Where did/does Israel test its publicly nonexistent nuclear weapons? Presumably the US and Russia can detect these tests when they occur…
The Vela Incident seems to have been the only “detected” test of a nuclear weapon by Israel with the cooperation of the apartheid South African government. There may have been other tests; however, the entire Israeli program is so shrouded in secrecy from the public that it would be impossible to confirm that.
Reference:
We don’t know that Israeli tests weren’t detected. They may not be testing either, we or others may have cooperated with them sufficiently that they can rely on information from tests we or others have done. There’s no doubt in my mind that what we don’t know about Israeli nuclear weapons programs far exceeds what we do know.
How can Israel, or any other country for that matter, hid their nuclear tests, or how are they able to develop and deploy nuclear weapons without testing them?
My post crossed yours TriPolar. I guess the US or someone else could test their devices for them, but I would want to know for sure that my own weapons worked…
Yeah, well…
That explanation is more speculation than anything.
- It’s unconfirmed that it was a nuclear explosion.
- If it was, no one knows who did it.
- No radioactivity was ever detected (pretty much rules out nuclear).
- No seismic activity was detected.
Computer simulations and good engineering.
The US didn’t test the Little Boy bomb before it was used, and it seemed to work OK…
Israel entire alleged nuclear weapons arsenal has existed in an era where it is impossible to hide tests from sensors, satellites and seismic equipment.
As it is, these days it is possible using simulation and cold tests to obtain results that would give you high confidence that a weapon would work, without a full up hot test… At least for fission and boosted fission weapons. For multistage to thermonuclear warheads, you still need a full test, at least until recently.
So the answer is that they don’t test because they don’t need to.
Good engineering is all that’s needed. I don’t recall major problems getting our nuclear weapons to work, the testing has been primarily to measure the functioning and results. We didn’t have to test their weapons for them, just share information, and perhaps test their innovations in our own weapons.
Is there any reason why it would be impossible or highly improbable that the US secretly tested Israel’s nukes for it?
Nuclear testing is generally done for political reasons instead of scientific or engineering ones. As the others have said, it’s pretty unlikely that a simple nuclear bomb design wouldn’t work, but small nuclear powers generally still have to test a few bombs to demonstrate that they’ve overcome the engineering and infrastructure hurtles. In Israel’s case, they’re an advanced enough country and their collaboration/material sharing history with France and South Africa are notorious enough that there’s pretty much zero doubt they’re capable of building functional nukes. Taking the extra step of actually testing them wouldn’t necessarily improve their deterrent value and would make it much harder for Israel to keep the politically advantageous fig leaf of denying they exist.
If anyone has done that, I’d bet on France.
Wouldn’t it be more of a deterrent to say you have nuclear weapons than to keep it a secret?
In this case you are talking about the world’s worst kept secret. More people believe Israeli has nuclear weapons than know that Racer X is really Speed’s brother Rex.
In fact, so many people believe it, that Israel doesn’t even need the actual nukes themselves. If you’ve got a propaganda machine so good that you can convince everyone you’ve got nukes without tests, then wouldn’t it be much cheaper to just use the propaganda machine, and save the money you would spend on an actual bomb to buy a bunch more Merkavas instead?
Since Israel is loath to allow international inspection of their nuclear program, then speculation is really all that exists.
Several things:
-
There was one other other case of a “double-flash” being detected that was NOT a nuclear test and that was on Bell Island in Canada. WHile it could have been a superbolt of lightning in the Indian Ocean, the odds of that being detected seem to be very low.
-
There was no reason for anyone else to test a nuclear weapon in the Indian Ocean as all of the other nuclear powers had well established test sites on LAND at whicht o test their devices/
-
No radioactivity was publicly acknowledged. That doesn’t mean that it was never found
-
No seismic activity would have been detected from an air burst and a very limited amount would have come from a surface blast.
Few if any other nations face the existential threat to it’s very existence that Israel does. If it is at all possible that Israel could build nukes, they would; not only to deter an invasion (which it seems to have done) but so that it is clear to the major powers that Israel will NOT go gentle into that good night.
The whole theory of nuclear explosions is that you blow up a shell of conventional explosives forcing non-critical masses together to form a critical mass. Depending on design - I’ve heard of two hemispheres, or a segment into the rest of a sphere, a collection of segments like an orange (multiple pieces for a larger critical mass).
Presumably, you can test this with non-critical fake uranium substitutes, then examine the explosion process and resulting blob to be sure the creation of the mass meets the speed and symmetry etc. required of a nuclear explosion.
Math and a knowledge of subatomic particles, reaction rates of your enriched material to various levels of neutron flux (bombardment levels), gives you pretty good estimates how fast the pieces need to slam together to prevent the fizzle happening before the pieces are fully together. (Too slow slamming the mass together and the reaction starts early and counters the conventional explosive.)
So you can test everything except the actual nuclear explosion itself. That gives an extremely high confidence if you test for real you get the expected mess.
There’s no reason to think that the US would have, or would have had any interest or motivation in doing so. The US and Israel were not particularly friendly when Israel allegedly began its nuclear program, France was Israel’s main weapons supplier at the time, France helped them build the Negev Nuclear Research Center where the weapons grade materials are supposed to have come from, and France conspired with Israel and the UK to start the 1956 Suez War with Egypt. France’s schism with Israel only happened in 1967, before which Israel is believed to have produced its first bomb. The close relationship with Israel that the US has today only began to start in the years after this. The US has never had any desire for Israel to be a nuclear power, and co-operation between Israel and South Africa in their respective nuclear programs makes some sense. The wiki article on Israel’s nuclear program is rather good.
Time lapse map of every nuclear explosion since 1945: http://www.ctbto.org/specials/1945-1998-by-isao-hashimoto/
France and South Africa are known to have helped Israel with their alleged nuclear weapons program. The US officially doesn’t cooperate with Israel on this, but there are indications the US has turned a blind eye to Israeli efforts, sometimes a wink and a nod, and there is suspicion that we have actively cooperated with them. I would hate to consider who else Israel might have cooperated with to further their weapons program. They don’t consider any ally to be that reliable, and they consider their survival to be based on the credible threat of nuclear weapons, so they may have dealt with anyone who had what they needed. In this geopolitical game there are some surprising bed-fellows. Israel’s existence is necessary to maintain the status quo in the middle east, something most of the world wants.