Western Air Command (WAC) chief Air Marshal N A K Browne told reporters in New Delhi on Thursday that different types of radars would be put in place along the 667-km LAC with China, the air defence of which is WAC’s responsibility.

“The Air Force is keenly examining the option of special type of radars, which we call the mountain radars and we are also looking at Low Level Light Weight Radars (LLLWR). So there is a definite plan,” Browne said to a question on the future air defence systems along the LAC.

The IAF’s move comes close on the heels of reports of recent incursions by Chinese military helicopters into Indian airspace.

Browne said the IAF would put in place these radars in the next four to five years to make the air defence system along the LAC robust.

“When I talk of operational infrastructure to be improved in the northern sector, the mountainous terrain is very tricky. Because you have huge peaks and normal conventional systems are very difficult to maintain there,” he said.

Browne said the IAF had already given contracts for 19 of LLLWRs and that the WAC itself had some of these. “More are in the pipeline. They are coming starting from next year itself,” he added.

Browne said the IAF also had the option of an indigenously developed LLLWR. At present, the IAF has placed along the LAC two Rohini radars developed by DRDO and manufactured by BEL.

“One more Rohini radar is to be inducted next year and placed along the LAC,” he said.

“These, I think, will take care of detection of any threats that come from across the LAC,” he added.

Browne parried queries on the IAF’s response to Chinese helicopters violating Indian airspace in Ladakh, but he said India needed to keep talking to all its neighbours and at the same time maintain highest levels of military preparedness.

“We do need to talk to everybody…every one of our neighbours and at the same time keep our gun powers dry. We should maintain our preparedness at the highest levels,” he said.

The WAC chief also admitted that the IAF was fully aware of what was going on along the LAC, but reiterated that there were issues such as differing perceptions of the LAC on both sides.

On the recent remarks of IAF chief Air Chief Marshal P V Naik that India’s Air Force fleet was just one-third of China’s, he said the IAF was extremely well-balanced on all fronts such as numbers, technology, modern platforms and equipment.

“It is not just a question of numbers, there are other issues such as technology and capability too,” he said, dismissing the Chinese fleet strength as a threat.

Source: PTI

In a major leap for India?s space programme, the Moon mapper on-board the Indian space probe made the unexpected discovery that water may still be forming on the moon surface overturning the long accepted view that lunar soil is dry.

There are strong chemical signatures of water on the moon in its high latitudes, said Carle Pieters, Principal Investigator of NASA’s Moon Mineralogy Mapper (M3) instrument

Chandrayaan-I, whose mission also included sniffing for water on Earth’s only natural satellite, had made the discovery before it was prematurely aborted on August 30.

Source: PTI

He acknowledged that incursions were taking place but said there was “hardly any increase” in these activities and situation was not “alarming”.

The NSA disagreed that China was trying to put pressure saying “India of 2009 is not (India) of 1962″ and said both nations are keen to maintain peace and transquility at the border.

“In terms of number of incursions, there has been hardly any increase. Occasionally inroads are a little deeper than what it might have been in the past. I don’t think so that there is anything alarming about it. I think we have a good understanding about the whole issue,” Narayanan told Karan Thapar on his ‘Devil’s Advocate’ programme on CNN-IBN.

“I really am unable to explain why there is being so much media hype on this question,” he said.

Asked if over reaction by media could create problems, he replied in the affirmative and said,”I have been through 1962. I was aware of the problem then…. What we need to be careful of is that we don’t have an unwarranted incident or an accident of some kind.

“That’s what we are trying to avoid. But there is always concern (that) if this thing (media hype) goes on like this someone somewhere might lose his cool and something might go wrong.

Army chief on incursions: Don’t over-react

Meanwhile, a day after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh played down reports of increasing Chinese incursions along the border, Indian Army chief General Deepak Kapoor Saturday also said there has been no increase in infiltration.

“There has not been any more incursions or transgressions. As compared to last year, they are almost at the same level. So there is no cause for worry or concern. I request the media to restrain and not overplay,” Kapoor told reporters here.

Some recent media reports had indicated that there was increasing infiltration and firing from Chinese troops along the Line of Actual Control that separates the two countries.

Talking to reporters at an Iftar party at his residence the prime minister had Friday stressed that there was no reason for concern as there are no inputs to suggest anything serious happening along the border.

Manmohan Singh had also said he was in contact with Chinese authorities.

Source: Agencies

He said that the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), which comprises a peer group of scientists, had last week come out with the “most authoritative” statement on the efficacy of the 1998 nuclear tests and no more clarification was required from the government on the matter.

“They (AEC) were satisfied in 1998 and they were satisfied in 2009. Now what are you going to discuss?” he told on a private channel.

Narayanan said that the AEC, an independent Commission and the highest body in such matters, was asked to study the data of the 1998 nuclear tests once again in the wake of the controversy over the efficacy of the hydrogen bomb following the statements of former DRDO scientist K Santhanam.

“I think, we have done what we have done. Beyond that I do not know what we can do,” he said.

Eminent scientists like C N R Rao, P Rama Rao and M R Srinivasan were members of the AEC and the doyen of the nuclear programme Raja Ramanna was part the apex nuclear body which went into the test results in 1998.

“The thermonuclear device had a yield of 45 kilotons. I have chosen my words carefully 45 kilotons and nobody, including Mr Santhanam who has absolutely no idea what he is talking about, can contest what is proven fact by the data which is there,” Narayanan said.

The NSA claimed that a “very authoritative piece” about the nature of the tests written by AEC Chairman Anil Kakodkar and senior scientist S K Sikka was being “examined by physicists all over the world.”

Narayanan said that former AEC chairman P K Iyengar had admitted that the yield of the thermoculear test “might have been 45 kilotons and had raised doubts on the fission and fusion reactions happening at the same time.

“All the atomic scientists are part of the establishment. Those who are sceptics, the same ones Dr Iyengar, Dr A N Prasad, the same ones were sceptical about the civil nuclear initiative,” he said.

Narayanan said Santhanam was not privy to the information on which the test measurements were taken. “As the NSA, I know what the DRDO is supposed to do and what it knows. I think he is not merely exaggerating, I think he is talking something which is horrific,” he said.

He said there was no need for a public debate on the issue as it required to have a clear idea of the explosive ballistics, neutron physics, material sciences and computer simulation. Asked about the doubt former Army Chief V P Malik had raised about the efficacy of the hydrogen bomb, the NSA said

“I think the person to answer that is the present chief and not the past chief on this matter.”

“We have thermonuclear capabilities. I am absolutely sure. We are very clear on this point. If you hit a city with one of these you are talking about 50,000 to 1,00,000 deaths,” the NSA said.

Narayanan said it was a matter of concern for the government the “kind of interested propaganda being put by various people” in media.

On US move to press for a UN Security Council resolution calling upon all countries to sign the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), he said that the issue had already been raised with the Americans who have assured India it would not affect the civil nuclear agreement. Narayanan said India also talked to countries with whom it has signed nuclear agreements against the backdrop of US bid to get G-8 group of countries to ban sale of enrichment and reprocessing technologies to non-nuclear states.

He termed as an “old story” ex-Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf’s admission that Islamabad was deploying American military aid meant for fighting terrorism against India. He said Pakistan’s acquisition of sophisticated weaponry from America in the last three to four years was more worrying than any modification of Harpoon missiles. Strongly refuting the need to rethink the ‘no first use’ doctrine, Narayanan said:

“It is a very well thought out doctrine. We are clear for various reasons. For us it is only a deterrent. We are committed to it.”

On reports of Pakistan enhancing its nuclear arsenal, he said “the fact that the country which is not particularly friendly to us is building up its nuclear arsenal is certainly a matter of concern.”

Source: PTI

India’s nuclear bomb tested 11 years ago in the wild and wind-swept regions of Pokhran range in Rajasthan has now `exploded’ into a full-blown controversy `yielding’ embarrassing details. Three top Indian nuclear scientists have asked the government to set up an enquiry committee so that the nation can know the truth.

Being very critical, three former nuclear leaders — M R Srinivasan, P K Iyengar and A N Prasad - have said that only a probe can bring out the truth. Prasad was highly critical saying he was ashamed that information on the May 1998 thermonuclear test was hidden. The scientists have now asked the government to institute an inquiry to determine whether the test yielded the expected results or failed.

K Santhanam, the project leader of Pokharan II, who first stoked the nuclear yield issue, has also favoured a probe, saying that creation of nuclear power could not be based on myths.

“I think this is standard procedure in science and if there are claims then an impartial group of scientists is normally formed to look into the relevant facts,” Santhanam said.

Asked whether such a probe will affect the country’s image as a nuclear power, he said one should not be carried away by “images or imagery” and that the image must be rooted in solid facts and cleared by competent group of scientists. “So the creation of a myth must be avoided,” he said.

The latest authority to question former president APJ Abdul Kalam and R Chidambaram, former chairman of AEC (Atomic Energy Commission, is A N Prasad, former director of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre Former Barc director, Prasad has always been maintaining that the thermonuclear test was anything but a success.

Reacting to the fallout, he was quoted in The Times of India on Friday as saying that “The painful fallout of this episode is that the credibility of the nuclear scientific community and the respectable name of Barc is being damaged by a few at the top.” 

In a direct attack on Kalam and Chidambaram, Prasad said: “If all that Santhanam has written is true, then people occupying high places have misled the country. If all the data about the thermonuclear test has been held by one man (Chidambaram), then how can it be scientifically contested or debated? He has kept it under wraps.”

Stressing that there should be a probe by a committee constituted by the government, Prasad said that the team should comprise those having serious doubts about the yield of the test as well as experts who can include former nuclear scientists who have been raising their voices. “It should not consist of only yes men. It should consist of those who are knowledgeable, who have the capacity to investigate such a serious matter,” he said.

“If this committee concludes that the thermonuclear test had completely failed then the government has played a major fraud on the people of this country,” he said.

It may be recalled that Santhanam had gone public on August 26, claiming that the yield from the test was far lower than what the then prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s government had claimed. In a recent newspaper article, he had some embarrassing details to disclose - that the test was a failure because the yield was only 25 kilotons, nearly half of what the scientists had then claimed. Soon after the test, senior scientists had met to discuss the failure and decided to bury the Pokharan truth. 
What has bolstered Santhanam’s claim is that there was no disturbance to the shafts at ground zero - a proof that the test was unsuccessful.

Now the worrying factor: If the yield was not as expected, India does not possess a credible nuclear deterrent, indicating that warheads on India’s long-range missile could have far less punch than expected. 
On August 28, Abdul Kalam contradicted Santhanam’s August 26 statement and took the stand that Pokhran II was successful. But on Sept 1, former Atomic Energy Commission chief Homi N Sethna openly criticised Kalam in television interviews saying that the former president was not a nuclear scientists and suggested that Santhanam was the authority on the nuclear yield.

Santhanam was earlier criticised by Chidambaram, former chairman of Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and the architect of the nuke tests and Anil Kakodkar, then director of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. They agreed with Kalam who in 1998 led a team from Hyderabad-based Defence Research and Development Organisation and insisted that the yield was 45 kilotons.

When the issue started snowballing into a controversy, the AEC convened a meeting on September 5 and held Santhanam wrong. The committee said different types of analysis had come to the conclusion that the yield of the thermonuclear test was indeed 45 KT.

But not many are impressed with the committee’s findings. Scientists in Barc, the nation’s top nuclear weapon establishment, have expressed serious reservation.

M R Srinivasan, former AEC chairman, was quoted in the paper as saying that it was time for both Chidambaram and Kakodkar to clarify the position. “In such circumstances I think a peer review is certainly warranted. A lot of information has been published and is on record. So I have really no reason to disbelieve at this stage either Chidambaram or Kakodkar on this issue. However, because of the current controversy, I think the best recourse would be for both of them to clarify the position.

Another former AEC chief, P K Iyengar said, “The government should undertake an active investigation immediately following the statements made by Santhanam in the article. I am feeling really ashamed.”

India conducted five nuclear tests on May 11 and 13, 1998 at the Pokhran range in Rajasthan which included a 45 kiloton (kt) thermonuclear device, called as hydrogen bomb in common parlance.

Source: PTI.