- Dec 2, 2016
Going by your logic, every other country should have a nuclear bomb by now. On other hand, there is nothing like Atom bomb. It was a misnomer.
Designing one is not a small deal. Its the design, not the fuel which matters most. You want to have maximum yield from minimum fuel and it could be achieved by design only. Currently design for Indian nuclear warhead is somewhere in 1Kt per kg yield. Means for 100 Kt yield we are using 100 kg of fissile material. Now for us with severe drought of fissile material, this design is not economic.
CNC and Lase cutting could only provide you with the vessel to hold the materials, it can't help you out with the procedure to carry out a controlled detonation of secondary stage to have a massive primary blast.
First, nuclear weapons are easy to make and are much less complicated than making a computer. Countries like syria and Iran did try to make them several times but western countries bombed or cyber attacked them.Many countries can make crude nuclear bombs today. Even south Africa had very advanced nuclear program before giving up. What stops many countries is economical and political fallout. Also not having a nuclear enemy or nuclear neighbor helps. And not many are looking to be super powers which must posses the nukes.
Your logic is correct . But we need nuclear weapons for survival against an all out war with china. Economic consideration are thus secondary in this matter. So even if we have a basic design which is not very efficient on fuel count but just as explosive as supposed to be we can bear the cost for the security it provides.
As for fuel we are importing uranium from many countries now and our own resources are increasing multiple times via continous find in andhra Pradesh.
Meanwhile we must be working on design optimization. What do they do in barc anyway.
It is not complicated and once even a single testing is successfully done, it can be assumed that the rest of the technology is easy to make.