US turned India into a dangerous nuclear power

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
5,000
Likes
2,302
Country flag
1974 to present is more than 3 decades.
Again, it was only an atomic bomb in 1974, not a boosted fission bomb.

Miniaturized nuke tested successfully 1998 how will India make slbm's and MIRVs without miniaturization and put nuke warheads on cruise missiles. The big nukes are for China smaller for pak.Can't translate any better . Are you p5 official rep?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No, the bomb tested in 1998 was a LOW YIELD H-bomb according to Indian scientists, not a miniaturized nuke. They are different thing. Actually, the bomb showed in the picture of Indian media was too big to be a miniaturized bomb.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,799
Likes
48,278
Country flag
What are you trying to prove? Pointless discussion


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,799
Likes
48,278
Country flag
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/India/IndiaShakti.html


Two stage thermonuclear device with fusion boosted primary, intended for missile warhead;
test design yield 45 kt, with a 200 kt deployed yield
Shakti II Lightweight pure fission tactical bomb/missile warhead, 12 kt design yield
Shakti III Fission experimental device, reportedly made with reactor-grade plutonium.
Probably a fusion boosted design without the fusion fuel, 0.3 kt design yield
Shakti IV 0.5 kt experimental device
Shakti V 0.2 kt experimental device
Shakti VI Not fired; another low yield experimental device?
According to Chengappa the plutonium for the devices

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

http://thediplomat.com/2012/07/indias-military-comes-of-age-the-brahmos-missile/

India will try to miniaturize a nuclear warhead sufficiently to fit on the BrahMos. The manufacturer is working on a missile variant that can be launched from torpedo tubes

http://tass.ru/en/archive/691145

First underwater supersonic BrahMos missile successfully tested in India
 
Last edited:

Adioz

शक्तिः दुर्दम्येच्छाशक्त्याः आगच्छति
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
1,419
Likes
2,819
Interesting article from 1995 on US fears about Indian Nuclear capabilities.


Indian Missiles: Threat and Capability
January 1, 1995


As Indian scientists watched their new space rocket ascend over the Indian Ocean, they were jubilant. The rocket’s four giant stages lifted a three-quarter ton satellite into a near polar orbit, a tremendous achievement for Indian rocketry.

For the rest of the world, however, last October’s launch was more ominous: India had just proved that it could soon reach any point on the globe with a nuclear warhead.

India tested its first nuclear device in 1974. Since then, according to the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency), its researchers have progressed to working on more powerful thermonuclear bombs and the missiles to deliver them. India’s smallest nuclear-capable missile now threatens Pakistan, and its medium-range missile will threaten China’s border regions. If India converts its new space rocket to a missile, it could reach cities as far away as London, Tokyo and New York.

Whether India succeeds will depend on help from abroad. India has long claimed that it has a perfect right to run a space program, and India has never promised not to make nuclear-capable missiles. India is not seen as a “rogue country.” Yet, India has consistently used foreign help to convert its space rockets to nuclear-capable missiles. Imports, some clandestine, some overt, have nourished India’s nuclear and rocket efforts from the start.

India built the medium-range Agni missile by taking a first-stage rocket from a small space launcher and combining it with guidance technology developed by the German space agency. The effort dates from the 1960s. U.S. scientists from NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) launched the first small rocket from Indian soil – an American Nike Apache – in 1963. “We were waiting for the payload to arrive when we saw a guy on a bicycle coming up an unpaved road,” recalls one NASA veteran of the launch. “He had the payload in the basket.”

From this humble beginning, the United States, Britain, France and Russia launched more than 350 small rockets over the next twelve years, all from India’s new Thumba test range, which these countries helped build and equip. It was through this early training that India learned the solid fuel technology that later wound up in the first stage of the Agni missile.

One of India’s ablest students was A. P. J. Abdul Kalam. While training in the United States, he visited the space centers where the U.S. Scout rocket was conceived and was being flown. Kalam returned home to build India’s first space rocket, the Satellite Launch Vehicle – SLV-3, a carbon copy of the Scout. NASA made Kalam’s task easier by supplying unclassified technical reports on the Scout’s design.

France supplied the next technology infusion. In the 1970s, its Societe Europeene de Propulsion gave India the technology for the Viking high-thrust liquid rocket motor, used on the European Space Agency’s Ariane satellite launcher. The Indian version, the “Vikas,” became the second stage of the large rocket India launched in October. Liquid fuel technology also helped India develop the Prithvi missile, which can reach Islamabad. Derived from a Soviet-supplied anti-aircraft missile, the Prithvi became the second stage of the Agni missile.

But aid from America and France was soon dwarfed by aid from Germany. In the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s, Germany helped India with three indispensable missile technologies: guidance, rocket-testing and composite materials. Earmarked for the space program, all were equally useful for building missiles.

In 1978, Germany installed an interfero-meter on an Indian rocket to measure, from the ground, a rocket’s angle of flight. Four years later, India tested its own version. From 1982 to 1989, Germany helped India build a navigation system for satellites based on a Motorola microprocessor. During the same period, and following the same steps, India developed its own navigation system for missiles and rockets based on the same microprocessor.

Germany also tested India’s first large rocket in a wind tunnel at Cologne-Portz; it helped India build its own rocket test facility; and it trained Indians in glass and carbon fiber composites at Stuttgart and Braunschweig. These lightweight, heat-resistant fibers are ideal for missile nozzles and nose cones. To help India use the fibers, Germany provided the documentation for a precision filament winding machine, a sensitive item now controlled for export by other countries, including the United States.

India’s quest for imports provoked a row with the United States in 1992. The Russian space agency tried to sell India advanced cryogenic engines for India’s most ambitious space rocket, the Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV). The United States opposed the deal, rejecting India’s argument that the engines were only suitable for space launchers. “If you can do space launches, you can do ballistic missiles,” a Commerce Department analyst told the Risk Report. The analyst’s stance is buttressed by a CIA report declassified in 1993. It said that a space launcher “could be converted relatively quickly by technologically advanced countries … to a surface to surface missile.”

In 1993, India’s procurement effort surfaced again. A Massachusetts company was charged with violating U.S. export laws by selling India components for a hot isostatic press. The press, which India obtained through the company’s Scottish subsidiary, can be used to shape advanced composites for missile nose cones.

The question now is what India will do next. If it perfects a lightweight nuclear warhead, which the CIA says it is working on, the Agni missile could carry bombs to Beijing. And if India perfects an accurate long-range guidance system, its new space rocket could become an intercontinental ballistic missile. Success would change the strategic equation in Asia and make India a world nuclear power.

But India still needs crucial help. A recent Pentagon study cites composites, electronics, computers, sensors and navigation equipment as some of the technologies in which India is still weak.
 

hit&run

United States of Hindu Empire
Mod
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
14,104
Likes
63,370
Just remind someone to discuss issues base on reality instead of fantasy.
We have nothing to prove your question. But the larger question remains if your nuclear scientists and military leadership will rely on you doubts ?

The few nuclear and military analysts I have read; they bet no money to doubt Indian capabilities including yield we can lit.

If you have anyone from China belonging to that fraternity doubting Indian capability, PUT IT HERE. Or Shut up.
 

Khagesh

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
1,274
Likes
870
No, the bomb tested in 1998 was a LOW YIELD H-bomb according to Indian scientists, not a miniaturized nuke. They are different thing. Actually, the bomb showed in the picture of Indian media was too big to be a miniaturized bomb.
This attached below is what was shown and it is the Fission Boosted Fusion Device. The body of the FBF device is only a little more than two arms length of a full grown adult say about 2 meters. Necessarily, the fission primary will be about as long as third of that over all length. And that will be about 0.66 meter (which is about 2 feet). The dia does not appear much beyond, may be 1 feet, inclusive of the protective shell. So the 20 kt to 25 kt primary (boosted form of a 15kt unboosted primary) would be a small package of 1 ft x 2 ft. Which is standard for all others too.

And there were overall 5 tests done in 1998. Only one was an FBF. You can imagine what the other 4 were.

For reference the FBF:
 

desicanuk

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2011
Messages
527
Likes
686
Eric Margolis is not American.He was part time foreign affairs correspondent for the trashy Canadian tabloid Sun and full time vitamin peddler.A perpetually drunken moron he is admirer of everything Pakistan and Islam.No body takes him seriously except Pakistanis.I wouldnt be surprised if he is on ISI payroll as well.
 
Last edited:

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
5,000
Likes
2,302
Country flag
This attached below is what was shown and it is the Fission Boosted Fusion Device. The body of the FBF device is only a little more than two arms length of a full grown adult say about 2 meters. Necessarily, the fission primary will be about as long as third of that over all length. And that will be about 0.66 meter (which is about 2 feet). The dia does not appear much beyond, may be 1 feet, inclusive of the protective shell. So the 20 kt to 25 kt primary (boosted form of a 15kt unboosted primary) would be a small package of 1 ft x 2 ft. Which is standard for all others too.

Ok, before we go further, we have to clarify the name we use here to make sure we are discussing the same thing: by your term, the picture you show here is a DEVICE, the one mated to the missile is warhead or RV. They are 2 different things. The nuclear device is only one part of the warhead, which means warhead is always bigger and heavier than the nuclear device.


Now looking at your picture, this is only a device. Its size alone is already beyond other people’s warhead or nuclear bomb.


Here is the picture of USA’s W87 warhead:

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/W87.html


From this paper, we know that the nuclear device itself is only 200-272kg, but when the weight of RV is over 363kg. And keep this in mind: this is USA who has the most advanced material, electronic technologies in this world. If other countries, such as Russia, China and India to build the RV on the same nuclear device, the size and weight of their RV will be lots bigger and heavier.


So, from your picture, it is safe to assume that the weight of the nuclear device itself should be over 1 tone. The warhead built on this would be between 1.5-2 tones if not more.
 

Kshatriya87

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
10,108
Likes
15,829
Country flag
But not all Indians are so delighted, particularly those on the left who ask how their nation, with one third of all the world’s poorest people, can afford to spend tens of billions on advanced weapons, including nuclear submarines, aircraft carriers, and ICBM’s.
Ok sir. We will quit and sell our advance & nuclear weapons and help the poor prosper.

Meanwhile though, a foreign country attacks India, steals our resources, money, gold, weapons etc. Now what happens? Instead of 1/3rd of world's poorest (wrong fact btw), India has 2/3rd (or even more) of worlds poorest people.

Such a wise suggestion. God bless you.
 

mayfair

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2010
Messages
6,032
Likes
13,109
The Chinese are the ones to talk- from nukes to missiles, to space launchers and now bullet trains, gifted at different times by the Soviets, Amreekis (especially the philandering skirt chaser Bill) or else stolen in violation of IP.
 

gslv markIII

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2016
Messages
1,751
Likes
16,346
Country flag
Ok, before we go further, we have to clarify the name we use here to make sure we are discussing the same thing: by your term, the picture you show here is a DEVICE, the one mated to the missile is warhead or RV. They are 2 different things. The nuclear device is only one part of the warhead, which means warhead is always bigger and heavier than the nuclear device.


Now looking at your picture, this is only a device. Its size alone is already beyond other people’s warhead or nuclear bomb.


Here is the picture of USA’s W87 warhead:

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/W87.html


From this paper, we know that the nuclear device itself is only 200-272kg, but when the weight of RV is over 363kg. And keep this in mind: this is USA who has the most advanced material, electronic technologies in this world. If other countries, such as Russia, China and India to build the RV on the same nuclear device, the size and weight of their RV will be lots bigger and heavier.


So, from your picture, it is safe to assume that the weight of the nuclear device itself should be over 1 tone. The warhead built on this would be between 1.5-2 tones if not more.
Apparently the Agni VI will have a payload of 3 tonnes & will be able to carry 6 MIRVs. What is the weight of RV there ?

Also, read about the RV Mk IV

http://www.indiandefencereview.com/interviews/indias-long-range-missile/
 

Hari Sud

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
3,701
Likes
8,331
Country flag
Just to remind deal that US-India deal is stuck in one problem or other. Now the Japanese company Toshiba/ Westinghouse has declared bankruptcy. Hence the nuclear power plant of 1100 MW capacity will never be built. Hence India has to rely on its own 700 MW technology and also NSG membership to buy some hardware globally.

Hence all that bullshit of India turning into a dangerous global military power is Pakistani version of indo-us nuclear deal, perpetuated thru Think Tanks in Washington where a lot of Pakistani intellectuals work.

No sir, all this writing in this paper is worthless. As an alternative, India already a nuclear power, thanks to Homi Bhabha and lots of other scientists who worked at Tromway.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,799
Likes
48,278
Country flag
@Hari Sud

Without NSG membership this whole deal is more or less void. India may not even need the deal many parts have of the three phase are complete and indigenous uranium reserves are more than enough to start the cycle. Russia will also be bûilding two new reactors so things have not stalled for India It is USA Japan France and Canada and Australia that will lose out out on a windfall nuclear trade
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top