Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

N. Korean nuclear blast probably less powerful than hoped for: Yale scholar
Yonhap News ^ | 05/28/09 | Sam Kim

Posted on 05/28/2009 6:44:23 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster

N. Korean nuclear blast probably less powerful than hoped for: Yale scholar

By Sam Kim

SEOUL, May 28 (Yonhap) -- North Korea apparently failed to achieve desired explosiveness in its second nuclear test, a Yale University professor says, citing seismic readings that have been generated by it.

North Korea set off an underground nuclear explosion on Monday, creating a shock that registered 4.52 in magnitude on the Richter scale, according to a Vienna-based anti-nuclear weapons organization.

North Korea produced a magnitude of 4.1 in its first test in October 2006, the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty says.

Jefferey Park, director of the Yale Institute for Biospheric Studies, said the seismic data from Monday's test indicate that North Korea failed to create a "Hiroshima-class crude explosive device."

"It was too small," he wrote on the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, referring to the explosion.

Using what he called standard conversions, Park, a geologist, said North Korea appears to have produced a force of 4 kilotons or less through the test that took place in the northeastern region.

"That's a lot of energy, much larger than the 2006 North Korean test, but it still falls far short of an expected 12-20 kiloton yield of a crude Hiroshima-style device," he said. North Korea is believed to have produced less than 1 kiloton in its previous test.

Park said if North Korea had built a detonator precise enough, it would have obtained a yield of 10-20 kilotons. One kiloton is equal to 1,000 tons of TNT.

"My guess is that North Korea tried and failed to get a simple plutonium bomb to detonate correctly," he said.

But he said the latest explosion should not be taken as a failure, warning, "Make no mistake -- an inefficient nuclear weapon is nothing to dismiss."

"Even at the low end of its estimated yield (2 kilotons), the May 25 test released as much or more explosive energy than the largest conventional-explosive air raids during World War II," he said.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: nkorea; nucleartest; yield
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-56 next last
Which means they will have more tests. It would also serve their political purpose, too.

If we let this slide, we will have the third and the fourth.... Eventually followed by ones from S. Korea and Japan.

1 posted on 05/28/2009 6:44:23 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster; AmericanInTokyo; Steel Wolf; nuconvert; MizSterious; nw_arizona_granny; ...

Ping!


2 posted on 05/28/2009 6:45:17 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster (LUV DIC -- L,U,V-shaped recession, Depression, Inflation, Collapse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Should we be surprised that someone from Yale thought it was “too small”?


3 posted on 05/28/2009 6:45:53 AM PDT by Sam's Army
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
North Korea apparently failed to achieve desired explosiveness in its second nuclear test...

We should drop in a nuke bunker-buster and show them what a big boom feels like.

4 posted on 05/28/2009 6:46:16 AM PDT by Onelifetogive (Check out Puppy News at www.buyingapuppy.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
N. Korea celebrates their 2nd nuclear test at a mass indoor rally.


5 posted on 05/28/2009 6:46:31 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster (LUV DIC -- L,U,V-shaped recession, Depression, Inflation, Collapse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Too small.. well I gues we have nothing to worry about. Good thing Obama will make all things right, or we’d still have major cause of concern.


6 posted on 05/28/2009 6:47:23 AM PDT by theDentist (qwerty ergo typo : i type, therefore i misspelll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

non-pc joke ahead, warning

“Wow, they DON’T all look alike...”


7 posted on 05/28/2009 6:47:32 AM PDT by MrB (Go Galt now, Bowman later)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Sure!

not


8 posted on 05/28/2009 6:49:32 AM PDT by Carley (OBAMA IS A MALEVOLENT FORCE IN THE WORLD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sam's Army
Yes, I wonder what his motivation was.:-)
9 posted on 05/28/2009 6:50:10 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster (LUV DIC -- L,U,V-shaped recession, Depression, Inflation, Collapse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

gee, what yield do they need to take out Seoul?


10 posted on 05/28/2009 6:51:19 AM PDT by silverleaf ("Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal ( Martin Luther King))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theDentist

That’s what I’m thinking... Sounds like they’re floating trial balloons, trying to minimize the seriousness of the test. “Look, they failed, they have problems...” Making an excuse for doing nothing. obama is gutless.


11 posted on 05/28/2009 6:52:20 AM PDT by CodeMasterPhilzar (I'll keep my money, my guns, and my freedom. You can keep the "change.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

100 tons, 10 tons, 1 ton...

It doesn’t matter what the yield is. Simply the fact that it IS a nuclear explosion is enough to get the desired effect.


12 posted on 05/28/2009 6:53:47 AM PDT by MrB (Go Galt now, Bowman later)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
"It was too small," he wrote on the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, referring to the explosion.

Using what he called standard conversions, Park, a geologist, said North Korea appears to have produced a force of 4 kilotons or less through the test that took place in the northeastern region.

It all depends on how much fuel they used and what the target blast size was, all things this guy doesn't know.

Perhaps they made a bigger blast than planned, using only a small amount of fuel for testing a 3 KT miniaturized weapon and achieved greater efficiency than expected.

I doubt they are gong to supply the world with the data, so we can only speculate. I'd expect the worst.
Making old fat boy type nukes doesn't make much sense and is a big waste of their limited nuclear fuel. They're most likely trying to build modern miniaturized nukes for short the range missile capability they have.

13 posted on 05/28/2009 6:54:14 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CodeMasterPhilzar

I’m sure 0bama or his advisors HAVE to know that “minimizing” the Norks efforts have a really bad cultural effect... they lose face, and they react.

If ‘bammy wants an analogy, it’d be like calling Al Sharpton “boy”.


14 posted on 05/28/2009 6:55:33 AM PDT by MrB (Go Galt now, Bowman later)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Onelifetogive
"We should drop in a nuke bunker-buster and show them what a big boom feels like."

Wouldn't that be embarrassing if our aging nuke failed to go off...

15 posted on 05/28/2009 6:57:10 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
Well, this story is off the mark. This was not a Hiroshima type nuke, which was a gun-type uranium, the Little Boy. This was a plutonium implosion-type bomb, like Nagasaki. Why did the writer pick a geologist as their "expert" on nukes?

The yield was very small, about 20% of Nagasaki. It is now suspected that was intentional and in fact planned. They are simply trying to make a nuke small enough for transport by missile and don't care if the yield is low because of portability measures.

A 4 kilo yield air burst at 800 feet would flatten any downtown core.

16 posted on 05/28/2009 6:57:18 AM PDT by gandalftb (An appeaser feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
Miniaturized nuke to be mounted on ICBM which can strike U.S. mainland is their ultimate goal. That is the way they can maximize their leverage against U.S.. Then against China, Russia, and Japan, too.
17 posted on 05/28/2009 6:59:18 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster (LUV DIC -- L,U,V-shaped recession, Depression, Inflation, Collapse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: gandalftb
As a geologist, his knowledge on using nuke effectively or the nature of nuke is limited.
18 posted on 05/28/2009 7:02:52 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster (LUV DIC -- L,U,V-shaped recession, Depression, Inflation, Collapse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf
"gee, what yield do they need to take out Seoul?"

None. They have enough conventional weapons pointed at it to do the job. One day, when the wind is blowing north west, Obama has to toss a few low yield nukes along the DMZ to take that arsenal out, but without creating much fallout. Otherize, if the North koreans fire first, Seoul is done.

19 posted on 05/28/2009 7:04:13 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

"Where's the kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering kaboom!"

20 posted on 05/28/2009 7:04:56 AM PDT by dfwgator (1996 2006 2008 - Good Things Come in Threes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-56 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson