There is a kernel of truth to this… and it’s simple. We used to actually blow them up and really test if they still worked. Now we don’t. So we simulate with s

There is a kernel of truth to this… and it’s simple. We used to actually blow them up and really test if they still worked. Now we don’t. So we simulate with supercomputers, we perform partial tests on sub components, we validate everything as best we can… except for the part where we can’t really test if the whole combination works together at the critical moment. (pun intended) In particular there’s a reasonably big thorn in the all sealed up and “ready to go” thermonuclear devices, the tritium in the devices has a pretty short half life and needs regular replacement… same but on a longer schedule for neutron sources. While a gun type fission device is incredibly simple and has a shelf life of probably well over a hundred years… we don’t use them… I don’t think anyone still actively fields that type in their arsenal. So it’s all complex implosion type devices with neutron primers, and even more complex thermonuclear implosion devices with tampers and fillers (Remember when the USA forgot how to make FOGBANK) and tritium and lots of circuits and electronics that while designed specifically for this environment… are sitting in proximity of radioactive material (just because the aren’t emitting radiation at a level that makes them unsafe for military personnel to handle doesn’t mean they emit none and the electronics are on the inside behind layers of material blocking some of the radiation from people) It’s not really a situation that should be surprising. What’s surprising is that we have managed to see the nuclear test ban treaty hold up as well as it has. I suppose it comes down to the calculated game theory style gamble that you can be sure enough of your own nukes working with billions of extra dollars on things like supercomputers and exhaustive component lifecycle testing programs and lots of hard work but it’s obvious that this also makes it harder for your nuclear armed adversaries to be sure theirs work. Cold War game theory type realpolitik. Edit: having written this all off the top of my head from the (kinda “no duh”) headline I’m pretty happy with how much I covered the actual topic vs the “but Russia and politics and maybe he might use nukes” subtext that is pretty much the rest of the article and the part I didn’t talk about. They even mentioned FOGBANK by name.