INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 19 Jul 2009 13:13

I guess with a shrouded pumpjet behind, there is no chance of
getting cut by screw. I wuz thinking it would be unreeled from top of sail in designs with open screws.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 19 Jul 2009 13:21

Singha wrote:btw why do western subs not feature a akula style towed sonar?


They do have TAS one that comes out from the sail ( twin towed from sail ) , plus in case of Virginia they do have special towed arrangement just below the pumpjet in an dedicated extended arm style.

The Akula style large pod is still a legacy early 80's stuff not changed much since Victor 3 , even the last Akula launched Gepard had a very small streamline pod.

Ofcourse they are now being replaced by just a cylindrical one ( Pelmedia TAS ) as seen on Borei , Delta 4 and Lada. Ofcourse technology has made it possible to have a small LF Active/Passive thin line Towed array Sonar with better sensitivity then previous large Towed

I am just surprised why Nerpa did not go for a Gepard style streamline pod atleast which was operational way back in 2001 though a small cylindrical one as seen on newer subs should have been there.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 19 Jul 2009 13:36

Raja Bose wrote:A slightly different question: How confidential is the screw of INS Arihant? -


Contrary to the popular perception the screw of submarine is not at all confendential or top secret , during the normal roll out ceremony they do keep it covered , but eventually many pictures have appeared on which the have shown the screws of submarine.

I have seen pictures of screw of LA , U-212 , Lada , Akula-2 , Typhoon it out there on the net but not widely seen

how does the IN sanitise the area where the sea trial are supposed to take place esp. against sneaky folks like Unkil's Virginia class subs who might loiter around to snoop.


I dont think Unkil needs to send in Virginia to know what Arihant is , its a cat and mouse game but if Virginia wants to find and trail the ATV they can very well do it.

dinesha
BRFite
Posts: 1165
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 11:42
Location: Delhi

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby dinesha » 19 Jul 2009 13:50

On the contrary screw photographs are rare... especially american ones.. infact I have seen only two in the net..
http://americanhistory.si.edu/Subs/angl ... _prop.html
[Caption: The stern of a Los Angeles-class (SSN 688) submarine at Holy Loch, Scotland, showing a mid-1970s propeller with edge guards; it probably was being installed when this photo was taken. Most of this class remains in service. Courtesy of Norman Friedman.]
from http://americanhistory.si.edu/Subs/angl ... ing6.html#

It is an interesting read..The Taming of the Screw

The other one in famous August 2007 Virtual Earth view ..
http://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/382 ... ?service=1
(Ohio Class SSBN)

BTW: Evolution of screw design is clearly evident..
Last edited by dinesha on 19 Jul 2009 14:27, edited 3 times in total.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 19 Jul 2009 14:19

Maybe Ru found the small pod doesnt do somethings the large pod can hence reverted back. or perhaps changed Nerpa later to a older large pod to not give away secret of small pod to Yindia.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 19 Jul 2009 14:28

Singha wrote:Maybe Ru found the small pod doesnt do somethings the large pod can hence reverted back. or perhaps changed Nerpa later to a older large pod to not give away secret of small pod to Yindia.


The submarine was more than 60 % ready when they stopped construction on it , when Indian leased it they probably went with what was already done on the structure with changes done internally where it mattered

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Gerard » 19 Jul 2009 16:56

Hitesh wrote:You have to know the insides in and out and what makes it tick and how to build it the right way or how not to build it the wrong way.


You assume that the Russians have not provided technical assistance. I would be wary of assuming same, especially if what comes out of that drydock looks like an Akula.

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2566
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby darshhan » 19 Jul 2009 16:57

Raja Bose wrote:A slightly different question: How confidential is the screw of INS Arihant? - how does the IN sanitise the area where the sea trial are supposed to take place esp. against sneaky folks like Unkil's Virginia class subs who might loiter around to snoop.


They don't have to send any virginia class subs to snoop.Their intelligence has most probably penetrated every strategic Indian departments considering the amount of corruption and treason that is prevelant in our government.If they want any information they will get the full documentation.No need of any snooping around.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 19 Jul 2009 21:52

Gerard wrote:You assume that the Russians have not provided technical assistance. I would be wary of assuming same, especially if what comes out of that drydock looks like an Akula.


Ofcourse the Russians did , but you will be surprised to see what we could do with the Charlie 1 design.

mohan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 47
Joined: 15 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby mohan » 19 Jul 2009 22:52

Austin wrote:
Gerard wrote:You assume that the Russians have not provided technical assistance. I would be wary of assuming same, especially if what comes out of that drydock looks like an Akula.


Ofcourse the Russians did , but you will be surprised to see what we could do with the Charlie 1 design.


Hi Austin!

What did we learn from the Chakra? What exercises did we do? Did we modify her substantially? Is there public domain info on how long her patrols were? Did she operate with a mix of Russian/Indian crew, or was the crew completely Indian towards the end of the lease?

Thanks!
Mohan

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2411
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby John » 19 Jul 2009 23:09

Gagan wrote:The Brahmos hasn't even been tested underwater yet. let us wait for that to happen.
Brahmos already has the ability to be fired at any angle, how difficult will it be to eject the cannister out of a torpedo tube, and then for an underwater gas generator to fire and take it out of the water?

Well the reason is Brahmos/Yakhont won't fit into even the large torpedo tube its diameter is 670mm. Besides i never seen any brochure on either of them ever mention tube launch, so i don't think there is modified version for that purpose.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Arun_S » 19 Jul 2009 23:28

Singha wrote:if outright sale of nuclear submarine is not closed by any treaty or unofficial tech denial regime, why did India choose to lease rather than buy ? afterall we are said to have paid the money to complete the Nerpa and its sister which a typical lessee would not do.

does it impart some addl legal flexibility in rotating Akulas between IN and RN when time comes for MLU and reactor refueling ?

Singha ji: Little birdie tell me it was path of least resistance and not give any chance anybody to raise hue and cry. Leasing it for 10 years is as good as owning, and then after 10 years no one will raise freckle if residual value bought for $1M. Also teen matsya ka bhaav tol hai.


As an apart, if Arihant's displacement turnout to be ~6500 tonne that vassel will almost certainly be 105 m long

KrishG
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 1290
Joined: 25 Nov 2008 20:43
Location: Land of Trala-la

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby KrishG » 20 Jul 2009 00:14

A simple question --- Both the USN and the RN use the Trident-2 SLBM and Tomhawk SLCM, both of which are from the United States. Doesn't MTCR stop RN from using American SLMs, considering that Trident is a ballistic missile and tomhawks are medium range cruise missiles ??

aditp
BRFite
Posts: 444
Joined: 15 Jul 2008 07:25
Location: Autoland

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby aditp » 20 Jul 2009 00:18

Somehow, the MTCR doesn prohibit nations to continue transfering systems and tech if they were doing so in the pre-MTCR days. :wink:

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17016
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 20 Jul 2009 00:49

KrishG wrote:A simple question --- Both the USN and the RN use the Trident-2 SLBM and Tomhawk SLCM, both of which are from the United States. Doesn't MTCR stop RN from using American SLMs, considering that Trident is a ballistic missile and tomhawks are medium range cruise missiles ??

it's always two sets of rules for the gora aadmi and the non-gora aadmi, (not counting the 'honourary whites'.)

BUT
, Image

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11209
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Gagan » 20 Jul 2009 03:37

The US-UK ballistic missile arrangement predates the MTCR. The powers that be drafted MTCR to exclude this possibility.
Another funny thing we've seen is wrt the NPT. Germany is a non nuclear weapons state per the NPT, but recently admitted that it borrows nuclear weapons from the US.

I have not read either treaties, what is the experts opinion on joint development of missiles between two nations? Is this a possible workaround the MTCR?

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Arun_S » 20 Jul 2009 04:07

Gagan wrote:The US-UK ballistic missile arrangement predates the MTCR. The powers that be drafted MTCR to exclude this possibility.
Another funny thing we've seen is wrt the NPT. Germany is a non nuclear weapons state per the NPT, but recently admitted that it borrows nuclear weapons from the US.

I have not read either treaties, what is the experts opinion on joint development of missiles between two nations? Is this a possible workaround the MTCR?


Pls read MTCR document, it has nothing to do with predating anything.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Gerard » 20 Jul 2009 05:10

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 35/835.pdf
However, an “aide memoire” attached to the MTCR states that the regime does not supersede any agreement that came into force prior to 1997. This, for example, allows the transfer of Category 1 systems between NATO members

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Arun_S » 20 Jul 2009 06:35

Gerard wrote:http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmdfence/835/835.pdf
However, an “aide memoire” attached to the MTCR states that the regime does not supersede any agreement that came into force prior to 1997. This, for example, allows the transfer of Category 1 systems between NATO members

Gerard: Wow. Thank for bringing that out. Are you a human or a BOT? (a compliment to you sir)

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 20 Jul 2009 19:47

The recent Russian ICBM tests indicate where the ATV ideally should be hiding before launching its missiles,under the Antarctic ice,parts of the continent whose seas are ice-bound.Sats cannot pick up the subs below ice and it wil be impossible for all of our SSBNs under Antarctic ice to be shadowed by the PLAN subs.The ability of Indian N-subs to stealthily exit harbour on both seaboards without eenemy detction ,will allow them to find out suitable hiding places in the vast regions of the IOR.However,this will demand that these subs are carrying a long range ICBM,capable of strking any part of China from the southern waters of the IOR.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 20 Jul 2009 20:32

I think IOR is vast and that is a good place for our ATV to hide , Arabian sea are not exactly the best condition to find a submarine.

And PLAN is not exactly America and does not multiple resources or technology sophistication to track our submarine , neither do we have those to track PLAN sub.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 20 Jul 2009 21:06

chipanda has no land bases to patrol the IOR. unless they can obtain a strong foothold in Indonesia or Mauritius its tough to see them wasting their small number of SSNs hunting indian subs.

Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2091
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Picklu » 20 Jul 2009 21:44

What is the source for the torpedo tubes? I do not think we make any.

Which torpedoes? Russian, German, new French ones? When is our HWT going to be ready?

Like our other ships, are we importing the props or making them in house because of strategic nature?

so many questions ...... any knowledgable guru want to take a shot?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 21 Jul 2009 09:21

TOI

Delay in Scorpene project to hit Navy: Antony
TNN 21 July 2009, 02:24am IST
|
NEW DELHI: The government on Monday admitted that the mammoth Rs 18,798-crore project to construct six Scorpene submarines at Mazagaon Docks
(MDL) in Mumbai had been hit by slippages, which in turn would adversely impact the Navy's underwater combat capabilities.

TOI was the first to report that the project, under which the six submarines were to roll out one per year from 2012 onwards, is running around two years behind schedule.

"On account of some teething problems, absorption of technology, delays in augmentation of industrial infrastructure and procurement of MDL purchased materials (MPM), slippage in the delivery schedule is expected,'' defence minister A K Antony told Lok Sabha.

"Delay in scheduled delivery of the submarines is likely to have an impact on the envisaged submarine force-levels,'' he added.

As earlier reported, the entire project is also going to be hit with a huge cost escalation, which will take total costs much beyond Rs 20,000 crore, because France is demanding virtually double the money to supply some critical equipment to MDL.

A big delay will hit Navy hard since its projections show it will be left with only nine out of its present fleet of 16 diesel-electric submarines — 10 Russian Kilo-class, four German HDW and two Foxtrot — by 2012.

As it is, the Foxtrot submarines are obsolete now, and the number could further dip to just five by 2014. This is alarming since both Pakistan and China are rapidly augmenting their underwater combat capabilities.

In the Scorpene project finalised in October 2005, contracts inked with French companies included the Rs 6,135-crore one with M/s Armaris (DCN-Thales joint venture) for transfer of technology, combat systems and construction design, and Rs 1,062 crore with M/s MBDA for sea-skimming Exocet missiles.

A Rs 5,888-crore contract was also signed with MDL for indigenous submarine construction, with another Rs 3,553 crore earmarked for taxes and Rs 2,160 crore towards other items to be acquired during the project.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby merlin » 21 Jul 2009 10:53

Austin wrote:I think IOR is vast and that is a good place for our ATV to hide , Arabian sea are not exactly the best condition to find a submarine.

And PLAN is not exactly America and does not multiple resources or technology sophistication to track our submarine , neither do we have those to track PLAN sub.


PLAN won't be the only navy tracking our subs, other far more advanced ones will also be doing the same. That's why with the numbers of boats we will possibly deploy, IMO land mobile missiles will be more survivable given the vast landmass we have, the number of decoys we may be able to have running around and the lower cost enabling more numbers to be available.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 21 Jul 2009 11:07

but we lack the expressway infra of NATO or the vast forests of Siberia or the
deserts of tibet and east turkmenistan to disappear into. and whatever forests we have is infested with maoist moles.

so our scope for road mobile TELs is a bit restricted and railways may be preferred. yet due to lack of investment, many routes are 1-line and any
issue at a critical hour can affect us right there.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 21 Jul 2009 11:23

merlin wrote:PLAN won't be the only navy tracking our subs, other far more advanced ones will also be doing the same. That's why with the numbers of boats we will possibly deploy, IMO land mobile missiles will be more survivable given the vast landmass we have, the number of decoys we may be able to have running around and the lower cost enabling more numbers to be available.


We are still many years if not many decades away in having a credible sea based deterrent , ATV is first step in that direction.

For atleast a decade and half to come our key deterrent will still remain Road and Rail mobile system armed with Agni-3/5 , the rail based system will still be very hard target to track considering its a very mobile target , can cover a large area and due to density of our rail system , as good as sea based deterrent if not better.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 21 Jul 2009 16:10

Bad news about the Scorpenes.Asinine planning by the MOD,to build the first ones here as well.Now how do we overcome the shortfall in the IN's sub inventory? We do not have the equivalent like the SU-30MKI,which beats the crap out of the opposition already in service with it,but two capable sub designs which are of '80s vintage,some of the Kilos at least have been upgraded with Klub missiles.Thanks to the "lost decade " and babudom,we are yet to get the second line deal even at the first stage of discussion! We should've had the second line being built right now in parallel with the Scorpene.The only subs available to us right now are the rejected U-214 sub for Greece,which had stability problems on the surface,which might end up in Pak,and the Amur/Lada in service with the Russians.

The only light at the tunnel's end is the Akula-2 arriving later this year,which will go into service immediately and the launch of the ATV,which is really part of the strategic deterrent and needs a year+ of sea trials to be commissioned.It also needs the strategic missiles aboard it to be ready too,which will take at least two years.If a second Akula is also in the pipeline,arriving within a year or so,then it will tide us over for a while,but we have to immediately place orders for a new line of sub other than the Scorpene to meet the immediate need ,an AIP sub with underwater launch for missiles, eventually equipped with Brahmos,Klub OK for the present from tubes.Rubin has had an Amur/Brahmos design concept for a few years now,the IN/MOD should accelerate the buy for at least 6 for the moment to salvage the Scorpene deal,where France is acting uptight.In fact,ordering another 3 Akulas and scrapping the Scorpene deal beyond the first few might be a better idea as the price of a Scorpene with extra costs is fast approaching that of one Akula!

abhiti
BRFite
Posts: 248
Joined: 26 Apr 2009 00:39

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby abhiti » 21 Jul 2009 16:35

Philip wrote:Thanks to the "lost decade " and babudom,we are yet to get the second line deal even at the first stage of discussion! We should've had the second line being built right now in parallel with the Scorpene.The only subs available to us right now are the rejected U-214 sub for Greece,which had stability problems on the surface,which might end up in Pak,and the Amur/Lada in service with the Russians.


I will much rather have the second line be all nuclear i.e. ATVs. We don't need more than 10 conventional subs for dealing with Pukis. All the Chink subs that we will ever fight will be nuclear anyway. So why the heck do we need a second conventional line?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 21 Jul 2009 19:02

We need the second line because Pak is going to have about 10-12 AIP conventional subs (Agostas and most probably more German U-214s) in the future. AIP conventional subs are far superior to larger nuclear subs for littoral warfare,more difficult to detect,as has been proven worldwide.A key capability of the IN is to be able to enforce a naval blockade of Pak in any future crisis.This will require a large sub fleet that will have to be stationed all along the paki coastline including Gwadar,being built into a major naval base for the Paki and Chinese navies.If the PN and PLAN act in concert,we will have a huge job for the IN patrolling the Arabian Sea and Bay of Bengal.While nuclear powered subs cab operate indefinitely in open ocean waters,they all cannot be at the same place at the same time,and come at a far higher price.In addition.,some of them will be tasked to protect our SSBNs,the key component of our strategic triad.

The reason why the USN is avoiding building conventional subs,even though it can easily do so,is that these subs cost far less than nuclear ones and the nuclear sub industry and lobby would be badly affected.Given the USN's worldwide scope of naval operations,it is therefore building only nuclear powered subs.On the other hand Russia wisely has always had a mix of nuclear and conventional subs in service,which give them a vareity of options for defensive and offensive operations.
Last edited by Philip on 21 Jul 2009 19:03, edited 1 time in total.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11209
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Gagan » 21 Jul 2009 19:02

Conventional subs are said to be littoral subs.
But the interesting thing is that littoral waters extend all along from India's coastlines to the south china sea.
If the second line of subs are all AIP equipped, there should be no problems with month long deployments.
Another thing that the IN can do is to have a covered base across the malacca, or have a submarine tender vessel out in the sea at all times there, so that which sub docks and when it docks for replenishment is not apparent easily.
The best AIP is without any doubt a nuclear sub, but if the conventional AIP subs provide good underwater endurance, they should do the job as well.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11209
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Gagan » 21 Jul 2009 19:08

The pakistanis are going to get 3 more second line subs, to make their total useful subs to 6 ( 3 Agosta 90 + 3 U212/214), excluding the 2 daphanes that are barely sea worthy now. The contract is still not signed yet, with the french now going in full force to their earlier 'contacts' to bag the deal.

So by 2015-17 period we are looking at 6 Pakistani subs, notably all with AIP and capable of 3 weeks + underwater endurance.

While that is destabilizing, what is more serious I think are the large numbers of maritime recon aircraft they have managed to acquire. Unless these are accounted for very early in a battle, IN will not be free to undertake a marine landing in balochistan if it wants.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 21 Jul 2009 19:17

Pak will still have its old Agostas just as we are still using the venerable Foxtrots.One also does not know what Chinese subs Pak is also secretly acquiring to make up numbers.We need for future challenges,at least 36 subs (China has about 70),of which at least 12 should be nuclear powered and 24 conventional,two-thirds of these with AIP.The latest Chinese conventional subs have been designed using Russian Kilo tech,plus other stolen tech from the west/supplied by Pak.The huge flaw in the scorpene deal was not to have had the first two built in France,where the french would've built them quickly and of required quality.Our Scorpene building exercise has not elarnt its lessons from the U-209 fiasco,wheer we took almost a decade to only assemble two subs.The fact that we still haven't been able to complete a Kilo refit at Vizag should've been a suitable warning to the MOD/DRDO,who seem to think that if a committee passes it,it can be built.

KrishG
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 1290
Joined: 25 Nov 2008 20:43
Location: Land of Trala-la

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby KrishG » 21 Jul 2009 19:22

Conventional subs will play an ever important role in todays low intensity. For example, an SSBN also does have the capability of land-attack with it's SLBMs, but in cases like Kargil, we will not possibly use ballistic missiles against the adversary. In this case, a stealthy conventional sub plays a vital role in the land attack role as it can get closer to the adversary's coast to launch attacks against vital installations.

abhiti
BRFite
Posts: 248
Joined: 26 Apr 2009 00:39

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby abhiti » 21 Jul 2009 19:27

Philip wrote:We need the second line because Pak is going to have about 10-12 AIP conventional subs (Agostas and most probably more German U-214s) in the future. AIP conventional subs are far superior to larger nuclear subs for littoral warfare,more difficult to detect,as has been proven worldwide.

A key capability of the IN is to be able to enforce a naval blockade of Pak in any future crisis.This will require a large sub fleet that will have to be stationed all along the paki coastline including Gwadar,being built into a major naval base for the Paki and Chinese navies.


Pakistan so far got three subs with one AIP. They are looking to buy another three in next decade. Where does that number 10-12 come from? Indian subs will also be fitted with AIP. Btw AIP or no AIP you need a propellor for a submarine.

There only so much littoral space which in addition to subs can also be monitored by planes and frigates. Why do you want subs sitting 50 nautical miles from Pakistan? You can enforce the same blockade from further away.

If the PN and PLAN act in concert,we will have a huge job for the IN patrolling the Arabian Sea and Bay of Bengal.While nuclear powered subs cab operate indefinitely in open ocean waters,they all cannot be at the same place at the same time,and come at a far higher price.In addition.,some of them will be tasked to protect our SSBNs,the key component of our strategic triad.


When did Arabian Sea and Bay of Bengal become littoral warfare? You proposing we protect SSBN with AIP submarine? The biggest threat that China faces from IN is due to its capability to block traffic to Chinese ports in Indian Ocean. This will have immediate disastrous consequences for Chinese economy. Nuclear subs are well suited to handle such a threat.

The reason why the USN is avoiding building conventional subs,even though it can easily do so,is that these subs cost far less than nuclear ones and the nuclear sub industry and lobby would be badly affected.


USN doesn't build conventional subs is because of the limits on speed and endurance. AIP works only for short time and distance. Sooner or later conventional subs are caught sitting (snorkling) on ocean surface trying to charge their batteries (remind me how does P-8 hunt for submarines) which is how they get killed.
Last edited by abhiti on 21 Jul 2009 19:41, edited 3 times in total.

abhiti
BRFite
Posts: 248
Joined: 26 Apr 2009 00:39

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby abhiti » 21 Jul 2009 19:28

KrishG wrote:Conventional subs will play an ever important role in todays low intensity. For example, an SSBN also does have the capability of land-attack with it's SLBMs, but in cases like Kargil, we will not possibly use ballistic missiles against the adversary. In this case, a stealthy conventional sub plays a vital role in the land attack role as it can get closer to the adversary's coast to launch attacks against vital installations.


Nuclear subs come in two variety i.e. SSBN and SSGN or SSN. No one is asking to replace conventional subs with SSBN. Do you need more than 10 submarines for low intensity conflict?

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11209
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Gagan » 21 Jul 2009 19:40

Philip wrote:The fact that we still haven't been able to complete a Kilo refit at Vizag should've been a suitable warning to the MOD/DRDO,who seem to think that if a committee passes it,it can be built.

The INS Sindhudhwaj has been in refit in a dry dock for approximately the last 10 years, right next to the covered shipbuilding center where the ATV is being built.

And we still claim that the ATV is inspired from a charlie class sub?

I say that the open and under repair Kilo also has given 'inspiration' to the subbuilders, located barely 20 feet across.

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Raj Malhotra » 21 Jul 2009 23:00

I think that we should scrap the second line of conventional subs and go in for more ATVs and in future go the UK, France & USA way of having on nuclear powered subs!

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby Arun_S » 22 Jul 2009 00:48

merlin wrote:
Austin wrote:I think IOR is vast and that is a good place for our ATV to hide , Arabian sea are not exactly the best condition to find a submarine.

And PLAN is not exactly America and does not multiple resources or technology sophistication to track our submarine , neither do we have those to track PLAN sub.


PLAN won't be the only navy tracking our subs, other far more advanced ones will also be doing the same. That's why with the numbers of boats we will possibly deploy, IMO land mobile missiles will be more survivable given the vast landmass we have, the number of decoys we may be able to have running around and the lower cost enabling more numbers to be available.


Hiding in ocean is like dog skating it territory by pissing on every tree stalk. All oceans of words and certainly Indian Ocean is littered with passive sensors of naval powers foriegn to Indian Ocean Region. So to think one can hide in depth of Indian Ocean is a risky proposition. These sensors that I am talking about are not only of the type that are tethered to buoys, but autonomous crafts that at various levels in between inversion layer(s).

Where can you hide from the dog poop, unless you also have technology to clean the poop and put your own ones there !

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: INS Arihant (ATV) Launch News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 22 Jul 2009 00:54

Sensors again?

Like some suggest IAF should build out more Jags and MiG-21 Bisons (instead of MRCA), IN should bring out old ships too.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests