Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.


Indian Nuclear Submarines -3

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Posts: 695
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Nuclear Submarines -3

Postby yensoy » 21 Dec 2017 10:23

Singha wrote:i have a basic question - why do we need SLBMs to deter Cheen? would not a fleet of 100 road mobile A5 and follow ons be enough , backed by a good IRBM inventory? russia for instance puts great store by its land based fleet incl mobile, train and even the fixed SS18/Sarmat. these will be far cheaper as we pay for the missile and a truck, not a huge submarine to cart the missiles around. I could drive that TELAR, read the instruction manual and fire that thing off with a week of training

My understanding is that deterrence relies on you not firing the missile, rather than firing it. The threat that your enemy has something underhand, hidden from plain view, and capable of annihilating you is what makes deterrence work. It is an elaborate game of bluff and submarines are the most effective at stealth and deception, not a bunch of TELs which can be monitored from satellites and easily liquidated with some missiles.

BRF Oldie
Posts: 61626
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Indian Nuclear Submarines -3

Postby Singha » 21 Dec 2017 10:54

ArjunPandit wrote:Russia has the following advantages for land based deterrent
1. huge land mass
2. little inhabitation
3. very few moles, which can be made to disappear easily
we do not have any such luxury

good point. siberia alone seems 5x the size of india, with barely a few cities in the south along the railroads ...

BRF Oldie
Posts: 9492
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Nuclear Submarines -3

Postby Aditya_V » 21 Dec 2017 12:11

it is better to have all options, monitoring all TEL via Satellite is very tough, India is blessed with lots of people and hence structures and Good Granite mountains. It is even better to have SLBM's in addition to the above. So the enemy thinks a First strike will inevitably bring a 2nd strike which will annihilate his country and there are surplus weapons to deter others. Basically the enemy(and all his well wisher Allies) must think your deterrence is soo numerous that a first strike will definitely mean destruction of his and his family and country. Unlike many here whoa re satisfied with having deterrence with a few cities, I think we must have the ability to end human life in every major city and village in Pakistan and China. This will take years but only when numbers appear they will take us seriously.

BRF Oldie
Posts: 18643
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Nuclear Submarines -3

Postby Philip » 21 Dec 2017 13:36

The problem with land based missiles silos or mobile, is that they attract N-devastation across the country.
Sub launched missiles give one the insurance against first strike threatening utter devastation of the enemy's landmass.It is not impossible that we could eventually afford and build 8- 12 SSBNs, which could carry upto a mknimum of 200+ warheads, including MIRVs.

BRF Oldie
Posts: 61626
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Indian Nuclear Submarines -3

Postby Singha » 21 Dec 2017 14:16

well if someone is going for a first strike, they will strike at our cities, not at isolated missile units.

Forum Moderator
Posts: 3352
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Indian Nuclear Submarines -3

Postby hnair » 21 Dec 2017 14:31

Probably the Aridhaman was being worked on for extra plugs or an uprated reactor with tweaks. But then before the prep work got done, Doklam and Kim's whims happened and the Arighat was speeded up with original specs. This is a seriously black project and we all are unhappy at the blackness :D

BRF Oldie
Posts: 18643
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Nuclear Submarines -3

Postby Philip » 21 Dec 2017 14:42

I would prefer castrating my enemy's nuke capability first.Once that has been achieved,the cities would be sitting ducks. It would also give the enemy a lesser capability to destroy our cities.The enemy can even be brought to heel and sign on whatever we demand. In the case of Pak,we need to plan for the assimilation of Pak today into the India of yesterday in the future. It would be beyond our financial capacity to rebuild a country/landmass the size of Pak.

Here's a piece from Bus. Line on the need for continued Indo-Ru N-sub cooperation. ... 996987.ece

Russia matters to our submarine plans

The country’s technological assistance has immensely helped India’s indigenous nuclear submarine programme

In early November, a Russian news website claimed that the Indian Navy allowed a US technical team to inspect the Russian Akula-Class nuclear submarine loaned to India in 2012. Although the report turned out to be false, the issue raised eyebrows in strategic circles for two reasons. First, it brought into focus Indo-Russian cooperation in the domain of nuclear submarines.

India is the only country in the world to have operated a nuclear submarine on loan from a nuclear-weapon state, and Russia is the only such state to have leased one. The history of their cooperation on nuclear submarines has, however, been shrouded in secrecy. Second, it highlighted potential strains in Indo-Russian defence ties against the backdrop of New Delhi’s growing strategic closeness with Washington.

Even when Russia remains India’s largest defence supplier, New Delhi has increasingly looked toward the US for top-of-the-line defence equipment including attack helicopters, artillery guns, and advanced transport aircrafts. More worrying for Moscow is the recent emphasis on technical cooperation between the two sides in joint production of defence equipment. In the current environment of distrust between the US and Russia since the Ukraine crisis, Moscow is increasingly wary of US-India defence cooperation lest it compromise existing Russian defence technology in Indian hands.

Old ties
Moscow first loaned India a nuclear submarine in January 1988 during the era of the Soviet Union, which was not only India’s strategic partner during the Cold War but also its most important source of military equipment, especially for the Indian Navy. Between 1964 — when Moscow first started supplying naval equipment to India — and 1987, 70 per cent of the Indian Navy’s inventory came from the Soviet Union. Though Soviet Admiral Sergey Gorshkov had reportedly suggested supplying nuclear submarines to the Indian Navy in the late 1960s, the Soviets first agreed to lease a nuclear submarine to India during Marshall Nikolai Ogarkov’s visit to New Delhi in March 1981. Both sides subsequently also reached an understanding on assistance to India’s indigenous nuclear submarine programme.

As Vice-Admiral Mihir Kumar Roy reminisced later, this was the beginning of Project-S (the codename for India’s nuclear submarines). Moscow also agreed to train Indian naval personnel and help expand the Visakhapatnam naval dockyard for nuclear submarine operations.

In October 1986, the Soviet Politburo confirmed the lease of a submarine. However, there were voices of resistance. An internal memorandum circulated by some politburo members in November 1986 pleaded with President Gorbachev to cancel the lease on grounds that it would unleash a nuclear arms race in the Indian Ocean, create a perception of Soviet compromise with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and harm the prospects of creating a zone of peace in the Indian Ocean.

The memo also expressed fears that “in the process of the use of the nuclear submarine a succession of technical data about the boat’s systems, and also partially about the external parameters of the benchmark (bazovoy) of the nuclear power plant for our nuclear submarines will fall into the American hands.”

Gorbachev did not heed these voices and the transfer was officially completed in December 1987. However, a special service group (SSG) of the Soviet Navy accompanied the Soviet nuclear submarine K-43 — rechristened INS Chakra by the Indian Navy — when it sailed for Visakhapatnam from Vladivostok in January 1988.

The SSG’s mandate was not only to help with the smooth operations of the boat but also to ensure that no technical parameters were leaked during the period of the lease. That the Visakhapatnam naval base was completely out of bounds to Western navies also helped assuage Soviet fears. In fact, during the Cold War, a division existed between the Eastern and the Western command of the Indian Navy, with the Eastern Command primarily dealing with equipment supplied by Moscow.

Moreover, the Indian Navy maintained strict controls over access to the boat even for its own senior commanders.

Tilting towards the US?
If Moscow feared its defence equipment being compromised in Indian hands during the Cold War, current circumstances accentuate these concerns. From being an exclusive preserve of the Russian defence industry, the Indian Navy is increasingly looking forward to American hardware.

For example, Russian Tu-142 maritime reconnaissance aircrafts have been replaced by Boeing’s P-8 I Poseidon aircrafts of the same type, and India is seeking US technology for its new aircraft carriers. India conducts its most high-profile naval exercises — the Malabar series — with the US Navy, with an emphasis on joint operations. The sea change in India-US naval relations is evident in the fact that in 2015, US defence Secretary Ashton Carter visited the Visakhapatnam naval base, which was considered a Soviet outpost for much of the Cold War.

Yet, it would be erroneous to assume that India will give short shrift to Russian concerns. On the contrary, India acquiesced in a Russian naval group accompanying the Akula-class nuclear submarine loaned to India in 2012 and the same will be true when India next borrows a boat, negotiations for which are currently underway. Indian naval strategists appreciate the strategic utility of Russian cooperation, even when these boats are largely meant for training and come with restrictions on their use for offensive purposes.

But most importantly, Russia’s technological assistance to India’s indigenous nuclear submarine programme has been immense. India’s first nuclear submarine, the INS Arihant, would have been a pipedream without Moscow’s assistance, which remains critical for the next generation of India’s nuclear submarines as well.

Given this history of cooperation and India’s need for continued Russian assistance, it is hard to imagine that New Delhi would shoot itself in the foot by revealing Russian secrets to its American counterparts. In fact, the reluctance among the Indian defence services (including the Navy) on signing the Communication and Information Security Memorandum of Agreement with the US partly emanates from such concerns.

Moreover, it is impossible for the Navy to do so without prior consultations with Moscow as the latter’s naval personnel are always on-board its leased nuclear submarines. Finally, even though some Indian strategists now argue for US technical cooperation in naval nuclear propulsion, New Delhi knows it will be difficult for the US to overcome its reluctance to share military nuclear technology with India. For the sake of some future possibility of cooperation with the US, India cannot afford to abandon its most important defence partner.

The writer is a Nuclear Security Post-Doctoral Fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford. This article is by special arrangement with the Center for the Advanced Study of India, University of Pennsylvania

(This article was published on December 19, 2017)

Forum Moderator
Posts: 4811
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth

Re: Indian Nuclear Submarines -3

Postby Rakesh » 17 Mar 2018 01:04

X-Post from the Indian Navy - News & Discussion thread...

Second, third Scorpene Class submarines undergoing sea trials, says Indian Navy official ... l/1101676/

To a question on the accident suffered by INS Chakra, Indian Navy’s only nuclear-powered submarine, he said, “85 per cent of the reports on it was incorrect.”

Vivek K
Posts: 1877
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Nuclear Submarines -3

Postby Vivek K » 17 Mar 2018 01:22

Also incorrect "India's only nuclear-powered submarine".

Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests