INS Arihant (ATV) News and Discussion -2

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 30 Dec 2014 12:04

kit wrote:Isn't pump jet propulsion quieter than conventional skewed propellers ?

Electro magnetic Propulsion. Hunt for Red October.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 30 Dec 2014 16:03

OSA violation regarding this article by NDTV:
http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/ndtv- ... ine-578949

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/offi ... 10485.html

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 30 Dec 2014 16:17

It is as disconcerting that the letter, together with manual notifications on it, was leaked by India Today

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 30 Dec 2014 16:49

^^^ JEM,

No excuses for public infighting. It is pathetic, so I will say no more about it.

But the debate itself is basically a google maps debate.

More secrecy /= more security. Only more ignorance for more people. There is really nothing secret about the generic shape, weight, or basic capability of most platforms to the marginally literate.

Needless to say the adversaries are not going by NDTV broadcasts. And the smart brains know all they need to know, and will ask if they cant find out something via their own sources. The Sec. Def. went onboard the lioning (ow whatever the spelling is) when he visited, so various admirals will also be clamoring to see arihant for picnics when it is operational.

Rest can be inferred in between the lines. Knowledge breeds pride, security, confidence. Obscurity breeds weakness, and insecurities. The thick curtain should be on very specific operating policies, not the platforms. Hiding one platform will not make it into a hundred platforms. Same applies to capabilities.
You have what you have, and dont what you dont.

Most Indians will never get to see let alone touch the fruits of these labors. Google maps is the closest I will get to Arunachal. And that makes me sad.

Functioning bureaucracy apart, the world (not just India) seems to want to revert to dark ages again.
My 2 immaterial np.

ps -- vishal and his mates will have a hard time going forward by the look of it.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 30 Dec 2014 16:54

suryag wrote:With all due respect to him, he also said it underwent crushing depth tests, he mixes a lot of facts, fictions and imaginations etc

INS Arihant being tesed at crushing depth sounds absurd. There have been instance of equipment, including military equipment, tested "to destruction". But then these equipment are NEVER used again. Let us not discus this issue.
K

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 30 Dec 2014 16:57

It is not just this case. Media live telecast on this matter is gone to the useless levels. For example one Tv channel in India - I have seen this myself- reported while live during the Australian hostage crises that "police are going to launch their attack very soon". Do we think is as resposible???

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 30 Dec 2014 16:59

we call them DDM for a reason

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 30 Dec 2014 18:15

JE Menon wrote:It is as disconcerting that the letter, together with manual notifications on it, was leaked by India Today

Leaking a confidential letter related to confidential-info-leaks is an insult and a open challenge to Indian Gov. And it's not about freedom of speech at all. Find the mole who leaked this letter. Stop the source and there will be nothing to leak.

Filtering media sets a wrong precedence and will put us in same category as China in long run. Like someone said, "road to hell is built with good intentions".

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 30 Dec 2014 18:21

Shalav wrote:Like missiles torpedoes don't have IFF either... and like missiles they self-destruct when they fail to re-acquire their targets after having lost them to decoys.

This is a safety measure to ensure they don't inadvertently target friendlies in the area, or even more unluckily the launching platform itself!

There may be some work going in that direction to make them smarter, but you could counter loitering torpedoes by releasing timed decoys, so that one takes over after the first one has stopped, and so on. Loitering decoys laying a false trail if you will, much easier to achieve IMHO.

You don't have to stop there? You could develop a series of smart decoys leading an acoustic trail back to the launching platform!

Modern torpedoes have wire guidance + active/passive homing. In the initial phase they are wire guided to maintain their stealth. Only in their final phase they are cut loose and they rely on their homing system.

Along with that they also have signatures of enemy warships and know what they are looking for.

They are as smart as one can be.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 30 Dec 2014 18:41

Just to clarify I meant leaked "to" India Today, not "by"... my mistake. I just realised when I saw Sid's post. Don't want to edit it now as there are responses to the original post...

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 30 Dec 2014 18:48

Sid wrote:
Leaking a confidential letter related to confidential-info-leaks is an insult and a open challenge to Indian Gov. And it's not about freedom of speech at all. Find the mole who leaked this letter. Stop the source and there will be nothing to leak.

Confidential? The damn thing is marked secret!
Cabinet secretary level correspondence being leaked is outrageous.

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 30 Dec 2014 19:21

Wire guidance does not guarantee they will not accidentally reacquire and target friendlies after having lost track of their original target, so even wire guided modern torpedoes self destruct if they cannot require. IIRC.

AFAIK no one has put their threat libraries on munitions which may be recovered by the enemy, but I am willing to be corrected here.

Also whats the point of loitering around a decoy for 20-30 minutes? The target is trying to get as far away as fast as possible from there!

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 30 Dec 2014 21:22

Gerard wrote:
Sid wrote:
Leaking a confidential letter related to confidential-info-leaks is an insult and a open challenge to Indian Gov. And it's not about freedom of speech at all. Find the mole who leaked this letter. Stop the source and there will be nothing to leak.

Confidential? The damn thing is marked secret!
Cabinet secretary level correspondence being leaked is outrageous.

++1, totally agree.

But read the following, this gem allows all our DDMs to bypass OSA.

The Delhi high court greatly reduced the powers of the act by ruling publication of a document merely labelled ``secret`` shall not render the journalist liable under the law.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes ... ecrets-act

And hence, even if GOI decides to press charges it will loose as this letter itself does not put our National sovereignty in danger. WTF.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 30 Dec 2014 22:04

The journalist and media are IMHO rather minor concerns. Even if the memo was not marked secret, this is cabinet secretary level correspondence. There is no country in the world where the leakage of government correspondence at this level is tolerated.

Some serious housekeeping is in order. The civil servants in those departments have shown themselves incapable of doing their lawful duty and need to be replaced.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 31 Dec 2014 17:30

the violation of the OSA is very serious.Sub commns. are the "holy grail" in naval warfare as they are vital for the sub leg of the nuclear triad. Locations of such commn installations is and should be a matter of the utmost secrecy unless already mentioned by the govt. Such installations are vulnerable esp. to terror strikes during a crisis. If members do have knowledge of the same,or any other sensitive mil. info not available in open source media,etc.,please as was said in posters during WW2,"be like Dad,keep Mum!"

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 31 Dec 2014 17:36

Gerard wrote:
Sid wrote:
Leaking a confidential letter related to confidential-info-leaks is an insult and a open challenge to Indian Gov. And it's not about freedom of speech at all. Find the mole who leaked this letter. Stop the source and there will be nothing to leak.

Confidential? The damn thing is marked secret!
Cabinet secretary level correspondence being leaked is outrageous.

The irony/idiocy of stating that a rival channel has leaked confidential information and bragging about it by "accessing" and openly printing classified information themselves is incredible. Its a direct insult to the GoI and it speaks volumes about current GoI that they havent been able to bring this stuff in order.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 31 Dec 2014 18:16

Gag orders will be coming soon hopefully - for starters

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/450 ... error.html

Live TV coverage of anti-terror ops may be banned
New Delhi, Dec 31, 2014, (PTI)
Live TV coverage of anti-terror ops may be banned. AP File Photo
Live coverage of anti-terror operations by television channels is likely to be banned soon as the Home Ministry has asked the Information and Broadcasting Ministry to amend the rules to stop such telecast.

Citing the unpleasant experience during 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks when news channels broadcast NSG operations live, the Home Ministry told the I&B Ministry to amend the Programme Code under the Cable Television Network Rules so that no terror-related operation is telecast live in future.

In its letter, the Home Ministry said such live coverage not only affects the secrecy and effectiveness of the operation but also puts the safety of security forces, common people and journalists in jeopardy, official sources said.

However, the I&B Ministry is yet to respond to the Home Ministry's request sent about a month ago.

After the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, the National Broadcaster Association put out a set of rules, including restriction on live reporting of terror situations, as part of a self-regulation exercise on the part of private broadcasters.

However, so far there is no official ban on live coverage of anti-terror operations.
The Home Ministry is asking for more changes to the 15-point Programme Code prescribed under the Cable Television Network Rules, 1994 for this purpose. The rules were amended in 2009 when private broadcasters were brought within the ambit of the Cable Television Networks Rules.

During the Mumbai terror attacks, television channels had broadcast live images, including the moves by security forces, para-dropping of commandos, which led the authorities to intervene and stop it.

Live coverage of an NSG chopper operation at Nariman House was seen to be of particular concern to the government as it was revealed that the controllers of the terrorists sitting in Pakistan were monitoring TV channels to guide the attackers.

At that time, the I&B Ministry had issued directives to TV channels asking them to exercise caution while covering terror incidents.

In 2011, another advisory was issued pointing out that some TV channels telecast interviews with terrorists or terrorist groups, which the government said could help them to advance their agenda.

It was also pointed out that such coverage would amount to violation of the provisions of the Programme Code. The Code so far mentions a broad category — that programmes which contain anything affecting the integrity of the nation shouldn't be carried in a cable service.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Jan 2015 18:16

http://in.rbth.com/blogs/2014/12/20/ari ... 40451.html

Arihant stirs up the ocean

December 20, 2014 Rakesh Krishnan Simha
India’s first nuclear powered submarine will allow it a credible second strike option and keep out adventurists from its waters.

Related
• India to lease second Russian nuclear submarine — media
• Russia offers to help repair India’s Kilo class submarines
• Russia prepared to modify submarines for Indian tender
The first clear image of INS Arihant, taken by NDTV. Photo: NDTV snapshot

In June 2012 a nuclear-powered attack submarine of the Russian Navy quietly entered the Gulf of Mexico. Armed with long-range nuclear cruise missiles, the Akula class vessel operated undetected for several weeks and its movement in strategic US waters was only confirmed after it left the area. The silent Akula left a lot of red faces in the American defence establishment in its wake.

In November 2013 Russia launched its advanced stealth diesel-electric Novorossiysk. The Project 636 submarine is said to be virtually undetectable when submerged. “Our potential opponents call it the ‘Black Hole’ due to the very low noise emission and visibility of the submarine,” Konstantin Tabachny, the captain of the Novorossiysk, told the media. “To be undetectable is the main quality for a submarine. And this whole project really fits its purpose.”

Considering that the Russian scientists and experts behind these stealthy subs played a key role in the development of the Arihant, India’s first SSBN (ship submersible, ballistic missile, nuclear powered) submarine promises to be a potent vessel.

After decades of development, the 367 ft – as long as 10 buses parked end to end – Arihant was finally launched on December 15. It is a measure of how jealously India guards its strategic submarine that when the jet black beauty sailed out of the naval dockyard in Visakhapatnam, the Indian Navy and Indian Air Force deployed their MiG-29K and Su-30 MKI combat jets around the harbour while the Poseidon P-8I maritime surveillance and attack aircraft from the nearby naval base at Arakkonam sanitised the area for any hostile underwater activity. Further, reports India Strategic warships from the Eastern Command provided protective cover.

The excitement in India’s defence establishment is understandable. Like the BrahMos, the Arihant is a rare example of a successful strategic weapon made from scratch within the country. The 6000 tonne submarine will take India to an elite league. According to Richard Sharpe of Jane's Fighting Ships, a nuclear submarine will give India a "colossal advantage" over its neighbours. “Facing a nuclear submarine is a nightmare; it has unlimited endurance and mobility and there's no place for a surface ship to hide,” he writes.

Until now India has blissfully carried on without a credible second strike option. This means if China – or for that matter any other country – launches a surprise first strike and decapitates the country’s land based nuclear missiles and its nuclear armed aircraft, there’s very little India can do except throw in the towel.

Having an SSBN changes the equation. It guarantees a nuclear first strike will not destroy India’s ability to strike back. Lurking at the bottom of the oceans and constantly moving, even a handful of SSBNs can sow doubt in the enemy’s mind that some of India’s sea-launched strategic missiles will be launched in retaliation. The planned fleet of five Arihant class SSBNs will thus complete India’s strategic triad, giving the country’s military the second strike option.

The first Arihant class submarine will carry 12 K-15 ballistic nuclear missiles that can be launched even under ice caps. Tested in 2008, the K-15 will be armed with a nuclear warhead that can be targeted at a distance of 750 km. The low range means the sub will have to venture close to enemy waters before launch. However, a 3,500 km range missile is already in development.

India’s quest for strategic parity with the leading nuclear powers began as early as the 1950s. As noted by Eric Arnett, a researcher at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, “The history and implications of (nuclear powered submarines) for Indian maritime strategy suggest that the US presence in the Indian Ocean was a stronger motivation for the programme.”

The approval of the construction of an SSBN dates back to 1970, but as is usual with Indian defence projects, nothing came off it. The project was revived in 1985 and in 1989 DRDO sought design assistance from former engineers and defence workers of the former Soviet Union. Several Russian naval engineers have been in India since 1991.

By 1996, when India had spent $285.7 million on the nuclear submarine, work on the project came to a crawl because of pressure from the US. The Federation of American Scientists says ASEAN also wanted India to stop work on the ATV as a condition for entry into ASEAN and for India to be invited to future Asia-Europe summits. The European Union was behind the demands put up by ASEAN.

The Russians soon understood the US game plan. By stopping Moscow from selling key technologies to India, the Americans managed to starve Russian industry of much needed funds while at the same time it placed major roadblocks in India’s ability to develop strategic weapons. This not only had the effect of creating a rift between Russia and India, it also allowed the Americans a foot in the door in India’s defence market.

However, with the exit of the pro-American elements from the Kremlin, Russians came back in full strength. While Russian designers assisted in building the vessel, which is based on the Akula class hunter killer submarine, its nuclear-powered 80MW pressurised water reactor was developed by the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre with assistance from a design team from Rubin, the Russian submarine-design bureau.

Although the reactor was “designed, fabricated and executed in India” by Indian industry and under the direction of Indian scientists, the chairman of India’s Atomic Energy Commission, Dr Anil Kakodkar, told the media in 2009: “I would also like to thank our Russian colleagues. They have played a very important role as consultants, they have a lot of experience in this so their consultancy has been of great help so that I think we should acknowledge.”

Russia offers to help repair India’s Kilo class submarines

In fact, Russia's contribution has been acknowledged by the Government on a number of occasions, including in 2009 by former prime minister Manmohan Singh. The Russians also helped in building the naval base in Visakhapatnam, where a section of the officers’ mess is named Kremlin.

Russia helped with another significant aspect – crew training. Even as the Arihant’s development was plodding along, India prepared for operating an SSBN by leasing a Charlie class nuclear-powered submarine Chakra from Russia in January 1988. However, bowing to pressure from the US, Moscow refused to extend the lease and the sub returned to Vladivostok in January 1991.

The crew of Arihant is being trained on a brand new 12,000 tonne Akula-II Class submarine. Leased from Russia for 10 years in 2011, the submarine is also named Chakra.

In the 1971 India-Pakistan war, as the Indian Army was thundering down the road to Lahore, the US and British fleets made a threatening pincer against India. While the US Seventh Fleet from Southeast Asia sailed towards Calcutta, a British flotilla from Madagascar steamed towards western India. The Indian Air Force was on alert after receiving intelligence that American warplanes might attack the Indian Army’s communications in the west. However, the Soviet Pacific Fleet sailed into the Indian Ocean and threw a cordon around India, forcing the American and British warships to retreat.

Once a fleet of Arihant boomers start patrolling the waters around India, India can ensure no foreign navy will threaten it again.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Feb 2015 02:31

Shouldn't the second INS Ardhiman and the third boat be close to completion?

We know INS Arihant is in sea trials but that is no excuse to delay the rest. I expect once Arihant launches its BO15 missiles, the other two should be launched this year and next at most.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 02 Feb 2015 02:50

Ramana, per report in other thread, Navys aim is to increase indigenous content to 70% from 40%. That might be the time factor, more than design & hull fabrication alone.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 02 Feb 2015 03:35

Are subs normally inducted with fanfare? Can't they just induct it without any formal ceremony?

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 02 Feb 2015 12:06

Such ceremonies are morale raising events for all the people involved. Makes them feel proud and appreciated for their work.

Will · Post by **Will** » 02 Feb 2015 14:02

There have been reports that the Ardhiman and follow on subs are going to be bigger boats. Is the current reactor going to be sufficient to power them or is it that only the follow on subs, after the initial 3, going to be bigger subs?

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 02 Feb 2015 14:24

Many specific details of the Arihant class are not know to public and us. I would not be surprised if the Nuclear power plant is more powerful than we were told or we have some other plan already under way to develop a more powerful power plant for a decade without any one in public knowing.

Personally I feel, it is time India go for all SSN, SSBN platforms. SSKs of today are also quite costly and we do not even have a local SSK design in place as on today. But I am a mango man with all kinds of wet dreams. IN knows better and if they are asking for new SSKs, I go with that.

We may need a more SSNs and SSKs in any event. Our present numbers are too small and both China and Pakis are acquiring more and more subs.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 02 Feb 2015 19:47

Some Xcpts reg. Undersea warfare for the future from the USNI. pertinent in the context of our UW strat. deterrent and the prime requirement for the In to transform its sub fleet as far as possible into having a greater number of N-boats both SSBNs and SSGNs. The SSGNs could also have their LR cruise missiles like the Nirbhay fitted with N-warheads when demanded.

http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedin ... ea-warfare

Generation III: Nuclear and ASW Strategic Deterrence

In 1992, when the strategic submarine force completed its 3,000th strategic-deterrent patrol (by the USS Tennessee [SSBN-734]), General Colin Powell noted that “America’s nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarine fleet” had been largely responsible for winning the Cold War. The submarine force’s wisdom in persevering with development was validated as the Soviet navy’s submarines became increasingly advanced and the United States fully committed to the newly established NATO. In the event of a third world war, the fate of the free nations of Europe would depend on the rapid resupply of the outnumbered NATO forces. Just as did the Germans with U-boats in World Wars I and II, the Soviets would undoubtedly attempt to interdict these convoys in the Atlantic. This threat alone justified a significant investment in antisubmarine warfare. 11 The strategic reality of the Soviet presence in Europe dictated a new mission for the U.S. submarine force.

Additionally, in the late 1950s, following the development of the intercontinental ballistic missile, both the U.S. and Soviet navies feverishly worked to develop the submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM). With the ability to relocate almost anywhere in world and remain hidden from aerial reconnaissance, SLBMs proved to be the most survivable and reliable leg of the nuclear triad. For the U.S. submarine force, the rise of SLBMs reinforced the importance of antisubmarine warfare as well as creating a new mission: strategic deterrence. 12 As intelligence would eventually make clear, the primary mission of the Soviet submarine force was to establish secure bastions near the homeland in which their strategic submarines could remain under way and hidden. By this means they hoped to preserve a decisive and survivable strike capability. Once this Soviet strategy was discerned, it became a primary mission of the U.S. submarine force to hold those Soviet SSBNs at risk.

Both antisubmarine warfare and strategic deterrence required submarines with an acoustic advantage and the ability to remain submerged for prolonged periods. After significant experimentation and innovation, the Silent Service achieved the acoustic advantage through better sonars, superior sound silencing, and an understanding of oceanography. Simultaneously, the submarine force harnessed the advantage of nuclear power. This meant the vessels could remain submerged indefinitely and travel immense distances at high speed, with no need to refuel or spend significant time at periscope depth for air. 13

By the end of the Cold War, the submarine force had successfully performed as a credible and reliable U.S. nuclear deterrent, holding at risk the Soviet ballistic-missile submarine force. This achievement, in the absence of any combat evolutions that would have validated or invalidated the force’s strategy, was almost unprecedented. It required “the kind of technical and doctrinal innovation which is normally considered rare in military organizations in peacetime.” 14

Much as occurred during the gradual transition between the second and third generations near the end of World War II, no sharp divide separated the third and fourth generations near the Cold War’s end. Although the Soviet menace vanished almost overnight, highly capable adversaries did not disappear. The submarine force has had to continue to execute missions similar to those of the Cold War. Precision strike had already emerged, but it evolved and became the submarine force’s primary combat mission area of the 1990s. 15

Despite the lack of a monolithic adversary threat, the force knew it needed to evolve its capabilities to keep pace with those of potential threats. Much as its leadership at the end of World War II embraced the potential of nuclear power and correctly chose to explore new designs and technologies, the submarine force at the end of the Cold War appropriately embraced the promise of advanced computer processing and digital technology, producing a superior and effective replacement for the Los Angeles class with the Virginia . And just as the undersea challenge of the Cold War did not become fully clear until the USS Nautilus (SSN-571) was in the water, the situation confronting Generation IV is just now becoming clear. A new security environment is taking shape, and Virginia -class submarines are joining the Fleet in growing numbers.

Generation IV: Undersea Networks

The maritime-security environment that distinguishes Generation IV is largely defined by two broad trends. One is the movement toward increasingly pervasive combat networks that combine ubiquitous intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; longer-range, responsive, and precise weapons (including cyber and space weapons with near-instantaneous global reach); and increasingly high-bandwidth command-and-control networks to connect the ubiquitous sensors with the longer-range weapons. The other trend is the persistence of very simple weapons—groups of mines, salvos of rockets, swarms of small craft—that can impose an asymmetric cost even on an advanced force in a close-quarters fight.

The combination of these rapidly proliferating approaches permits adversaries to attack from close in or at great distance—concentrated in time and space with unprecedented precision. Consequently, our Navy’s traditional standoff ranges have become less and less protective. More than ever, it is easy to be “seen,” which can lead to being targeted and, increasingly, hit. These trends combine in ways that are tailored to the user, to produce a uniquely designed system of systems that can deny access to an area altogether, or can severely limit freedom of action within an area—an A2/AD network.

The implications for undersea warfare are far-reaching. Just as in World War II, our missions in the A2/AD environment will pertain to operating in increasingly large areas of the maritime domain where non-stealthy forces are more vulnerable to attack. While many forces will be working to fight from the “outside in,” undersea forces will fight from the “inside out,” working closely with other low-profile forces (such as stealth aircraft and special-operations forces) within the A2/AD radius, to create chaos and disruption for the enemy and opportunities for our joint force. These operations will be focused on using the stealth, endurance, and payload of undersea forces to exercise freedom of maneuver inside an aggressor’s network barriers and enable access for the rest of the Navy and joint force. In other words, networked undersea forces will act as a key to unlock the door for decisive force to enter the fight and seize and maintain the initiative.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Feb 2015 20:51

Will wrote:There have been reports that the Ardhiman and follow on subs are going to be bigger boats. Is the current reactor going to be sufficient to power them or is it that only the follow on subs, after the initial 3, going to be bigger subs?

Its the next class that is larger. The three boats are Arihant, Ardhiman and A#####, these area ll same displacement.
I think economy of scale due to Indian build is three of a class. For surface ships its six of class.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Feb 2015 21:05

ramana wrote:Shouldn't the second INS Ardhiman and the third boat be close to completion?

We know INS Arihant is in sea trials but that is no excuse to delay the rest. I expect once Arihant launches its BO15 missiles, the other two should be launched this year and next at most.

KaranM replied here:

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 0#p1789400

...the team that brought Arihant to this stage is now focused on the next two submarines in the series being built in the same shipyard. Their aim is to take the indigenous content of the next two nuclear submarines from the 40 to 60 and then to 70 per cent by the time the third submarine is ready for commissioning possibly by 2017....

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 02 Feb 2015 22:30

jamwal wrote:Such ceremonies are morale raising events for all the people involved. Makes them feel proud and appreciated for their work.

I agree but there is no need to invite a media circus. 2 weeks after induction just release a press statement and a few pics. Thats should keep the jingos happy and pakis and chinese salwars brown.

ravip · Post by **ravip** » 02 Feb 2015 23:14

ramana wrote:

Its the next class that is larger. The three boats are Arihant, Ardhiman and A#####, these area ll same displacement.
I think economy of scale due to Indian build is three of a class. For surface ships its six of class.

Former Navy Intelligence Chief Mr. Ranjit Rai in one of the articles had stated that the second sub of Arihant class will have long range K-xx missile (which is now known as K-4)when compared to INS Arihant's K-15 or BO15, and the third sub will have an additional plug of 4 silos taking the total number of silos on 3rd sub to 8.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 07 Feb 2015 10:10

Next line of Nuke Sub can be called Arimati Class or Aantya class= one who finish the enemy/ job.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 07 Feb 2015 10:57

When is the boat scheduled to return. She approaching her 70th day on patrol?

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 07 Feb 2015 19:47

I feel that two nuke subs may already be in water with third to follow in couple of years.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Feb 2015 13:20

French Baracuda Program should be a good template for us to develop future SSN

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.ph ... ew&id=2253

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Feb 2015 16:47

Pratyush wrote:When is the boat scheduled to return. She approaching her 70th day on patrol?

shh - we might hear that she will soon start her sea trials

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 11 Feb 2015 22:40

She left around Dec 15 so its been 57-58 days only?? Expect a return in March.

http://zeenews.india.com/news/india/ins ... 15250.html

ravip · Post by **ravip** » 25 Feb 2015 00:08

INS Arihant caught sun bathing and most probably his cousin INS Aridaman is hiding in the pens.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 25 Feb 2015 01:25

That is a Kilo.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 25 Feb 2015 03:23

Too long to be a Kilo. Its more than 100 m long nearly 110-112m so I would venture it is the A-class.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 25 Feb 2015 03:30

Perfect. Deterrence needs to be seen and believed.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 25 Feb 2015 03:46

111m. +1 bheeshma