16-05-2025
Do Nuclear Bombs Explode On-Ground Or Mid-Air? Which Would Cause More Damage?
Last Updated:
An often-asked question is whether a nuclear bomb exploded mid-air or on the ground? And more importantly, which method causes greater devastation
The ceasefire between India and Pakistan is holding but baseless rumours continue to be speculated upon online that India's BrahMos missiles struck the Kirana Hills in Pakistan, a site long believed to host key components of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal.
The Indian Air Force categorically denied this claim, with IAF Air Marshal AK Bharti stating in a recent press briefing that India did not hit Kirana Hills and dismissing all speculation over whether the Indian forces targeted Pakistan's 'nuclear storage" sites.
However, these speculations have reignited intense public debate over nuclear doctrines, target strategies, and the science behind atomic warfare.
The Science Of Nuclear Detonation: Airburst vs Surface Burst
An often-asked question is whether a nuclear bomb exploded mid-air or on the ground? And more importantly, which method causes greater devastation?
According to the US Defence Technical Information Centre, the majority of nuclear detonations are designed to occur in mid-air – a technique known as an 'airburst detonation'. This method involves the explosion of a nuclear device a few hundred metres above the ground, allowing the shockwave to disperse evenly in all directions.
This strategy was grimly demonstrated in Hiroshima in 1945, where the bomb exploded approximately 600 metres above the city. The result was an annihilation radius that vapourised infrastructure and killed tens of thousands instantly. The rationale for an airburst is straightforward: it maximises damage over a broader area, making it ideal for targeting cities, military bases, and other 'soft" targets such as civilian infrastructure.
In contrast, a 'surface burst' – where the bomb explodes upon impact with the ground – produces a narrower zone of destruction. This method is typically employed to penetrate and destroy hardened targets such as underground bunkers, missile silos, or fortified command centers. However, surface bursts have a higher environmental and radiological cost. When the fireball touches the ground, it sucks up enormous amounts of radioactive debris into the atmosphere, creating long-lasting fallout and environmental contamination.
India And Pakistan's Doctrine On Nuclear Use
India and Pakistan, both nuclear-armed nations with a history of conflict, have adopted markedly different nuclear strategies. India maintains a No First Use (NFU) policy, committing to only use nuclear weapons in retaliation to a nuclear attack. If provoked, however, Indian military doctrine allows for a devastating retaliatory strike – likely via airburst – aimed at paralysing enemy infrastructure and command systems.
Pakistan, meanwhile, does not subscribe to the NFU doctrine. It has instead developed Tactical Nuclear Weapons (TNWs), which are smaller, battlefield-grade nuclear devices designed to deter or respond to conventional military incursions. These TNWs are believed to be optimised for surface detonation, suitable for halting advancing forces rather than widespread destruction.
While TNWs may limit the blast radius, they present their own dangers. A tactical strike on home soil could still release radioactive contamination and potentially trigger a full-scale nuclear response from India.
As speculation swirled on May 10, a curious diplomatic footnote emerged where sources claimed that a high-level Pakistani official placed a discreet call to counterparts in India. While the content of the conversation remains classified, intelligence circles are abuzz with theories suggesting that it may have signalled an unofficial acceptance of defeat or a backchannel plea to prevent further escalation.
Though unconfirmed, the call is being viewed by many as a quiet acknowledgment of the psychological and strategic edge India may have gained during Operation Sindoor – not only through its conventional military might but also via the implied readiness to escalate if pushed to the brink.
First Published:
May 16, 2025, 16:24 IST
