Current Nuclear Weapons Development

Looks like DPRK is preparing a new nuclear test. Some specialists speculate about their new low-yield tactical warhead "Hwasan-31" as it supposedly started getting deployed a couple of months ago in their tactical systems (KN-23 , KN-24 & KN-25)

130041946.1.jpg





By the way, actual underground tests take place much less deep than the epicenter of an earthquake. 10 km deep bore hole? lol
 
The Times at least, I cannot post the article as it’s behind a paywall, are claiming Ukraine are months away from the bomb. I imagine there’s more to the story than the headline suggests.
 
Flyaway said:
The Times at least, I cannot post the article as it’s behind a paywall, are claiming Ukraine are months away from the bomb. I imagine there’s more to the story than the headline suggests.
Click to expand...
No I don't think so. Ukraine reactors are fueled w./ LEU, and Energoatom doesnt have any enrichment programs nor re-processing facilities. Under current circumstances is truly hard for them to pursue & accomplish a succesful weapon option ( & even so, that would not change the bigger picture; probably that proliferation - or its attempt - would escalate the war to apocalyptic levels)

Their fuel used to be supplied by Russia, nowadays it's fabricated by Westinghouse at Västerås plant in Sweden... so they dont even have control over the fuel cycle and are subject to strict safeguards.
 
As regards the Times report a Ukrainian defence think tank has prepared a paper for the Ukrainian ministry of defence, saying it would be possible to build a bomb using plutonium extracted from a nuclear power station.

It's been reported today that Ukraine has responded to the media reports, stating that it has no intention of developing nuclear weapons:

www.independent.co.uk

Ukraine war: Kyiv responds to reports it could build nuclear bomb to use on Russia

Kyiv does not possess, develop or intend to acquire nuclear weapons, says official
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk
 
capitan r8 said:
No I don't think so. Ukraine reactors are fueled w./ LEU, and Energoatom doesnt have any enrichment programs nor re-processing facilities. Under current circumstances is truly hard for them to pursue & accomplish a succesful weapon option ( & even so, that would not change the bigger picture; probably that proliferation - or its attempt - would escalate the war to apocalyptic levels)

Their fuel used to be supplied by Russia, nowadays it's fabricated by Westinghouse at Västerås plant in Sweden... so they dont even have control over the fuel cycle and are subject to strict safeguards.
Click to expand...
I rather take a look at Ukrainian research reactors. Those use high enriched uranium and Ukraine have at least 2 of them.
 
www.mdpi.com

Renewable Distillation of Spent Nuclear Fuel

Nuclear waste is one of the most important environmental problems of nuclear power plants. A novel renewable distillation method has been proposed for the direct on-site recycling of spent nuclear fuel and the separation of its valuable components from fissile isotopes, which is especially...
www.mdpi.com www.mdpi.com
 
bobbymike said:
Click to expand...
Forest Green said:
breakingdefense.com

Sub-launched nuclear cruise missile will need ‘an entirely new industrial base,’ warns Navy admiral - Breaking Defense

SLCM-N was a priority of the first Trump Administration that Biden tried and failed to cancel. Now Vice Adm. Johnny Wolfe has to figure out how to actually build it — without compromising ballistic missile modernization or new hypersonics.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
Click to expand...

One thing I learnt about Trump in a book I read about him earlier this year is while he's in general very incurious in many subjects and easily bored about when being briefed is that one of the few subjects that fascinate (Since childhood in the 1950s) hi. That WILL make him pay very close attention is nuclear weapons, it's a sure bet he'd be all sub-launched nuclear-armed cruise-missiles and possibly expanding the US nuclear-arsenal.
 
Forest Green said:
breakingdefense.com

Sub-launched nuclear cruise missile will need ‘an entirely new industrial base,’ warns Navy admiral - Breaking Defense

SLCM-N was a priority of the first Trump Administration that Biden tried and failed to cancel. Now Vice Adm. Johnny Wolfe has to figure out how to actually build it — without compromising ballistic missile modernization or new hypersonics.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
Click to expand...
Everything in that just screams slow-walking a program the brass don't like in the hopes of getting it canned. You can't start making nuclear Tomahawks again because it would "overload production", but the Navy has a hundred or so to fling at Syria/Yemen/Libya whenever the local insurgencies start causing trouble. So either the replacement rate is atrocious and you'd already run out on day one of a real war, or someone wants this project dead, probably to fund their own.
 
Ravinoff said:
Everything in that just screams slow-walking a program the brass don't like in the hopes of getting it canned. You can't start making nuclear Tomahawks again because it would "overload production", but the Navy has a hundred or so to fling at Syria/Yemen/Libya whenever the local insurgencies start causing trouble. So either the replacement rate is atrocious and you'd already run out on day one of a real war, or someone wants this project dead, probably to fund their own.
Click to expand...
I suspect the key word there is "nuclear."

As in, the warheads is the limiting factor in production, not the missile airframe.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I suspect the key word there is "nuclear."

As in, the warheads is the limiting factor in production, not the missile airframe.
Click to expand...
Another FOGBANK kind of situation, you think? The article seems to push against that though:

Wolfe, however, was emphatic at the submariners’ conference that he couldn’t just recreate the Cold War nuclear-tipped Tomahawk.


“We can’t reconstitute that, okay?” he said. “It’s not that easy.”


Why not? Wolfe didn’t divulge details, but a Navy spokesperson told Breaking Defense on Friday that the admiral’s concern was not about finding a workable nuclear warhead — which is the Energy Department’s job, not the Navy’s, in any case — but about ramping up production of an appropriate missile.


“Vice Adm. Wolfe was referring to the industrial base required for producing the SLCM-N delivery system when he made that comment, not the warhead portion,” the spokesperson said. “The requirement to deliver SLCM-N would increase the capacity requirement amongst industry to a level that had not previously been accounted for.”
Click to expand...
 
The USN SSN comms has no interest in tactical nukes and I supporter brass is slow walking it for this and cost reasons. IMO this weapon fulfills no role that USAF cruise missiles could not do better, but Congress has mandated it will happen. Over what timeframe anyone’s guess.
 
bobbymike said:
www.defense.gov

DOD Sends Report to Congress on the Nuclear Weapons Employment Strategy of the United Stat

The secretary of defense submitted an unclassified report to Congress describing the nuclear employment strategy of the United States.
www.defense.gov
Click to expand...
Uhm, yikes.
Effectuating the 2022 NPR decision to rely on non-nuclear overmatch to deter regional aggression by Iran as long as Iran does not possess a nuclear weapon;1
1 The United States remains resolved to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon and is prepared to use all elements of national power to ensure that outcome.
Click to expand...
Emphasis mine.

Gloves gonna come off when Iran tests their first nuke...
 
Last edited:
William Spaniel has this interesting video out about Israel's recent airstrike on Iran:


When Israel attacked Iran last month, there was a secret mission: to attack a site connected to Iran's nuclear program. This video examines what Iran appears to have been working on, how it connects to nuclear weapons acquisition, and what it says about Israel's future intentions in the region.
Click to expand...
0:00 Israel Makes a Counter-Nuclear Play
2:21 The Target
4:08 The Damage
8:11 How Close Is Iran to a Bomb?
9:25 The Broader Strategic Picture
Click to expand...
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.
Click to expand...
 
I just stumbled across this article on the US Congress bringing back the TLAM-N cruise-missiles to the USN:

US Navy submarines to re-arm with nuclear cruise missiles after 3 decades​

The SLCM-N would fulfill a critical role as a sea-based nuclear deterrent below the strategic level on the nuclear escalation ladder.​

Updated: Nov 22, 2024 01:46 PM EST

Kapil Kajal
Kapil Kajal
a day ago

0

US Navy submarines to re-arm with nuclear cruise missiles after 3 decades

Representative image.
Alexyz3d/iStock
In a surprising development, the US Navy has released a Request for Information (RFI) regarding the development of a Nuclear-Armed Sea-Launched Cruise Missile (SLCM-N).
The initiative aims to establish a modular and resilient cruise missile system that delivers a proportional response while ensuring essential adversary targets remain vulnerable.
The goal is to deploy an operational system by fiscal year 2034, with prototype tests anticipated within the next three years.
Click to expand...
 
Hanz2k said:
I rather take a look at Ukrainian research reactors. Those use high enriched uranium and Ukraine have at least 2 of them.
Click to expand...
Not really. WW-R reactor at Kiev's Institute for Nuclear Research was converted to LEU in 2008. Kharkov's Institute of Physics and Technology Neutron Source Research Reactor was put in deep subcritical state (shutdown) when the invasion started in Feb 2022.... also fueled by LEU. Not to mention both (as all nuclear installations in Ukraine) are under safeguards.
 
NMaude said:
Doesn't the Russian navy already have nuclear-armed submarine launched cruise-missiles?
Click to expand...
They do, but it still doesn't make it a good idea. (Also, some of those are AShMs, not land-attack)

Cruise missiles have a short range, relative to ballistic missiles. 1500nmi, about the same as the Polaris missiles. So any sub with an SLCM-N is going to be relatively close to the shore, easily accessible to MPA, shore-based ASW helicopters, and dodging any and all fishing boats in the area. Most of those places are also shallow water, like the Baltic Sea.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom