09-19-2009, 02:15 AM
'<b>India needs to carry out more N-tests to get it right</b>'<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The government should set up an independent panel to review the data of Indiaâs 1998 hydrogen bomb test to end the debate over its efficacy, says K Santhanam, ex-deputy director of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).
India will need to âcarry out two to three testsâ to ensure its hydrogen bomb is working and ânot rush to signâ the comprehensive test ban treaty, he says.
The panel should include retired âstalwarts in the fieldâ, he suggests. The full report will have to be classified but âa sanitised version of one or two pagesâ could be made public.
Santhanam triggered the debate in August by saying the hydrogen bomb testâs explosive yield had been only 25 kilotonnes, and not the official 40-50 kilotonnes.
The debate has since split the nuclear establishment. It has been argued that the DRDO, and thus Santhanam, had no access to the test data. However, sources say because of the close relations between the scientists involved, Santhanam was known to have been âmade aware of the primary dataâ.
Critics also say the sceptical assessment was based on partial information. DRDO handled only some of the instruments used to measure the explosion â ground motion and fibre-optic sensors and shockwave accelerometers.
The Department of Atomic Energy, which claims the test was a success, used radiochemical analysis. âMy arguments are still solid, â says Santhanam.
<b>There is no reason to be embarrassed about hydrogen bomb test failure, he says. âNo country in the world succeeded in the first try.â</b>
<b>But he believes that Indiaâs nuclear deterrent is not credible with warheads limited to 15 kilotonnes â the yield of a successful fusion bomb test.</b>
Brajesh Mishra, national security adviser during the tests, contests Santhanamâs claim that the issue of the yield was decided by a âvoice voteâ in a 1998 meeting. âThere was no voice vote.â S K Sikka of the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre did most of the explaining and he doubted, as Santhanam has claimed, there were any military officers present.
âThere are people in the world who still believe the world is flat. What more can I say?â<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
India will need to âcarry out two to three testsâ to ensure its hydrogen bomb is working and ânot rush to signâ the comprehensive test ban treaty, he says.
The panel should include retired âstalwarts in the fieldâ, he suggests. The full report will have to be classified but âa sanitised version of one or two pagesâ could be made public.
Santhanam triggered the debate in August by saying the hydrogen bomb testâs explosive yield had been only 25 kilotonnes, and not the official 40-50 kilotonnes.
The debate has since split the nuclear establishment. It has been argued that the DRDO, and thus Santhanam, had no access to the test data. However, sources say because of the close relations between the scientists involved, Santhanam was known to have been âmade aware of the primary dataâ.
Critics also say the sceptical assessment was based on partial information. DRDO handled only some of the instruments used to measure the explosion â ground motion and fibre-optic sensors and shockwave accelerometers.
The Department of Atomic Energy, which claims the test was a success, used radiochemical analysis. âMy arguments are still solid, â says Santhanam.
<b>There is no reason to be embarrassed about hydrogen bomb test failure, he says. âNo country in the world succeeded in the first try.â</b>
<b>But he believes that Indiaâs nuclear deterrent is not credible with warheads limited to 15 kilotonnes â the yield of a successful fusion bomb test.</b>
Brajesh Mishra, national security adviser during the tests, contests Santhanamâs claim that the issue of the yield was decided by a âvoice voteâ in a 1998 meeting. âThere was no voice vote.â S K Sikka of the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre did most of the explaining and he doubted, as Santhanam has claimed, there were any military officers present.
âThere are people in the world who still believe the world is flat. What more can I say?â<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->