back to article Did North Korea really just detonate a hydrogen bomb? Probably not

At 0130 UTC on Wednesday, the United States Geological Survey recorded a magnitude 5.1 seismic event in North Korea, and shortly afterwards the Nork state media delivered the message that the country had exploded its first thermonuclear device. An H-bomb, in other words. "Let the world look up to the strong, self-reliant …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Mushroom

    Of course there is the possibility...

    That the Norks built a hydrogen bomb, but when they tested it only the fission first stage fired correctly, and some design flaw prevented the fusion portion of the device from working.

    I remember that the Nork's first fission weapon test seemed to underperform, so maybe they are having the same experience with their first H-bomb test.

    1. Alex Brett

      Re: Of course there is the possibility...

      AIUI the difficult bit about a thermonuclear device is getting the secondary to go off properly rather than just being a fission explosion, not the basic principle of the thing which is well understood (there's even a diagram on Wikipedia!), so even if it was intended as an H bomb if it didn't perform as such that doesn't necessarily mean they're any closer to one than before...

      1. hplasm
        Coat

        Re: Of course there is the possibility...

        Perhaps the Heavy water was damp?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Coat

          Re: Of course there is the possibility...

          Maybe he just got the entire population of North Korea to all shout "Bang" at the same time.

          I really don't understand why the Chinese continue to put up with him. He must be a bigger danger to them than anyone else.

          1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

            Re: Of course there is the possibility...

            I really don't understand why the Chinese continue to put up with him. He must be a bigger danger to them than anyone else.

            The Chinese don't want 20 million starving North Koreans wandering across a very long and hard to police border, and buggering up their economy. Of course there's a thriving industry in China in exploiting those who manage to escape, as cheap labour, sex workers or even brides (given what the one-child policy has done to the male/female ratio). So they probably don't try too hard to stop them coming across the border - and the threat of having your entire family sent to Labour Camps for the rest of their lives is enough to deter most from trying to escape.

            But I guess the Chinese prefer the relative stability - rather than the uncertainty of having a border with a united Korea. But in comparison to North Korea, East Germany was a positive paradise on earth - so I'm not sure the South are up to re-unification anyway. The levels of poverty, suffering, terror and brainwashing are an order of magnitude worse.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Of course there is the possibility...

              >But I guess the Chinese prefer the relative stability - rather than the uncertainty of having a border with a united Korea.

              On the other hand, having the lunatic just over the border running around with nuclear and chemical weapons can't be much fun either.

              1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

                Re: Of course there is the possibility...

                Isn't this the choice we've struggled with, and so often failed, in Cold War and Middle East policy? Sure that dictatorship is horrible (Saudi, Egypt wherever) - but they're relatively stable, so at least we don't have much of a foreign policy headache. Followed by Oooh! This Arab Spring is exciting. Then almost immediately, Oh God, this Arab Spring is scary! Perhaps an Egyptian military dictatorship isn't so bad after all.

                Look at Iraq, Libya and Syria for 3 diffferent places where we've intervened a lot, a little and not much. And how they've all turned out quite badly. At least if you do nothing, fewer people will blame you when it all turns to shit.

                And as the old Yes Prime Minister joke went, "the Foreign Office's job is to tell you all the reasons why you shouldn't do anything. Then when it's clear that something ought to be done, that there's nothing you can do. Then to say that there might be something that we could do, but it'll be terribly complicated - and will need lots of time to study. Then hopefully whatever bad thing will have already happened, so they can then tell you that there probably was something that we could have done, but it's too late now.

                That show really was a documentary not a comedy... And I bet the Chinese diplomats are just as cautious as our Foreign Office ones.

              2. mstreet
                Mushroom

                Re: Of course there is the possibility...

                "On the other hand, having the lunatic just over the border running around with nuclear and chemical weapons can't be much fun either."

                Living in Canada while GWB was president, I can confirm this.

              3. Adrian Tawse

                Re: Of course there is the possibility...

                Talking about Raving Loonies how about Ronald Chump. Imagine him as the head of a state with nukes, it makes me shiver.

                1. x 7

                  Re: Of course there is the possibility...

                  "Ronald Chump"

                  I thought that was one of the stars of the PG Tips adverts?

            2. ZSn

              Re: Of course there is the possibility...

              One strange old colleague of mine had worked in Cuba/Russia/North Korea putting up satellite links (I've met some strange people in my time). He said that North Korea was the only place he felt truly scared. This was in the time of Kim Il-sung and he said that the satellite station was done in the most basic of ways - apart from the gold-leafed control room where Kim Il-sung would see.

              The advice he got when going to North Korea was: a) take two suitcases, one for your clothes and one for food, because there wasn't any; b) most importantly, never ever interact with the shadows that dogged your every step whenever you left your hotel, they are the security services.

          2. Stoneshop
            Boffin

            Re: Of course there is the possibility...

            Maybe he just got the entire population of North Korea to all shout "Bang" at the same time.

            Plus smashing a bunch of radium watches, to simulate the expected radioactive fallout.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Diagram on Wikipedia

        Uh-yeh. If that was a really useful diagram, it wouldn't be there. Maybe that's where North Korea started with its research program, and why their H-bomb fizzled. Get Jimbo to cough up the web server logs!

        Edit: beaten to it by Fred Flintstone. Story of my life, maybe others!

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Of course there is the possibility...

      Or maybe it's a boosted fission device, rather than just a simple fission one. That would enable them to claim that fusion's involved, without it being a proper two-stage thermonuclear device. Just a guess.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Of course there is the possibility...

      I think the yield is too small to be close, the initiator of the Castle Bravo bomb was claimed to be 60kt or 10x the apparent yield of the Korean device. Even the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs yielded double this device leaving open the possibility that they actually just got 6000 tonnes of TNT together.

      1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

        Re: Of course there is the possibility...

        Even the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs yielded double this device leaving open the possibility that they actually just got 6000 tonnes of TNT together.

        I remember that theory being put around for their first test, which was even smaller than the last three 5-10 kt ones. But I read about the last one that the detectors placed around North Korea detected the expected nuclear material in the atmosphere.

        Unless of course they're also releasing trace elements of that at the same time.

        But this does seem too small for fusion.

        Also I don't know why all the speculation that not only have they made the leap to fusion (as they claim) - but also managed to miniaturise at the same time.

        Although I suppose it's possible that this was actually a test of a mini A bomb, and they're lying about the H bomb bit.

        Still they haven't yet managed a successful large missile test launch have they? So they'd still have to put the things on aircraft or ships. Or a suicide sumbarine. Surface in New York harbour and kaboom.

        Have they managed to sell enough fake Viagra to afford to pay SpaceX, now the price has come down? Perhaps try to buy a cheap launch on a re-used Falcon first stage through a false company?

        I'd say the bigger risk is Elon Musk. He's got his rocket that can now land vertically. He's got the new space capsule coming in by 2017-18. He's got electric car capability - so should be able to master the monorail with ease. I bet he can get from a standing start to an H bomb, before the Norks can go from A bomb to miniaturised A Bomb. The moment he buys a private island or dormand volcano is the time to take him out - just to be sure...

        1. Sgt_Oddball

          Re: Of course there is the possibility...

          Thats only speculation.. I mean it's not been reported what his choice of pets are, and he could always run with a super tanker, or submerged Base in the Pacific.

          It doesn't have to be a volcano..

          1. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

            Re: Of course there is the possibility...

            It doesn't have to be a volcano..

            There are some nicely refitted missile silos on the market.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Of course there is the possibility...

              I looked at the page listed, and some questions popped out. Who fixes the latches on the 2000lb blast door when they break?

              1. Danny 14

                Re: Of course there is the possibility...

                Norks have test fired SLBM so now all they need to do is miniaturise which they will do eventually (or just load it with nerve agent)

          2. Chris G

            Re: Of course there is the possibility...

            Personally, I think Musky will hang on in there until he has his own space station, after all he probably has more chance of building one.

            Dormant volcanoes are so last year!

            He should be able to get to it in his own black (for baddy) Iron Man suit.

    4. Faux Science Slayer

      Re: Of course there is the possibility...Veterans Today knows

      "VT Nuclear Education: North Korea Fission-Fusion Doubts"

      Search VT for +30 detailed articles on current nuclear weapon use...

      1. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

        Re: Of course there is the possibility...Veterans Today knows

        Search VT for +30 detailed articles on current nuclear weapon use...

        Readers expect much more raving looniness from FSS posts. One star. Would not read again.

    5. Fred Flintstone Gold badge

      Re: Of course there is the possibility...

      Given the many references to Wikipedia in this thread I'm starting to wonder if the reason that NK's possible A-bomb never quite made it to H-bomb status is exactly BECAUSE they looked it up on Wikipedia :)

    6. emmanuel goldstein

      Re: Of course there is the possibility...

      Maybe it was just Kim Jong Un falling out of bed.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Of course there is the possibility...

        Or farting.

    7. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Of course there is the possibility...

      Actually, the seismic reading is them detonating 60% of their GDP....

  2. Tomato42
    Trollface

    let's assume for a second that what they say is true, wouldn't that make it the world's smallest thermonuclear detonation?

    1. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      No reason not to - they already did the hard part (the A bomb)

      Making an A bomb is extremely difficult and it is not the physics which is the issue, it is the chemistry part.

      An A bomb and especially the Plutonium variety requires the ability to manufacture shaped explosives which detonate simultaneously around the entire fission core and have very clean and well defined shockwave front propagating at several of Mach speed. As a comparison most normal industrial explosives have explosion front propagation speed around 1M. If it does not blow up simultaneously you get a dud (especially with Plutonium).

      Once you have made an A bomb, making it into an H bomb is graduate level chemistry and engineering.

      You already have heavy water from working on the A bomb, all you need is to make it into D2 and synthesize LiD. It is compact by design and "just works".

      Getting from an H bomb (100s of Ktn) to a three stage device (10s of MTn) is village garage engineering. You just pile non-enriched Uranium around the H core.

      So frankly, I see no reason not to believe them that they blew an H device and dialed back the yield. Their nuclear test site is only 300 km or thereabouts from one of Russia main naval bases on the Pacific. Blowing up anything above 50Ktn would get them a Xmas present from Putin (they blew it up spot on for Orthodox Xmas).

      1. druck Silver badge

        Re: No reason not to - they already did the hard part (the A bomb)

        Once you have made an A bomb, making it into an H bomb is graduate level chemistry and engineering.

        Absolute rubbish, a H-bomb is a very complex fission-fusion-fission sequence which is just as difficult as the A-bomb to get right. It took the UK 4 attempts with Operation Grapple to get a yield significantly greater than the secondary fission device alone. So it's unsurprising that NK's device has a similar yield to its previous tests.

        1. Voland's right hand Silver badge

          Re: No reason not to - they already did the hard part (the A bomb)

          is a very complex fission-fusion-fission - that is 3 stage. First 4 British thermonuclear tests were TWO STAGE designs and they yielded exactly what you would expect from a weaponized 2 stage design - 100s of Ktns.

          THREE stage is from Grapple X onwards

          A pure 2 stage H bomb (not a true 3 stage variety) is relatively trivial once you have A bomb and you know to use LiD as an "accelerant". Example - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_4 and the like - all several 100s of Ktn when cranked to full dial. The design is known, the caveats are known, once you have working A and the tech for it you can manufacture one.

          The NK explosion when looking at the quake-to-Ktn tables is ~ 30-50Ktns. (4.9 - 5.1 Richter scale, surface blast). That matches this type of device fairly well. It is also likely to be deploy-able as a warhead too. First American efforts were not weaponizable because they did not figure out to use LiD and used liquid D2 instead. The "use LiD" idea (I believe the russians came up with it first) has been non-secret for 50+ years now.

          As I said before, they are so close to Vladivostok and Nahodka that if they are stupid enough to test a 3 stage device cranked to full dial they will get whacked by their northern neighbor. So trying a 2 stage device and dialing the yield as far back is all they can do at that site. They will not get multi-Mtn range with this type device, but even the 300-500Ktn design maximum is more than enough and it matches their delivery capabilities as well.

          1. Jonathan Richards 1
            Stop

            Re: No reason not to - they already did the hard part (the A bomb)

            Whacked by their northern neighbor

            Hmmm. That could be made to look like a botched NK test, couldn't it...? After all, it's the nuclear capability that is the target, not Pyongyang.

            Then turn the tin-foil hat inside out: a botched test could equally be blamed on a neighbor-whack, or on others further away. This is why developing nuclear weapons is a dangerous business.

      2. Wommit
        Mushroom

        Re: No reason not to - they already did the hard part (the A bomb)

        "An A bomb and especially the Plutonium variety requires the ability to manufacture shaped explosives which detonate simultaneously around the entire fission core and have very clean and well defined shockwave front propagating at several of Mach speed. As a comparison most normal industrial explosives have explosion front propagation speed around 1M. If it does not blow up simultaneously you get a dud (especially with Plutonium)."

        That's only one way of initiating the reaction. They could have used the old fashioned "big enough lumps of XXXXX" and just explosively thrown the lumps together.

        1. Vic

          Re: No reason not to - they already did the hard part (the A bomb)

          That's only one way of initiating the reaction. They could have used the old fashioned "big enough lumps of XXXXX" and just explosively thrown the lumps together.

          The "rifle" design is very low-yield; as the halves get close to each other, the beginnings of the explosion tend to throw the fissile material around, rather than let it detonate. That's why the slappy explosive lens thing was created in the first place...

          Vic.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I thought relatively small thermonuclear devices were quite common?

      As in tactical nukes? Of course, given the likely accuracy of their missiles, the Norks would need a megaton class device (i.e. miss the city by a few miles, and destroy it anyway - the approach the Soviets used to take)?

    3. lee harvey osmond

      "world's smallest thermonuclear detonation"

      Not necessarily. If you get good at multiple-stage device design, you can do cute things like selectable-yield, and other general tuning of the second stage. The devices proposed for the later bigger Project Orion craft would have been designed to generate the minimum of fallout and be selectable-yield up to about 5kt. It's entirely possible the US tested a weapon along those lines prior to adoption of the nuclear test ban.

      1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

        I seem to recall the British Green Parrot (great name by the way chaps) was selectable yield. From single figure kilotons up to maybe hundreds. So could be used either as a tactical or small strategic nuke.

        1. MT Field

          Selectable yield is available from the boosted fission design, by way of selecting the amount of boost. I would guess this is what they've tried. Full thermonuke design is the next step.

          Also I suspect our decadent western governments have underplayed the threat.

          As someone pointed out its the delivery method that matters. Their working bomb is going to be at least dustbin sized and tonnes in weight.

        2. Stoneshop
          Coat

          the British Green Parrot

          How does it compare to the Norwegian Blue?

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          "I seem to recall the British Green Parrot (great name by the way chaps) was selectable yield."

          Yes, but unless I can control it over bluetooth with my iPhone, what good is it?

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @Tomato42 "let's assume for a second that what they say is true, wouldn't that make it the world's smallest thermonuclear detonation?"

      JUST AS WE CLAIMED -- A MAGNIFICENT TECHNICAL ACHIEVEMENT, UNEQUALED IN ITS GLORIOUSNESS BY ANYTHING ACCOMPLISHED BY DECADENT WESTERN PARIAH STATES, EVER!!! BOW DOWN BEFORE US, PUNY RUNNING DOG CAPITALISTS!!!

  3. ZSn

    plutonium little boy?

    'The basic nuclear weapon is a fission device that either fires two chunks of material, typically types of plutonium, uranium, or neptunium, into each other to set off a chain reaction, or uses carefully coordinated explosives to compress the mass of material and cause fission.'

    Ahem, while you can use uranium in a gun barrel approach to nuclear weapons, plutonium can't be. It will pre-detonate before a useful yield is achieved. In fact even uranium benefits from an implosion method of compression. It's just for Hiroshima they wanted something that would be *guaranteed* to go bang and the implosion method wasn't tested yet so they built a gun-barrel weapon. In fact Hiroshima was that test - but they were confident that it would in fact explode.

    Not that I have a comprehensive knowledge on this - but has anyone ever used Neptunium in a tested weapon?

    If North Korea wanted to develop a thermonuclear weapon a more reliable design for implementation is the sloika design (reputedly what the Israelis implemented). It's crude but easier to construct.

    If it was an open-air weapon as various pictures on TV screens seem to imply then radioisotopes driven by the wind will give a quite accurate idea of the design. If it's an underground explosion as I suspect, I guess that we'll have to guess.

    1. Notas Badoff

      Re: plutonium little boy?

      If it was an above-ground test their harvests this year will be even worse than last. And China would be rather wroth, and they need China really badly. But no, they copied the pictures, yes? Korea: our accomplishments are better than real!

    2. JeffyPoooh
      Pint

      Re: plutonium little boy?

      ZSn wrote "It's just for Hiroshima they wanted something that would be *guaranteed* to go bang and the implosion method wasn't tested yet "

      Trinity test July 1945 was an implosion device, a big ball with detonators sticking out all over the place.

      They actually didn't bother test firing the Little Boy gun method, as used at Hiroshima. As you stated, it was essentially guaranteed to work.

      So the implosion method *had* been tested before Hiroshima. And Fat Man was dropped on Nagasaki just a few days after Hiroshima in any case.

    3. JeffyPoooh
      Pint

      Re: plutonium little boy?

      ZSn "If it was an open-air weapon as various pictures on TV screens seem to imply then radioisotopes driven by the wind will give a quite accurate idea of the design. If it's an underground explosion as I suspect, I guess that we'll have to guess."

      Atoms are small; they'll leak. Even from underground. Especially if somebody has recently exploded a nuclear warhead, ah, nearby. Detection methods for unusual isotopes can be exquisitely sensitive (Ding! "Hey. Found another one!"). I guess they'll be up gathering samples, and hopefully finding the info they want.

    4. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: plutonium little boy?

      All the other tests were underground, and I read a news report in November / December that they were carrying out digging works at or near one of the previous test sites. So I don't quite know why most of the stories I've seen in the papers said that this test was a surprise. And this is likely to have been underground too.

      Admittedly China say they weren't told in advance. But then if you remember in December Kim withdrew his girlband from Beijing, because they were only getting a Politburo member in the audience, rather than Xi Xinping himself. And I read speculation then that this was because the Chinese might not want to be seen to endorse an upcoming test.

      The neptunium thing was interesting. I didn't realise it was useable in weapons. But according to that authoritive source of knowledge Wiki (as I quickly Googled it on reading the article) - the US released info that it could be used for nukes in the 90s. The same article said that no-one has been known to try, as it's harder to isolate enough of the stuff than uranium/plutonium.

    5. Simon Harris

      Re: plutonium little boy?

      "If it was an open-air weapon as various pictures on TV screens seem to imply"

      The TV pictures I saw were from the 1953 Soviet tests.

  4. Mark 85

    I think the bigger fear amongst the world powers that be isn't the Norks have the "bomb" but that they will sell it. They've been know to sell weapons including missiles (old out of date ones but missiles none the less) so why not a nuke?

    1. a_yank_lurker

      @ Mark 85 - Given NORK has not real trade with the world selling anything would bring in cash. Most analysts assume the primary reason a terrorist group has not gotten a nuke and used it has been the cost of buying one on the black market. If the NORKs are willing to play "Let's Make a Deal" then all bets are off and some terrorist group will get and use a nuke. A fission device in any major city would be very nasty and a real fusion device could be devastating.

      1. Mark 85

        Therein is the real problem. Their "current state of the art" if reports are to be believed, is that what they have hasn't been miniaturized enough to work as an ICBM warhead. Once they hit that point, it will be easy enough to be transported by boat, lorry, etc. If, say ISIS wanted one and could cough up the cash, the Middle East may very well turn into a sea of glass depending where it was detonated and who retaliates. As I recall, many (but not all) of Saddam's Scuds came from NK so there is precedent and yes, NK is cash-hungry after all these years of sanctions.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          "As I recall, many (but not all) of Saddam's Scuds came from NK so there is precedent and yes, NK is cash-hungry after all these years of sanctions."

          There were also credible reports of NK involvement in the Syrian programme (the one that the Israelis decided to visit)

        2. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

          Re NK selling nukes:

          There is a rather good spy novel based on that premise by Jaques Berndorf (ISBN 978-3-453-00630-0). The BND is informed by Daimler Benz that North Korea has just placed an order for 300 S-class Mercedes and are ready to pay in cash. So they start to investigate and find out that NK actually has sold a nuke... then things start to get complicated...

    2. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      The reports I've read suggest that the Norks are only able to make enough material for 2-5 nukes a year. So they've tested at least a year's supply. How long do they last before you have to reprocess the uranium due to too much decay? What's the shelf-life of a nuke?

      Anyway they've not got many, so may not wish to sell them. Plus there's a good chance selling one would be traceable. The retaliation after that might be quite serious. The regime might struggle to survive without imports of fuel from China - that would almost certainly tip China over the edge into becoming an enemy. I doubt the regime can survive that.

      Also they're under very serious sanctions now, so ships can't just leave North Korea - which means the nuke would almost certainly have to be smuggled via China. Which might also upset them somewhat. It's possible though, they may be mad enough to sell or use them.

      But selling the technology is nothing new. I don't remember the exact details of who helped who now, but look up the AQ Khan nuclear network. My recollection is that China helped Pakistan's nuclear program, as a counter-balance to India getting them in the 70s. Pakistan was a bit light on missile technology though, so they were helping various people in exchange for missile technology. I think that was principally Iran and North Korea, but possibly also Libya (not that their nuke program seems to have been all that serious). I don't remember if it was Pakistan or Israel that was cooperating with the South African nuke program.

      Iraq had a mix of Russian, Chinese and self-modified Scuds. I don't think they were using the North Korean tech. Again I think Iran and the Norks were cooperating there, so Iran would not have been best pleased if North Korea were helping their main enemy as well.

      I don't remember reading anything about Syria's program, so don't know who they were talking to. The AQ Khan network was broken up over ten years ago, and the Syrian project was more recent. I wonder if they were using Saddam's old scientists - his nuke program doesn't seem to have got all that far, and Israel bombed the French reactor in the 80s - but they must have still had the info. Or they could have been talking to North Korea.

      Tis all very convoluted.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Shelf-life

        The shelf-life of an atomic/fission nuke should be many hundreds if not thousands of years. The decay rate for U-235 is quite slow. The decay rate for Pu-239 is also rather slow, but this is usually complicated by the fact that Pu-239 is usually contaminated by higher order nuclei/isotopes, which spontaneously fission, and these can cause non-sustaining chain reactions in the Pu-239, so much so that a sub-critical lump of Pu-239 feels warm to the touch. I'm not sure, though, how much this decay may affect the effectiveness of one used in a nuke's core (That's probably classified.).

        The real trick, though, is that for a fusion type weapon, most are based on Tritium, and Tritium has an obnoxiously short half-life (12 years or so? I'm too lazy to look it up.). Thus, it may only be a matter of a few years before the Tritium component needs to be reprocessed or replaced.

        I believe it's possible to build a fusion type nuke with Deuterium, although I also believe it's harder to make it go bang, and the yield may be lower; thus, the use of Tritium. What I'm not so clear about is whether a pure Lithium secondary could be used (I don't know if anyone has ever tested this, and, even if they have, the information is probably classified.).

        Anon Y. Mus

        1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

          Re: Shelf-life

          I don't know at what purity you need your uranium/plutonium to make the nuke go bang. I can't remember if the Norks are only using centrifuges, or if they've been manufactuing Plutonium as well - I think they may have gone for both at once, as the Iranians did. But presumably you can over-purify, so that the warhead has a longer shelf-life.

          I wonder if you can you get them on special offer just as they're coming up to their best before date?

          I recall that tritium is a problem, with a much shorter half-life. Though that's not as hard to make I think, so it's just a maintenance job. And they've got plenty of labour.

        2. HPCJohn

          Re: Shelf-life

          Anon Y Mus,

          I beleive Lithium Deuteride is used.

          The Castle Bravo test, which has been referred to here, used a large tank of liquid deuterium, which was intended to test the concept, but not to be a deliverable weapon.

          The lithium deuteride is suitable for use in a weapon, as the lithium is converted to tritium when the thing goes off.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Shelf-life

          How much Tritium do you need? You can buy it online from El Reg.

          http://cashncarrion.co.uk/products/nite-glowring

        4. cray74

          Re: Shelf-life

          The shelf-life of an atomic/fission nuke should be many hundreds if not thousands of years.

          I hope that shelf-life includes a lot of regular maintenance and stellar storage conditions. It takes some engineering effort to get aerospace hardware to survive 20 years on a shelf in workable shape in conventional military storage depot. Polymers decay, corrosion-resistant coatings (paint) peel, metal corrodes, and there's always some overlooked galvanic problem between different metals.

          The real trick, though, is that for a fusion type weapon, most are based on Tritium, and Tritium has an obnoxiously short half-life

          Tritium is used to boost the fission primary and is injected into the hollow core shortly before the implosion. The fusion secondary uses lithium deuteride.

          1. JeffyPoooh
            Pint

            Re: Shelf-life

            Cray74 "..aerospace hardware to survive 20 years on a shelf..."

            I have some old synchros from WWII that are packed in cans, sealed cans, likely nitrogen filled with desiccants. I opened one up to see what I had, and it was pristine. Absolutely pristine. Still had that 'new synchro' smell after about 60 years.

            But you're correct, it does take some engineering effort.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Dear Leader

    Better leave off those mung beans!

    1. Jason Hindle

      Re: Dear Leader

      Well, if you want to tell that to Dear Leader, you'll need to hold a seance. He now lives with great leader (who himself ascended to the heavens to become Eternal Leader).

  6. Frumious Bandersnatch
    Mushroom

    unbombified?

    Let's say that you don't actually want to make a self-contained bomb, but do want the right type of explosion. Wouldn't it be easier to rig up some cannons (or rail-guns, but ignore that) containing non-critical fissile material, point them all at a target (which may include a second-stage mechanism intended to achieve fusion) and then synchronise all the shells to fire at once. It should produce the same effects as an equivalent bomb (and will probably be easier to rig than precisely-shaped charges) but probably a lot easier to set up.

    Of course, the easier way to fake this would be to set up your lab near a fault line, then wait for an earthquake of sufficient magnitude and claim that you caused it, after the fact.

    What does that icon do again? --->

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: unbombified?

      > Wouldn't it be easier to rig up some cannons (or rail-guns, but ignore

      > that) containing non-critical fissile material, point them all at a target

      > (which may include a second-stage mechanism intended to achieve

      > fusion) and then synchronise all the shells to fire at once. It should

      > produce the same effects as an equivalent bomb (and will probably

      > be easier to rig than precisely-shaped charges) but probably a lot

      > easier to set up.

      Not a hope. The timing required has far closer tolerance than such a rig could achieve. Any uneven density in the fissile mass will cause a "fizzle" (partial detonation). At any speed high enough to avoid premature fission, the shells would splatter each other into fragments and not achieve critical mass.

      1. Frumious Bandersnatch

        Re: unbombified?

        Not a hope

        Oh well, was a thought anyway. I guess I'll have to retake Bondesque Villainy 101.

    2. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: unbombified?

      Also you can tell a real earthquake from a nuclear fake-quake. Real ones are deeper, and last longer. And you'd need to release the right radioactive goodies for the atmospheric detectors to pick up. Easier to fake small bangs with lots and lots of TNT - or a fuel-air explosive, I'd have thought.

      Or could you get a million people in a big cave to all jump up and down at once? If North Korea wins the synchronised trampolining at the next Olympics, you'll know I was right...

  7. Shane 4

    Nobody cares!

    Hey look everyone, It's the boy who cried wolf....... again!

    Even if it's true, No one cares Nork.

    You offer nothing on the world stage other than threats and parades of synchronised dancers, Go back and play in the corner of the room, NOW!

  8. x 7

    last time this happened the RAF sent one of its VC10 tankers to go sniffing the air around Korea......some of them were fitted with sampling equipment to detect airborne radioactive particles. Thats what proved the Norks HAD exploded a nuke.

    Now we've scrapped the VC10s and don't have an equivalent replacement (the new civilian-crewed tankers aren't fitted out for such duties) we're going to have to take the Norks at their word and react accordingly.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      US Air Force

      I believe the US still has the WC-135 run by AFTAC.

      1. Dave 32

        Re: US Air Force

        Constant Phoenix:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_WC-135_Constant_Phoenix

        I just hope they have plenty of fighter escorts for it. I wouldn't put it past the Norks to try and shoot one down. :-(

        Dave

    2. WatAWorld

      Republic of Korea Air Force, Japan Air Self-Defense Force, People's Liberation Army Air Force.

      1. Voland's right hand Silver badge

        Missed a few

        Republic of Korea Air Force, Japan Air Self-Defense Force, People's Liberation Army Air Force.

        You forgot Russian Pacific fleet and Voiska PVO - they are next door in Vladivostok/Nahodka. Less than 300km from the test site. They were probably the first ones to have a bird in the air downwind too.

        There is at least one USA carrier group in the region and quite a few USA land-based assets as well.

        So in fact, we should know already if it was a nuke or a sloika (simple 2-stage low yield thermo-nuke) or a true Theller-Ulman/Third Idea thermonuclear device (least likely - yield is too low).

        The fact that all media outlets have suddenly started to lie about the size makes me assume the worst (sloika - simple thermonuke). Anyone and their dog can lookup 5.1 in the table - it is ~ 40Ktn +/- 10 which fits a sloika cranked to minimum yield (purely to verify that the fusion has occurred). Suddenly, all media outlets start blabbering about 9Ktn. Well - that does not compute. There is no way in hell you can get 5.1 Richter with only 9Ktn charge on the surface.

        1. phuzz Silver badge

          Re: Missed a few

          The magnitude of the earthquake isn't a direct correlation to the yield of the weapon. In order to accurately determine the yield you need to know a lot about the size, shape and depth of the cavity the weapon was detonated in, and the rock around it. Different testing sites require a different bias correction, and with only four explosions to go on, this will be tricky to calculate.

          What we can tell from the recorded tremors is that this detonation was very similar to their last test, which is widely agreed to have been a pure fission weapon.

      2. x 7

        "Republic of Korea Air Force, Japan Air Self-Defense Force, People's Liberation Army Air Force."

        none of those have - or admit to, nuke-sniffing equipped long-range aircraft like the VC10

      3. Stoneshop
        Alert

        People's Liberation Army Air Force,

        the Liberation Air Force of the People's Army, the Air Force of the People's Liberation Army Front and the Air Force Army For The Liberation Of The People.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: People's Liberation Army Air Force,

          the Liberation Air Force of the People's Army, the Air Force of the People's Liberation Army Front and the Air Force Army For The Liberation Of The People.

          Judging by the lack of upvotes we're fresh out of Monty Python fans..

          1. Stoneshop
            Megaphone

            Re: People's Liberation Army Air Force,

            Hmmm. Maybe the South Koreans should start deploying the deadliest joke in the world; they already have thousands of loudspeakers blasting across the border.

    3. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      You can sniff that on the ground

      The low level wind forecast puts the cloud above the Nagoya/Tokyo/Osaka metropolitan area over the next days. That also answers the question of "why now" - if they did it next week it would have gone into China.

      You can sniff it any way you like there. Even on the ground.

      Alternatively, you can sniff above USA in two-three days. The standard El-Nino Pacific JetStream pattern is to join the polar jetstream coming across Siberia over the Korean peninsula and the Chinese branch over the Korean Sea and proceed straight (no turns, just one straight line) to continental USA hitting the coast around SFO. ~ 6k miles, 80 mph average - 3 days and it will be there to sniff for everyone who can get to ~ 30K feet.

  9. Neoc
    FAIL

    Oops.

    "My concern is that they will do something that causes damage, or possibly an explosion, and won't be able to discuss it, as no one will want to admit to it. The complications are enormous."

    And what makes you think this isn't what happened this time? "oops, one of our devices detonated by mistake - better tell the world we were running a test."

  10. WatAWorld

    The UN SC should task China with removing the North Korea's monarchy

    The UN SC should task China with removing the North Korea's herditary dictatorship.

    North Korea is a threat to 2 countries, China and South Korea.

    China might have favoured NK back when NK had some claim to being a communist country, but monarchies are not communist states.

    There is no denying North Korea is as much or more a totalitarian dictatorship as Saudi Arabia. Probably the only thing stopping China is the fear that the USA interpret such an invasion as a direct threat to South Korea.

    1. Mad Chaz

      Re: The UN SC should task China with removing the North Korea's monarchy

      I don't know. If I was china, I could see a point keeping NK. They'll make a very good scapegoat when China needs someone to start trouble so they can expand.

      1. Richard Wharram

        Re: The UN SC should task China with removing the North Korea's monarchy

        China can't just march into NK and take it over. Nobody wants the Chinese and US armies to be sat either side of a land border.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The UN SC should task China with removing the North Korea's monarchy

      > ...monarchies are not communist states.

      Nor is China.

    3. Mark 85

      Re: The UN SC should task China with removing the North Korea's monarchy

      Right... Now who actually pays attention to the UN and what they mandate?

      1. Danny 14

        Re: The UN SC should task China with removing the North Korea's monarchy

        To China, NK is like the spotty kid next door that keeps torturing cats and setting off firecrackers. They are a nuisance but they leave China alone, actually they worship China as China appears to be the only person who wants to talk to them. Most they are all noise but want to get hold of catapults big enough to break the windows of japan because that will piss many people off and be quite lolz.

        The rest of the street make lots of noise about punishing him and he has been banned by almost every shop in town but luckily China buys the fags and beer for him.

        He used to live in a detached house but he was forced to live in a semi detached house with SK and doesn't like it.

  11. Mad Chaz

    Actual Hydrogen bomb, instead of a nuclear device

    Maybe they just filled up some large container with liquefied hydrogen then chucked it in spark pit?

  12. Barry Mahon

    Plenty of possibilities to use satellites to sniff. Probably already done, hence White House suggestion it wasn't H. Everything that everybody says is filtered from their informatin collection methods or is deliberate fudge.

    1. Danny 14

      how will satellites (in thermosphere) detect heavy particles carried in the wind (up to mesosphere)?

  13. circuitguy

    general note, the US has always fail to properly record the data in the Clinton and Obama administrations during these "tests". These Administrations spins the story into noise. But the odds are high that this is a low yield test of a fusion device. Since it is extremely expensive to produce the proper isotopes and the most important part, the correct metal phase state(extremely difficult) , one shouldn't be surprise of a minimum design for demonstrate of the triggering stage and focusing housing. if one adds an external source of neutrons to the stream, as some earlier US designs used, its possible to vary the output of the fusion device.

  14. Christian Berger

    No it was pole vault training

    At least to this news report from a respected German source:

    http://www.der-postillon.com/2016/01/erschutterung-in-nordkorea-laut-cia-nur.html

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: No it was pole vault training

      Upvoted though I did guess roughly what the picture would be.

  15. druck Silver badge

    H-Bombs, its the fission not fusion

    In the current media reports on the North Korean nuclear test seems to be a complete lack of understanding of what a H-Bomb is, despite the knowledge being public available. While it has a fusion element, that is not what gives it its greater yield, that is still the fission component, but more effectively.

    As mentioned in the article the biggest problem with an atomic bomb is the energy released when fission starts is so great it blows the bomb apart, which leads to a low yield and lots of radioactive contamination from the unused uranium or plutonium.

    Where as a convention A-bomb uses high explosives to try to hold the fissile material together during detonation, a H-bomb uses the result of fusion triggered by a smaller fission bomb, to constrain a larger fission bomb so it holds together longer producing a higher yield and less unused fissile material. The actual mechanism is massively intense X-rays from the fusion reaction causes ablative pressure on a uranium jacket surrounding the secondary fission device..

    A H-bomb is really a fission-fusion-fission bomb, with the vast majority of the energy released coming from the fission not fusion.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: H-Bombs, its the fission not fusion

      Yes. It is possible of course that NK have built the first component - the fission/fusion part - but have not worked out how to do the second stage fission bomb. This would explain why the yield is up, but not up by nearly enough.

      Whatever, it is extremely worrying because even if the thing needs an Artic trailer to transport, it could still be used in the ME or got into a country with lax controls on incoming shipping containers - i.e. most of them.

      However, just as the British nuclear deterrent is basically "if you bomb us to bits then our scary Trident might possibly work out who you are and bomb you", perhaps the function of North Korea is to deter terrorist attacks on China - "Our loony neighbour might nuke you".

    2. circuitguy

      Re: H-Bombs, its the fission not fusion

      "vast majority of the energy released coming from the fission not fusion" --- sorry, but that is totally incorrect. 235 uranium is not used as a "jacket" for the hydrogen isotope..... for many reasons, one is the chemical interaction, resulting in a bad "thing:. splitting-fission- energy is small in comparsion to fusion. simple example of fission process is the production of radon gas, that break down - fission- of uranium if was equal the energy released going from h3 to He, the earth surface would be molten rock and no water...... basic physics of e=mc2. and one can not compress a hollow core of uranium uniformly , for many reasons........ rhink of lead softness.....

    3. Balvenie Doublewood

      Re: H-Bombs, its the fission not fusion

      Depends on the design - the hohlraum U238 will fission from the faster fusion neutrons but the yield would be about 50:50. The Tsar Bomb 50Mt was 95% fusion energy if i recall correctly, upgradeable to 100Mt with a U238 jacket to be 50:50.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: H-Bombs, its the fission not fusion

        "The Tsar Bomb 50Mt was 95% fusion energy if i recall correctly"

        Wasn't it also said that the Russians believed that the Americans had really developed a fusion bomb and were slightly flabbergasted, after the Tsar Bomba went off, to realise that the US must have had developed something rather different? Krushchev is claimed to have come home and told his family that he had seen something absolutely appalling and was extremely worried about it.

    4. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge
      Happy

      Re: H-Bombs, its the fission not fusion

      ...causes ablative pressure on a uranium jacket...

      As it's finally getting colder now, I went to M&S and asked for a uranium jacket.

      I've no idea why that police helicopter has started following me around...

      1. werdsmith Silver badge

        Re: H-Bombs, its the fission not fusion

        As it's finally getting colder now, I went to M&S and asked for a uranium jacket.

        Make your own:

        http://www.amazon.com/Images-SI-Uranium-Ore/dp/B000796XXM/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1452175106&sr=8-2&keywords=uranium+ore

  16. wolfetone Silver badge

    I heard it caused an earthquake, or an earthquake was reported in that area where they did the test anyway. But if they didn't make the bomb, maybe they've just started fracking?

  17. OrientalHero
    Joke

    Perhaps they bought the thing explainer....

    Perhaps they were waiting for the right documentation to be published - thing explainer with it's "city burning fire machine"!! It might be coincidence that not long after it was published NK "succeed" in their fusion test.

    I guess if they make an "up goer" next (https://xkcd.com/1133/) and land people on the moon, we'll be a bit surer...

  18. MJI Silver badge

    Picture

    Little boy sitting on his granddads knee

  19. fpx
    Boffin

    Little Difference

    As the article hints at, there are two types of fission bombs. The gun-barrel type, where you simply fire one chunk of sub-critical uranium or plutonium at another to form a super-critical mass, is trivial to build but pretty ineffective, and incapable of triggering a fusion stage. The implosion type, where a sphere of high explosives compresses a hollow sphere of uranium or plutonium to become super-critical, is much more difficult to engineer -- the detonation must be very precise or the whole thing will fizzle. Better design will result in higher maximum compression and more chain reaction. Eventually it will be hot enough for long enough to ignite any hydrogen that might be at its core.

    So best guess is that NK might have moved from gun-barrel type to implosion type weapons, and even if it wasn't good enough to ignite the second stage, they can now start optimizing their design until it does.

    It's just slightly odd to advertise this test as such. Other nuclear powers made certain that their designs would be effective (using cheap dry runs with depleted uranium) before testing it for real.

    From a strategic standpoint though, there's little difference. Any A-bombs are good at deterrence only. It's the threat that they could level a western city that grants them a seat at the table -- and it doesn't matter at all if they have kilotons or megatons to threaten with. But the entire country would be burned to cinders the second after they used any of them.

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: Little Difference

      North Korea have been digging tunnels deep into rock since the 1950s. I heard someone on the radio suggesting that the most worrying thing was the idea that the top bods in the regime think that they (personally obviously - sod the rest of the population) might therefore be able to comfortably survive nuclear retaliation.

      I'm not sure I buy that idea, as surely spending the rest of your life hiding in a tunnel, however luxurious, is nowhere near as fun as being the boss of a whole Stalinist theme park. Where you can oppress your population, have the finest goodies that money can buy, meet Dennis Rodman, march your huge army around, and generally play God. I guess we so far out on the edge of sanity, that it's very hard to work out what the hell the regime wants out of anything. Makes them very hard to predict.

  20. BebopWeBop
    Mushroom

    I have to say I am impressed (admittedly only from an A level Physics, University Maths background with other interests) on the level of the discussion of NKs firing. Beats the UK dailys or the BBC. Or I suppose gubimint as well.

  21. cd / && rm -rf *
    Mushroom

    Brush up those CVs....

    There are some worryingly detailed explanations of how H-bombs work in this thread. Some of those posting here can expect the Norks to be along with job offers.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Brush up those CVs....

      "Some of those posting here can expect the Norks to be along with job offers."

      With the Towel Folder's and the PR man's view of science and its funding, perhaps that's a deliberate ploy. It's possibly better to work for a power mad tyrant who wants you to make stuff for him than an Old Etonian who thinks that politics, philosophy and economics are more important than engineering, chemistry and physics.

      1. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

        Re: Brush up those CVs....

        Doesn't hurt having a smattering of philosophy when you're in engineering, physics, chemistry, biology, etc. You know, concepts like ethics and responsibility and stuff...

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Brush up those CVs....

          "You know, concepts like ethics and responsibility and stuff..."

          An awful lot of philosophy, from Plato to Scruton, is about justifying the desires of the rich and the status quo. Socrates provided arguments as to why aristocracy was better than democracy, Hegel told Germans to obey the State, Scruton defends fox hunting. When I want some ethics and responsibility and stuff there's some good ideas in the first 4 books of the New Testament. And I'm an atheist.

          Yes, I'm trying to over-make the point, but look at the world today and tell me who did more for the poor of London; Karl Marx or Joseph Bazalgette?

  22. Tom 7

    Too small?

    Well possibly but as has been pointed out the additional power from the fusion part is really down to how much you put there. Perhaps they didnt want a Castle Bravo cock-up.

    The USGS puts it at 5.1 on the Richter so its over 30Ktonne TNT equivalent. That's not quite the 500Kton of the first UK 'thermonuclear' device which was pure fission (or fiction) to get the US to share data. Nonetheless it could easily be a Hiroshima sized jobie doubled up by fusion.

    Once you've got the method for getting the fusion started there are no physical limits to how big you can go afterwards.

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge
      Flame

      Re: Too small?

      I did a Hiroshima sized jobbie once. Boy those chillies were hot...

  23. nilfs2
    Mushroom

    Can't blame the Norks for trying to protect themselves

    If I had the Yanks pointing it's nuclear arsenal at me because they don't like the way I live, I would do my best to try to protect me and my people. Remember that the Nazis managed to make people believe that anyone different from them was their enemy, that is awfully a lot like the USA government thinking, you can't be so foolish to think that Norks are going to take over the world, they just don't want to be part of the world, let them be the hermit country.

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: Can't blame the Norks for trying to protect themselves

      let them be the hermit country.

      It's very nice of you to not to mind about the torture, slave labour camps, repression collective punishment and general hell on earth that is North Korea. They waited until about a million people had already died in the 1990s famine, before they bothered to ask for food aid. They did decide to think about trying not to have future famines, by giving up on the disaster that forced collectivisation of agriculture always brings - but I seem to remember that the new fat leader reversed those reforms - as he's gone for even more repression than before.

      Anyway, they didn't need nukes to protect themselves. The frozen conflict in Korea has gone on for years, and the US has entirely failed to try to nuke them. Nor have the South or US tried to invade - and the US only keep about one division there - so it's not like they've got the force on hand to launch an invasion. The South do, but their policy for years was avoiding confrontation - even over the nuclear testing (when the US wanted tougher sanctions). And it was only missile tests, artillery attacks and the sinking of an ROK navy ship that persuaded them away from their Sunshine Policy.

      So nope, North Korea doesn't need nukes. And without them would have better relations, and would be given subsidised (and some free) food, medicine and fuel as a reward for not having the nuke program (as they were getting in the 90s), even though that'll probably prolong the life of what is one of the worst regimes in history. It was deemed better than them getting nukes. Plus they have an estimated 20,000 pieces of artillery and rocket launchers aimed at Seoul (20-odd miles from the border), so don't need nukes to destroy the ROK's capital city.

      1. wolfetone Silver badge

        Re: Can't blame the Norks for trying to protect themselves

        "It's very nice of you to not to mind about the torture, slave labour camps, repression collective punishment and general hell on earth that is North Korea. "

        Ever heard of Guantanamo Bay?

        1. Lamont Cranston

          Re: Ever heard of Guantanamo Bay?

          That the USA has a less than stellar reputation on human rights, is hardly a reason to cheer on the NK nuclear programme.

          1. Rick Brasche

            Re: Ever heard of Guantanamo Bay?

            like the Brits and India or the "troubles" in Ireland?

            For people to point fingers about what Americans did during their civil war, and for a few hundred individuals captured in the battlefield while refusing to follow the Geneva Convention and uniform their soldiers, whilst barely a generation away from oppressing the world's next economic powerhouse and still playing hob trying to maintain a "united" Kingdom thru decades of occupation, the British have sadly, little to say either.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Ever heard of Guantanamo Bay?

              If you really want to hear silence then ask a US politician why they supported the IRA (including Jerry Adams visiting the White House), despite the fact that their actions caused equivalent number of deaths to 9/11, you'll be amazed how quiet it goes......

              1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

                Re: Ever heard of Guantanamo Bay?

                To be fair to the US government Gerry Adams was only invited to the White House, as a reward, after the Good Friday Agreement was in place.

                But there are quite a few US politicians who should be ashamed of themselves for having helped politically and financially support Sinn Fein/IRA terrorism from back in the day.

        2. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

          Re: Can't blame the Norks for trying to protect themselves

          wofetone,

          Indeed I have heard of Guantanamo. Where a few hundred people captured on the battlefield in a war in Afghanistan that the US did not start were kept. People that it has proved virtually impossible to repatriate because they weren't fighting for a state, so they weren't technically POWs - and most of their own countries refused to take them back, on the grounds that many of them were violent nutcases. A not ideal situation, appallingly badly handled.

          North Korea keeps many hundreds of thousands of it's people in gulags. So multiple percent of it's poplulation live and die in slave labour camps. Whole families can be sent for life imprisonment there, without trial, defence, evidence or due process. The "crimes" can be things such as trying to escape to China, watching DVDs, saying the President is an evil wanker, etc. Children born to people inside those prison camps are also politically contaminated. So they also get life imprisonment - for the crime of being born.

          I also pointed out that dliberately causing a famine that kills 5% of your population is also not what one would call good governance. Not to mention the secret police, torture, random killings of political opponents, lack of freedom, all-pervasive propoganda, constant horrendously intrusive surveillance, fear, despair, grinding miserable poverty etc.

          There is no equivalence between the regime in North Korea and the US government. If you attempt to create one you are at best an ignorant fool.

          As I said, this is one of the worst regimes in history. That's not hyperbole. It's equivalent to what Stalin's Russia was like in the worst days of the 1930s purges. Or the worst days of the Cultural Revolution in China.

      2. nilfs2
        Facepalm

        Re: Can't blame the Norks for trying to protect themselves

        @I ain't Spartacus

        Starvation and slavery is very present on "americanized" countries, and most of the bad things said on media about Norks is propaganda and/or uninformed lies; I'm not defending NK as the heaven we all should take as raw model, all I'm saying is that no country is perfect and we all are big rapers of human rights, freedom and inequality. How come there are people on the streets starving to dead and/or with deceases that can be cured easily if they had the money to do so meanwhile there are other people gold plating their Bugatti Veyron?

        Capitalism as it is on the world right now is not better than communism or totalitarianism, the thing is that a country like the USA can wash it's dirty clothes somewhere else outside it's borders and nobody will say a thing because they will be tagged as terrorists, a luxury that a country like NK can't afford.

        1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

          Re: Can't blame the Norks for trying to protect themselves

          nilfs2,

          Starvation and slavery is very present on "americanized" countries

          I think you're going to have to clarify what you mean here. But anyway you're talking rubbish. Slavery is illegal in most of the world. I'd assume all "americanised" countries, whatever that means.

          No country is perfect. But the North Korean regime is as close to George Orwell's 1984 as we're likely to see. Any attempt to try to create some moral equivalence between the US and North Korean governments means you are an ignorant fool, or an apologist for one of the worst regimes in human history.

          and most of the bad things said on media about Norks is propaganda and/or uninformed lies

          Are you denying my points above about the North Korean gulag system? This is visible from space - and I've also seen books by people who escaped from it, and heard interviews with others who had family members sent there. The North Korean aggressive invasion of the South is also a matter of record, as is the kidnapping of Japanese civilians off beaches up until the 1980s. It was a UN report to confirm the torpedoing of that South Korean warship in international waters. And I've not seen anyone question the regular North Korean artillery attacks on the South. Or special forces raids. The murder of political opponents gets announced on state news. There aren't many South Koreans desperate to escape into North Korea, but many Northerners desperate to get out. Hence the minefields and guards.

          Capitalism as it is on the world right now is not better than communism or totalitarianism

          Again, total bollocks! Remember West Germany didn't have to build a wall round their bit of Berlin to stop their population from running away, it was the Communist system that everyone was desperate to escape from. As with North Korea.

          Western democracies don't have famines. North Korea does. There are plenty of UN reports about that, as UN staff were finally allowed in - from memory about 5 years, and a million dead, after it started. You can read the UN reports about malnourished children, and studies on how the North Korean adult popluation are now so much shorter on average, because the people in the South get enough food, and the people in the North don't.

          The nuclear tests, and threats to nuke the US, Japan and South Korea were from North Korean state radio.

          Admittedly, you do get the weird stories about feeding his uncle to wild dogs, or having him killed with anti-aircraft guns. I seem to remember those were sourced from the Chinese media, by our media, and were too juicy not to report. But were officially thought not to be true - if anyone had bothered to ask the US State Department or South Korean government.

          In summary, no country is perfect. But some are better than others. Britain and the US have their faults, make mistakes but also commit their own blood and treasure to sometimes do good. And sometimes fuck up of course. There was no advantage to us in stopping the slaughter in Kosovo, or Bosnia or Sierre Leone. But we did it anyway.

          Iran may be a religious dictatorship - but it's also got a weird sort of democracy bolted on, there's a reason it's called the Islamic Republic. Although they've slaughtered their fair share of opponents too. China is a one party state, but does take some account of the population's wishes - unless they're Uighur or Tibetan. And the Party may be stealing loads of the cash, but are also to a great extent working to improve the country as a whole. The party even renew their leadership every ten years so as not to become a dictatorship. Russia is now virtually a dictatorship, but a populist one that again has limits. ISIS (if you can call them a state) are run by a genocidal bunch of total lunatics.

          I would be careful bandying words like evil around, but I'd feel safe using it for regimes like ISIS and North Korea. They have no redeeming features. They don't give a fuck about their own populations. And seem to do everything possible to make their lives as miserable as possible. I suppose at least North Korea haven't indulged in genocide, though probably have managed to starve to death 1-2 million of their own population in the last 30 years - and rejected help in favour of not admitting the problem, or building nuclear weapons. Some of the starvation is the result of dictatorship and forced collectivised agriculture - but they also seem to deliberately underfeed the prisonser in their gulags, so they can slowly work them to death. As Hitler and Stalin both did.

          1. nilfs2
            Coat

            Re: Can't blame the Norks for trying to protect themselves

            @I ain't Spartacus

            Where do you get your facts from, CNN, Fox News?

            Your name calling trying to "win" an argument shows the kind of person I'm dealing with, no need to take the discussion any further.

            1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

              Re: Can't blame the Norks for trying to protect themselves

              You can suit yourself, of course. I've indulged in no name calling. if anyone tries to claim any recent Western leader is as bad as Stalin or Mao, I will call them ignorant. It's a statement of fact. The North Korean regime uses the same deliberately cruel and vicious tactics as they did. And regularly kills a serious percentage of its own people by torture, non-judicial execution and deliberate starvation, as they did. As well as regular displays of foreign agression, and massive oppression. It's one of the nastiest regimes I can think of.

              You have failed to challenge a single one of my points, after I did you the courtesy of typing a long post, setting out my arguments.

              My news sources are the BBC World Service, and a couple of recent documentaries and book serialisations from defectors on BBC Radio 4. A friend who's been to North Korea twice. The U.K. press, the US press, the odd Chinese English language article, North Korea's own news agency, KCNA, where they regularly threaten nuclear attacks on their neighbours. I've read a couple of histories of the Korean War, plus I've been reading about the Cold War since the 80s, and studied modern history at university. Even picked up some info on El Reg.

              Perhaps you should try to make an argument, and educate me? It would be interesting for us both.

  24. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Is the Teller-Ulam mechanism

    The *only* viable way to achieve a 2-stage reaction ?

    Even typing it, I feel scared. It's something Uncle Sam has decided you could never ever devise in isolation,. it's a "born secret"

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Is the Teller-Ulam mechanism

      Sakharov's Third Idea:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrei_Sakharov#Development_of_thermonuclear_devices

      (which was basically an independent development of the Teller-Ulam approach).

      Sloika design:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_4

  25. GarethJ
    Coat

    Fallout

    I farted in bed this morning and the fallout from that was larger than expected. :-)

    1. nilfs2
      Mushroom

      Re: Fallout

      That's not a nuclear weapon, that's a biological weapon

  26. Frumious Bandersnatch

    Time to dust off

    the classic "Protect and Survive" booklet?

  27. Rick Brasche

    the other questions to be asked:

    1) if it is a real device detonation, did they develop it or simply buy/borrow it from an ideologically friendly nation?

    2) Is American leadership going to keep enabling this by pretending that the Norks will "dismantle their nuclear program" and claiming "great success!" in diplomacy by buying another 5 years between the next big "foreign aid" cash payoff, in which the whole thing goes around again?

    Anyone with a memory has seen this scenario a half dozen times already. Nothing has changed except the amount of money paid for appeasement of the pocket tyrant. Except now possibly he can actually hurt other than his own people when he has his next tantrum.

    We could've ended this decades ago, and even the "worst case" the handwringers predicted will have been less than what an actual thermonuclear device can do now, even if it's just an immobile "chemical factory with a fuse" (best description EVAR! All the Middle East has to do is make "baby formula" alongside the fusion parts and the Western Media will destroy any leader that tries to destroy it!) it will take out enough NK civilians to make a body count that WWII would whistle with respect.

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: the other questions to be asked:

      I don't believe any aid has been offered to the North since the first nuclear test - and although there have been talks on-and-off, they've never really got anywhere. They aren't even offering talks after each provocation now, as they're worried that doing that is just an incentive to cause more trouble to get attention. So the talks are on offer, and each time something like this happens, they talk about increasing the sanctions. Effectively that's down to the Republic of Korea, China and Russia. As they have the borders, so if they allow trade - or in China's case give subsidised fuel to keep the regime going - there's not a lot the US can do.

      We could have ended this decades ago, with mass civilian and military casualties. That is not the altervative to a nuclear explosion though, as North Korea may not have the capacity for thermo-nuclear devices yet (or ever) - and even if/when it does, may choose never to use them. The casualties from an invasion are certain to be huge - and that's without whatever reaction that might have caused during the Cold War - or starting a new Cold War with China.

      And by the way, it was bugger-all money in the grand scheme of things paid "to appease a tyrant". A large chunk of it was on food-aid anyway, which saved several million lives, and was therefore a worthwhile thing to do. Plus it is worth trying to negotiate, the Cold War mostly ended by negotiation for example - after many years of fruitless, or sometimes useful, talks - which was far better than any alternative.

    2. MT Field
      Unhappy

      Re: the other questions to be asked:

      "take out enough NK civilians to make a body count that WWII would whistle with respect"

      Population 25 million - so your American scorched earth policy would fall short by factor of two.

    3. x 7

      Re: the other questions to be asked:

      "if it is a real device detonation, did they develop it or simply buy/borrow it from an ideologically friendly nation?"

      there has been a great degree of cooperation between North Korea and Pakistan on both nuclear and missile technology. Basically Pakistani scientists help lead the Nork R&D programs, and the results (data and equipment) are fed back to Pakistan. That way Pakistan gets to illicitly carry out development its banned from under the various non-proliferation treaties, without anyone being able to prove anything. Any links between the scientists and the Paki government are vehemently denied, but nothing is done to stop them working in Norkland

  28. Florida1920
    Mushroom

    Was that an H-bomb?

    Or did Young'un pig out on the kimchee again?

  29. Someone Else Silver badge
    FAIL

    Such bluster!

    "Let the world look up to the strong, self-reliant nuclear-armed state," Kim Jong Un, the stout supreme leader of Best Korea, announced on state media.

    Strong? Self-reliant? My ass (or arse, your choice)! How does one look up to a state, nuclear-armed or otherwise, that can't even feed its populace while the fat-asses at the top (Kim Bac Un meeting that moniker in every way imaginable) plunder its entire GDP for themselves?

  30. Medixstiff

    This is why IT people and geeks should be feared.

    Bloody hell we sure do have a lot of knowledgeable nuclear bomb making specialists on here.

    Even work colleagues and geeky friends i know seem to know everything about blowing shit up and stuff, just yesterday we were talking about brake fluid and chlorine. I sure hope the various security services realise not to tick off the geeks, maybe that's why they want to have encryption backdoors, they know what you lot know and are capable of.

    1. MT Field

      Re: This is why IT people and geeks should be feared.

      What is it they say about the Devil making work for idle hands?

      I just spent a couple of days reading about it online. The history of the test programmes alone is fascinating.

  31. magickmark
    Mushroom

    Proof

    I'm sure there will be a badly photoshopped image any day now of the Great Leader surrounded by his staff standing in front of the classic mushroom with a big smile and pointing at the explosion.

    Positive proof that they have the H-bomb now.

    In fact I may see if I can make, err that is find one when I get home!!

  32. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Re. Proof

    IIRC fusion detonations produce a very characteristic neutrino burst which can be detected thousands of miles away no matter how far underground the explosion occurs.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like