Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Scientists suspect latest N-test was damp squib squib

Tom Wilkie Science Editor
Saturday 07 October 1995 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

FRANCE'S second nuclear test carried out in the south Pacific last week may have been a flop.

Scientists analysing seismic signals detected after the blast on Fangataufa atoll say that it created an earthquake of exactly the same magnitude as the first French test at nearby Mururoa. But the official French Defence Ministry statement described the yield of the test as "less than 110 kilotons" - which was taken as meaning it was five times more powerful than the 20 kiloton Mururoa test. The seismic shock should therefore have been significantly bigger.

The speculation arises that the main force of the blast came from the atomic bomb used to "trigger" the hydrogen fusion reaction of the H-bomb, which may not have gone off properly.

Roger Clark, a seismologist at Leeds University, said the French had consistently overstated the yields of their tests. "I have a cynical enough mind to say it [Fangataufa] could even be less than 20kt," he said.

In testing nuclear weapons, it is not enough simply to get a bang. The explosive yield and the radiation produced are closely measured to ensure that the device has performed according to its designers' specifications. If the yield is lower than forecast, that may indicate a fundamental flaw in the design.

Patricia Lewis of the London-based Vertic group, which monitors the explosions, said that the difficulty of measuring yields properly underscored the need for any test ban treaty to be completely comprehensive and not a "threshold" treaty, banning all tests above a certain size. Diplomats hope that a treaty might be attainable next year, after the French have finished, but some countries have suggested small nuclear explosions should be exempt.

Dr Clark said that if the device exploded at Fangataufa had been buried deeper than the one at Mururoa, then it was possible for a bigger bang to have given the same magnitude, and it was possible that the rocks might somehow have further attenuated the signal. But, he said, "It would be startling and unnerving from a seismologist's point of view if the calibration is different for Fangataufa, which is only 40km from Mururoa. There won't be a clear resolution of this until we have details of the yields of previous explosions. Past experience of analysing official announcements suggests that Fangatuafa could be a huge amount less than 110 kilotons."

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in