close enough to each other, your scientists can't rely on your simulation for any weapon design.

Yes , actually people around the world are worried that some country may endup making a fissionless trigger in the future a pure fusion bomb not the weird ones built around the world.

But, India is not one of those countries that people worries about.

I think it is wrong your 596 test was a 22 kt bomb of gun type probably and weighed 1.55 tonnes.

Sorry, my fault by misreading.

But my point is: Chinese was able to reduce their 2.7 hydrogen bomb to 2tons 48 years ago while your 220kt warhead is still 1ton. Considering the technology advance in this period, your warhead is too big to be a hydrogen bomb. So, my guess is that is an atomic bomb.

Whom are you kidding with this figure have you seen the YTW ratio what kind of super duper tamper did you use .

Oh, your super scientists didn’t tell you that YTW can be that high?

That is not something unreal, American already managed to produce W56 warhead with even higher YTW ratio (1.2MT/600p-680p) in last 60s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W56

In the past, people believes the 1MT warhead mated to DF31 was around 700kg

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/china/df-31.htm

But there was new report comes out suggesting the weight maybe only 450kg-480kg. At the time, people believed it was the weight for the smaller yield MIRV, but now we all know there is no DF31 equipped with MIRV.

http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default...ts/nwgs/UCS-Chinese-nuclear-modernization.pdf

We were supposed to test in early 80s of a new design . Tamper /reflector testing can be done in labs and currently every country making new warheads or replacing old warheads does that , US even accused Iran for having such a facility and brought the facility under safeguard regime in JCPOA .

But you didn't. And the warhead parameters provided by you suggests that your scientists didn't archieve much on weight reduction until today.

 

[garg_bharat]

But we don't have the capability to miniatures the nukes to put in Brahmos ?

The MTCR will not allow putting nuke on Brahmos. However India can always put nuke on a locally developed cruise missile, which India is working on.

The weight issue is all speculation. No point discussing such things as it will not yield anything.

 

[warrior monk]

Do you have any official source to support that?
Or do you have any third party source to support that?

Let's keep to what you have today instead of you may have tomorrow. Currently your H-bomb is not working well. So your scientists may be able to pull the rabbit from the hat tomorrow, or more likely like other countries, take another 20 years and multiple successful tests to achieve that. Simply, you don't know.

Go reed Perkovich and Chengappa it was supposed to be tested in 83 .

Our H bomb is working enough to give us 200 +/- 50 kt yield which is enough for our deterrence only thing is we require is to make lots of them . No rabbit is going to be pulled out from our hat until our facilities come online in the next decade. We will do new tests only when we need to test a new design or reduce yield not until then .

Even based on your new claim, your real test of first hydrogen bomb was a fizzle. So, your "many times" lab test didn't give your right result, which means your lab test method got some problems. Until your scientists fix these problems, all your claim about reducing the weight without real test.


How to know your scientists fix the problem? Very simple, do another real tests after your further "many times" lab tests. Until these tests match close enough to each other, your scientists can't rely on your simulation for any weapon design.

Yes it was a fizzle with only 50 to 70 % secondary burn depends who you ask which is enough for a 200 kt +/-50 kt yield because of this unclean design it will consume more fissile material than normal.

They didn't fixed the problem no wonder we are stuck with only 200 kt warheads and that too which weighs 1 tonne .

But, India is not one of those countries that people worries about.

India 's shaped laser pulse when focused normally on the target foils spot diameter of 100 - 150 μm yielding intensity up to 1 x1015 W/cm2 in 2012 which is not enough . Only USA is capable of generating such high energy such as 10 ^20 W/cm2 . It would take India another 10 years for such sophistication . Even French have also achieved high energies.not as much as US.
No other country can do that what US is doing so it only applies to US.

Sorry, my fault by misreading.

But my point is: Chinese was able to reduce their 2.7 hydrogen bomb to 2tons 48 years ago while your 220kt warhead is still 1ton. Considering the technology advance in this period, your warhead is too big to be a hydrogen bomb. So, my guess is that is an atomic bomb.

That is not how you reduce weight it can only be done through testing which currently India can't so we are stuck by 200kt over weight bomb but it is still thermonuclear . Weight is not a parameter for judging whether it is thermonuclear or not it is the post shot isotope analysis ,number of fusion events , energy released from fusion events ,how many moles of d and T achieved fusion and the 14 MeV neutron activation products. Which by the way India has submitted to world community relevent people know about it enough information has been given without giving our bomb signature.

Oh, your super scientists didn’t tell you that YTW can be that high?

That is not something unreal, American already managed to produce W56 warhead with even higher YTW ratio (1.2MT/600p-680p) in last 60s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W56

In the past, people believes the 1MT warhead mated to DF31 was around 700kg

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/china/df-31.htm

But there was new report comes out suggesting the weight maybe only 450kg-480kg. At the time, people believed it was the weight for the smaller yield MIRV, but now we all know there is no DF31 equipped with MIRV.

My sarcasm was only related towards China's YTW ratio not US YTW ratio . The global security article says Df-31 single warhead varies from .3 to 1 mt yield nothing else how did they generated the data is questionable at best . Seeing that currently the largest warhead deployed by US the most advanced country in the world in B 83 warhead which is a 1.2 MT warhead which weighs 1.1 tonnes so you mean to say China has overtook US . Well congrats to China .











.

 

[Superdefender]

How can the new nuclear city help India to make more powerful bombs?

 

[no smoking]

Go reed Perkovich and Chengappa it was supposed to be tested in 83 .
Our H bomb is working enough to give us 200 +/- 50 kt yield which is enough for our deterrence only thing is we require is to make lots of them . No rabbit is going to be pulled out from our hat until our facilities come online in the next decade. We will do new tests only when we need to test a new design or reduce yield not until then .

Yes, great, your deterrence is building on waste of nearly 50% of your fissile material? Your financial minister will definitely love this news.

Yes it was a fizzle with only 50 to 70 % secondary burn depends who you ask which is enough for a 200 kt +/-50 kt yield because of this unclean design it will consume more fissile material than normal.
They didn't fixed the problem no wonder we are stuck with only 200 kt warheads and that too which weighs 1 tonne .
India 's shaped laser pulse when focused normally on the target foils spot diameter of 100 - 150 μm yielding intensity up to 1 x1015 W/cm2 in 2012 which is not enough . Only USA is capable of generating such high energy such as 10 ^20 W/cm2 . It would take India another 10 years for such sophistication . Even French have also achieved high energies.not as much as US.
No other country can do that what US is doing so it only applies to US.

Oh, please stop . Let your scientists make the basic Hydrogen bomb design right, then we can talk about what you can do next.

That is not how you reduce weight it can only be done through testing which currently India can't so we are stuck by 200kt over weight bomb but it is still thermonuclear . Weight is not a parameter for judging whether it is thermonuclear or not it is the post shot isotope analysis ,number of fusion events , energy released from fusion events ,how many moles of d and T achieved fusion and the 14 MeV neutron activation products. Which by the way India has submitted to world community relevent people know about it enough information has been given without giving our bomb signature.

Well, according to others, the weight can give some information of your bomb.
A 220k warhead of more than 1 tone weight? Please tell who else is still equipped with such a big hydrogen warhead of such little yield except India.

My sarcasm was only related towards China's YTW ratio not US YTW ratio . The global security article says Df-31 single warhead varies from .3 to 1 mt yield nothing else how did they generated the data is questionable at best . Seeing that currently the largest warhead deployed by US the most advanced country in the world in B 83 warhead which is a 1.2 MT warhead which weighs 1.1 tonnes so you mean to say China has overtook US . Well congrats to China .

Do you really have any idea about you are talking about?
Please check your example B83, that is free-fall bomb!!!! In US arsenal, nuclear weapon starts with "B" are those carried by bombers, the warhead mated to missile starts with "W"!! The former is generally bigger than the latter.

I already give you the example of US W56 warhead: 1.2 MT yield and around 300kg weight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W56

Another one: French TN-61, weighed 275-375kg with a yield 1 megaton.

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/France/FranceArsenalDev.html

 

[garg_bharat]

@warrior monk, the information you quote is from early 2000s. There have been improvements since but information is not released into public domain.

I think the issue of delivery is more significant compared to warhead design itself. The reliability and accuracy of missile carrying the warhead is very important.

The progress in nuclear capability is dependent on political headwinds and international environment.

I think we guessing stuff makes no benefit. Whatever it is it is.

 

[garg_bharat]

From a political and rational viewpoint, a nuclear war with any nuclear power is unthinkable.

India will have to work on conventional strength which is needed for internal stability also.

 

[garg_bharat]

India is NOT spending huge money on nuclear arsenal. There is no sizable increase in nuclear arsenal. However older designs may have been replaced.

The bulk of expense is in design and production of missiles. The expense on warheads is very small.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

How can the new nuclear city help India to make more powerful bombs?

The city will have many dedicated manufacturing and testing facilities. It will have very high speed centrifuge to purify uranium.

 

[warrior monk]

Yes, great, your deterrence is building on waste of nearly 50% of your fissile material? Your financial minister will definitely love this news.

Our finance minister doesn't care we ran our reactors at only 60 % level till the 2000s which is inefficient because we had less ore he didn't care then why do you think he will worry now.

Oh, please stop . Let your scientists make the basic Hydrogen bomb design right, then we can talk about what you can do next.

Even with the inefficient unclean design it will be deterrence against China .

Well, according to others, the weight can give some information of your bomb.
A 220k warhead of more than 1 tone weight? Please tell who else is still equipped with such a big hydrogen warhead of such little yield except India.

Lack of testing tends to do that you get an unclean staged implosion device you get a device with a poor ytw ratio.

Do you really have any idea about you are talking about?
Please check your example B83, that is free-fall bomb!!!! In US arsenal, nuclear weapon starts with "B" are those carried by bombers, the warhead mated to missile starts with "W"!! The former is generally bigger than the latter.

I already give you the example of US W56 warhead: 1.2 MT yield and around 300kg weight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W56

Another one: French TN-61, weighed 275-375kg with a yield 1 megaton.

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/France/FranceArsenalDev.html

Thanks for correcting me , but still it doesn't prove China's warhead have such YTW ratio.

 

[no smoking]

Our finance minister doesn't care we ran our reactors at only 60 % level till the 2000s which is inefficient because we had less ore he didn't care then why do you think he will worry now.

Oh, he will worry because having more reactors doesn't mean you can build a warhead significantly cheaper.

Even with the inefficient unclean design it will be deterrence against China.

Even without any nuclear warhead, India still successfully deterred China for 35 years. India nuclear weapon carries far more expectation than just deterrence against China. It is one of most important bricks of India potential superpower status. India wants to be seen as a big boy in the street, but with a faulty gun? Nobody will take you seriously.

Lack of testing tends to do that you get an unclean staged implosion device you get a device with a poor ytw ratio.

I doubt that! Nuclear striking plan is a scientific calculation, the number of warheads for each target is calculated based on precise parameters of the warheads. When your design got problem, you won't be able to tell how powerful your warhead is. In 1998, it burned 50%, who knows what is the percentage of next time? 80%, 40%, or even 0%? That will put too much uncertainty in your nuclear strike planning. No one would like to build 100 warheads based on a faulty design.

So, my guess is the warhead is atomic bomb which was verified in multiple tests already.

Thanks for correcting me , but still it doesn't prove China's warhead have such YTW ratio.

Well, American thinks that Chinese have such YTW ratio or even higher! You can argue with them.
But that is not the point here. The point is: you are wrong, India is not closing to the P5 on the nuclear weapon. Instead, India still gets long way to go before you reach the American and French's last 70s level. The only way you can get there is: do more real test! It is too early to discuss about India's simulation capability.

 

[garg_bharat]

@no smoking, India does not want to be a superpower.

Neither political establishment, nor military is ready for a superpower status.

India has never claimed to be an aspirant for superpower.

Indian bid for UN security council is logical as India contains one sixth of humanity, and is a major economic and political entity. The purpose of UN security council is to keep stability in the world.

India has contributed regularly to UN peace keeping missions, and India's role as a positive contributor to peace has been growing steadily.

 

[garg_bharat]

India's nuclear weapons are driven by SECURITY PERCEPTION, not for PRESTIGE. The nukes are in line with Governments's policies which are clearly stated to the world.

There is no significant change. India IS NOT BUILDING a huge stockpile of weapons.

Some people just get it wrong. India will defend its country without use of NBC weapons.

 

[garg_bharat]

I have already stated that no testing is a significant risk. This risk is acknowledged. This is the reason tests were done in 1998 as data was needed.

Nuclear bombs (air dropped) already existed in 1998 when testing was done. So India did fabricate nukes even without testing.

@no smoking is correct that India does not get bragging rights without several more tests.

As I said before, this is a tough decision. We are living in a complex international environment. India's economy is heavily dependent on external factors. So India has to take decisions which cater to all aspects of country's development. We cannot just focus on nuclear aspect and ignore others.

 

[warrior monk]

Oh, he will worry because having more reactors doesn't mean you can build a warhead significantly cheaper.

That means the cost is acceptable. Reread what i replied in the context of what you asked

Even without any nuclear warhead, India still successfully deterred China for 35 years. India nuclear weapon carries far more expectation than just deterrence against China. It is one of most important bricks of India potential superpower status. India wants to be seen as a big boy in the street, but with a faulty gun? Nobody will take you seriously.

India has no dreams of being a super power nor it can achieve it in the future nor can any country period.
Only one country is a super power and is going to remain there for the foreseeable future . India just wants to feed its people and give a decent standard of living and health with security thats it .
A superpower is that whose currency is used as the de facto fiat currency in international finance and whose hard power is sufficient to enforce it , who influences global high finance , Which makes US one of its kind not any country now or in the near future. Trillions of dollars of securities are traded between Tokyo , London and New York in one currency and hundreds of billions of dollars oil payments are settled in clearing houses in one currency ( though now euro is also being used) . Practically nearly all of the defense deals are done in one currency. Only one country spends as much or more than rest of the top 10 put together in defense . Only one country has enough hard power to militarily defeat any country in the world . There is no two but one such country like that.
India doesn't aspire for such status nor need it . As far as P5 is concerned our economy is already bigger than one of them nominally and PPP wise it is bigger than 3 of then . India will be the third largest economy by 2025 to 2030 and will have a bigger military industrial complex than any of the countries in the world baring US , Russia and China . I don't know about the rest but US gave us the best 123 agreement amongst the 23 odd countries it has a nuclear deal with and the the only nuclear armed country in the world that can reprocess American uranium without American safeguards only IAEA safeguards . The P5 may not take us seriously now but they will take us seriously when we are bigger than most of them economically and militarily.

I doubt that! Nuclear striking plan is a scientific calculation, the number of warheads for each target is calculated based on precise parameters of the warheads. When your design got problem, you won't be able to tell how powerful your warhead is. In 1998, it burned 50%, who knows what is the percentage of next time? 80%, 40%, or even 0%? That will put too much uncertainty in your nuclear strike planning. No one would like to build 100 warheads based on a faulty design.

Well our CMD ( credible minimal deterrence ) has not been reached yet other wise we would have signed the FMCT so how did you know how many warheads and yield will be deployed and the radiation transport to the second stage can be accurately calculated for the the current design.

So, my guess is the warhead is atomic bomb which was verified in multiple tests already.

Well how did the world know the 1967 Chinese thermonuclear test was indeed a thermonuclear weapon , it could have been a large FBF warhead around 300 to 400 kt .

Well, American thinks that Chinese have such YTW ratio or even higher! You can argue with them.
But that is not the point here. The point is: you are wrong, India is not closing to the P5 on the nuclear weapon. Instead, India still gets long way to go before you reach the American and French's last 70s level. The only way you can get there is: do more real test! It is too early to discuss about India's simulation capability.

I didn't say we are closing in with the P5 wrt nuclear weapons , we are a peace loving country we just want to make as much fissile material as the P5 have thats it . No one can stop us our Ore , our reactor and our reprocessing facility thats it so why bother.
Well if you think India has no simulating capability good we don't care whatever helps you sleep .