Indian Nuclear Submarines -3

[member_28386]

Nuclear SSBN (Submersible Ship BallisticMissile Nuclear) Numbers S-2,S-3,S-4 - beginning with INS Arihant (S-1 would be the land reactor based half-boat)

Nuclear SSBN Numbers S-5,S-6,S-7 Larger SSBN
(in which case the Arihant Class above might be designated SSGN - Submersible Ship GuidedMissile Nuclear)

But as far as India is concerned, the role of SSBN and SSGN is interchangeable anyway for operational purposes. The above is a matter of time and shall occur in due course.

Now, what Indian Navy seems to be intent on is SSN (Submersible Ship Nuclear) which India needs desperately and figures from 6 SSN through 9 SSN to about 12 SSN are being bandied about. But an initial procurement of 6 SSN has certainly been approved and shall pose significant challenges requiring technological hand-holding and extensive assistance from the French and/or Russians. The SSN with continuous long term patrol features was what the Indian Navy wanted in the first place anyway right from the time the first SSK (Submersible Ship Kerosene) Foxtrot class was inducted and was the dream of most of our submariners; but strategic requirements dictated otherwise and Arihant ended up an SSBN.

[Aditya G]

...
Now, what Indian Navy seems to be intent on is SSN (Submersible Ship Nuclear) which India needs desperately ...

Nitpick - but I dont think there is any "desperation" to SSN acquisition. We already operate one - INS Chakra and are in talks (hopefully concluded in secret) to lease a second one. SSN capabilities are partially met by SSKs, of which we have a pipeline.

We are desperate to acquire MCMVs and additional ASW ships, and more SSBNs as they are crucial to NFU and second strike posture.

[tsarkar]

@Kaustav

SSBN and SSN are US Navy designations not used by Indian Navy. All Indian Submarines are designated S.

Please take cognizance and respect the fact that our doctrine (& hence assets) is based on our unique security environment and requirements and it does not ape the US.

[Singha]

imo if we want to make a statement the production and deployment of 60 land based A5 need to be speeded up as a national priority.
assuming they will be on trains, that also has its own lead time.
the C3i and force protection system to track , protect and control land and sea based n-assets with deliverable warheads has to be built and tested , redundancies need building up.

1 token test every couple of years is a TD track, not a FOC track.

de-mated warhead and delivery systems is not deterrence.

[ShauryaT]

tsarkar: You have to expand. What is the IN thinking with that designation. With every other power accepting the differentiated roles and capabilities of the SSN and SSBN (hope this is not just a terminology thing), and every report I have seen on Indian subs using the same designations, you have to enlighten us on the unique security aspects and India's doctrine and use of its capabilities and planned asset mix.

(not trying to refute anything, only to learn what is it?)

[Supratik]

It is not clear whether the later and bigger SSBNs will have 12 or 16 plugs. The IRDW article says double - so could be 16. Assuming 16 and the bigger submarines to carry MIRV warheads the number I am getting is 300 +/- 25 warheads at sea. That is a pretty good arsenal.

[srai]

^^^

That's more than the entire nuclear arsenal held by India

[member_23370]

Why would all 6 SSBN's be patrolling at the same time?

[sohamn]

@Kaustav

SSBN and SSN are US Navy designations not used by Indian Navy. All Indian Submarines are designated S.

Please take cognizance and respect the fact that our doctrine (& hence assets) is based on our unique security environment and requirements and it does not ape the US.

Don't get too riled up with your immaturity. Its OK to use these nomenclatures to differentiate between various subs. We have been using this in BR for a decade and I see no harm in using it. Infact Indian media uses it always to differentiate between the subs.

[member_29172]

@Kaustav

SSBN and SSN are US Navy designations not used by Indian Navy. All Indian Submarines are designated S.

Please take cognizance and respect the fact that our doctrine (& hence assets) is based on our unique security environment and requirements and it does not ape the US.

Don't get too riled up with your immaturity. Its OK to use these nomenclatures to differentiate between various subs. We have been using this in BR for a decade and I see no harm in using it. Infact Indian media uses it always to differentiate between the subs.

DDM is the standard for nomenclatures now? Who cares? SSN/SSBN nomenclature is not used in NauSena, I don't care if BRF or media uses it. It's you being immature. The systems and operational concept is totally different in accordance with our regional situation.

Last I checked this is a site for discussion for Indian military matters so it doesn't make sense to ram a square peg of foreign terms in the circular peg of Indian ones. The concepts are different and are better understood by using the actual terms used by the Navy.

[Philip]

All (assuming 6) SSBNs wouldn't be at sea at the same time.it would be a stupendous effort of support and maintenance to do so. There used to be a Cold War thumbrule.3 N-subs for every one on patrol.Why? One heading out on patrol,one returning and one in the dock/at port under std. maintenance procedures/repairs for faults that may have taken place,etc. USN SSBNs use the "Blue and Gold " system for their boomers,with a rapid turnaround after each patrol of the same sub. Still,victuals,supplies for the crew for patrols lasting upto 90 days for N-subs have to be loaded and there could even be weaponry changes for each voyage.

If we therefore assume that we will possess at least 6+ SSBNs,then we would have at least two on patrol at any given time.They should have a min of 12,pref. 16 ICBMs of 5,000+km range with at least 3 MIRV warheads. This would give us 32 ICBMs with 96 warheads for second strike against any pre-emptive PRC/Pak N-strike. In any such strike,our Nuclear naval bases and other known (to the enemy) secret N-bases for mobile ICBMs road or rail,will be prime targets. Survivability/operability of SSBNs at port even in UW accessed nuclear-hardened silos is debatable. In addition,enemy N attack subs will be prowling around looking for our SSBNs ,aided by surface warships,sats,etc. The CW cat and mouse game that existed between the US and the Soviet fleets will be played out in the IOR and ICS (Indo-China Sea).

Once we have around 10-12 SSSBNs and SSN/SSGNs,in a crisis ,the first batch of ATVs/Arihant class,could revert back to accommodating ICBMs to add more numbers to the UW leg of the triad.Some subs could be armed with Nirbhay LRCMs with N-tipped warheads to target key Chinese naval bases and ports in an advanced operational posture. The key to India's survival against China and Pak is going to be the size and capability of the nuclear sub fleet of all types,,SSBNs,SSGN/SSNs.

And the latest threat to SSBNs,Drones.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 00486.html

Drone technology a threat to Trident submarines, MPs to be told

Report by think-tank says Britain’s nuclear deterrent could be worthless before it is even launched
David Connett

The controversial idea that Britain’s nuclear submarines could be rendered irrelevant before the new fleet is even launched, will be bolstered this week by a report to be presented to MPs examining the Trident programme. Emerging drone technology, which could make the oceans “effectively transparent”, will make the submarines that carry the UK’s nuclear deterrent vulnerable to attack, warns the report which was commissioned by the British American Security Information Council (Basic), a nuclear disarmament think-tank.

The report, to be presented to MPs on the Defence Select Committee this week, says rapid advances in technology mean the world’s oceans are becoming a “sensor rich” environment full of drones with “eyes and ears everywhere”. As a result there will be “no hiding place for submarines.”

If Britain’s submarines become easily detectable they will lose “all their advantages as strategic weapons platforms”.

The Defence Select Committee has written to BAE and Babcock, constructors of the UK submarine fleet, asking them to respond to the drone threat claims.

The report is a fillip for Emily Thornberry, the shadow Defence Secretary, who has faced fierce criticism of her review of the Trident replacement programme. Her suggestion that drone technology posed a threat to nuclear submarines, thereby diminishing the potency of the nuclear deterrent, has been ridiculed as “tired old science fiction”.

Lord Hutton, the former Defence Secretary, speaking on Radio 4’s Today, described the idea that technological advances posed a clear danger to Trident as “camouflage for those who want to espouse unilateral disarmament”.

As a result of rapid advances in technology, drones will soon mean that there will be “no hiding place for submarines” (Getty)

Ms Thornberry said that “serious questions have been raised about whether the successor submarines will be redundant before they even hit the water and we need to look at this very carefully before we commit to spending £41bn on them. ”

The Basic report makes it clear that advanced drone technology is far from sci-fi fantasy and is already being used in anti-submarine warfare by the US and Chinese navies.

Air-dropped drones and underwater craft called gliders are employed to track enemy submarines. The US Navy is known to use relatively low-cost Coyote drones, launched from aircraft and fitted with Magnetic Anomaly Detectors, to hunt for subs. Similar technology is employed on Chinese built drones the report says.

Improved sensors, based originally on designs to detect and measure tiny magnetic fields generated by the human brain, will revolutionise drone capabilities, the report states.

Another technique employed is to borrow the soaring approach of albatrosses and other ocean-going birds. Drones imitate the birds by turning into the wind to gain altitude then glide downwards.

The US has produced drones that can land on the sea, re-deploy its wings as sails and recharge, allowing it to take off again later. Another research project is examining air drones that can land at sea and then propel themselves underwater.

Unmanned underwater craft, or gliders, also pose a threat to submarines. With greater endurance abilities they have been used to track the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, as well as radiation levels around Fukushima in Japan. They are extremely quiet and can carry acoustic sensors so sensitive they can, as one researcher put it, “hear a fish fart”. Unsurprisingly, they have been used to track fish shoals by the sounds they make.

Commercial gliders are being used by oceanographers to collect data on water temperature and cloudiness, salinity and ocean current speeds. Japanese scientists are examining proposals to deploy about 1,000 gliders to form a network to measure and survey the oceans, the report says.

China is particularly interested in the unmanned underwater craft and the report cites a 2010 US Department of Defence report which noted the Chinese were targeting this technology specifically.

Paul Ingram, the chief executive of Basic, said: “In the past anti-submarine warfare has been carried out by a small number of highly capable ships and manned aircraft. Their task has been like that of a handful of police looking for a fugitive in a vast wilderness. Lacking the manpower to cover the whole area, they have to concentrate their forces on the most likely paths and hideouts, and hope for a lucky break.

With the advent cheap drones, the police are joined by thousands more searchers, who are less well-equipped but have the numbers to walk shoulder to shoulder and sweep the entire area. Escape becomes impossible.”

Parliament is expected to vote on the future of Trident later this year.

[Aditya G]

All (assuming 6) SSBNs wouldn't be at sea at the same time.it would be a stupendous effort of support and maintenance to do so. There used to be a Cold War thumbrule.3 N-subs for every one on patrol.Why? One heading out on patrol,one returning and one in the dock/at port under std. maintenance procedures/repairs for faults that may have taken place,etc. ..

Where will our SSBN patrols be? I think it will be within the Bay of Bengal relatively close to the shores or somewhere between Vizag and A&N. It could be in Arabian sea as well but there is a lot of military movement there all the time.

[tsarkar]

@Kaustav

SSBN and SSN are US Navy designations not used by Indian Navy. All Indian Submarines are designated S.

Please take cognizance and respect the fact that our doctrine (& hence assets) is based on our unique security environment and requirements and it does not ape the US.

Don't get too riled up with your immaturity. Its OK to use these nomenclatures to differentiate between various subs. We have been using this in BR for a decade and I see no harm in using it. Infact Indian media uses it always to differentiate between the subs.

Thank you, Sohamn, for pointing out my immaturity.

Please do educate me with your infinite wisdom on which category does INS Arihant come under.

Is it SSN, because it carries torpedoes?
Is it SSGN, because it carries K15, BrahMos & Nirbhay?
Is it SSBN, because it carries K4?

Once you identify the category, please also educate me the basis of which INS Arihant was specifically designed in that category.

@Shaurya

The problem of a ballistic missile is its weight & volume. The Russian Delta class lacks hydrodynamics and is used as a missile barge operating in safe havens under Arctic ice protected by land based naval aviation.

If we build a boat with a large number of ballistic missiles, its hydrodynamics suffers. Ability to quickly dive & re-surface suffers. This is compounded by a first generation power plant.

Also, in the late 90's & early 00's, it was not deemed economically feasible to build separate classes for carrying ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and torpedoes.

So we hit upon a compromise solution. Build a submarine with a BM launching tube that can also hold cruise missiles. Carry lesser number of BMs so as not to compromise hydrodynamics, noise and maneuverability.

The US made the similar Virginia Payload Module (VPM) much after we did.

INS Arihant is a true versatile multirole submarine being able to carry out strategic deterrence or land attack with equal ease. The 12 K-15/Brahmos/Nirbhay is comparable to a salvo of 16 Brahmos from a Type 15A Kolkata.

More recently, in light of the Chinese string of pearls, the strategic deterrence role is gaining emphasis, and hence fitting more ballistic missile tubes is considered. Given the shortage of attack submarine, nuclear powered submarines are also being considered.

However, the multirole submarine philosophy remains strong in IN. Remains to be seen how the new designs will look like.

[srai]

It's fine for India's first attempt to built a multi-role nuclear submarine in Arihant. It's a good start. However, a true SSBN will be required for a credible deterrent. Its primary and sole role shouldn't be mixed with other tasks. They are few (total fleet of only 3 or 4 units) and too valuable (a huge chunk of Indian nuclear arsenal will be carried in just one unit). They are the most survivable element of the nuclear triad for retaliatory second strike.

[Karthik S]

It's fine for India's first attempt to built a multi-role nuclear submarine in Arihant. It's a good start. However, a true SSBN will be required for a credible deterrent. Its primary and sole role shouldn't be mixed with other tasks. They are few (total fleet of only 3 or 4 units) and too valuable (a huge chunk of Indian nuclear arsenal will be carried in just one unit). They are the most survivable element of the nuclear triad for retaliatory second strike.

+1

[Supratik]

+1

[Austin]

I am not sure of Arihant would carry Brahmos in its modular payload ( perhaps for self-defense ) but a Nuclear armed K-4/15 BM along with Nirbhay Nuclear Armed CM is a very much on the card both offer long stand off ranges.

[Rupak]

Tsarkar,
Thanks for your clear explanation of the Indian nuclear submarine design philosophy.

[arshyam]

Don't get too riled up with your immaturity. Its OK to use these nomenclatures to differentiate between various subs. We have been using this in BR for a decade and I see no harm in using it. Infact Indian media uses it always to differentiate between the subs.

Never expected to hear this statement on this thread, of all places . Especially in response to a person who knows the IN better than all of us (my impression, happy to be corrected if wrong).

Of late, BRF has started using exclusively American terms to describe Indian assets, like DDG, FFG, CVN, and the SSN/SSBN here. Why not use Indian designations for Indian assets? Something to mull over.

List of active IN ships, per Wiki. It also shows how the Navy (our Navy) designates these assets. And it is easier - a single letter compared to 3/4 used by the USN. What's there to complain?

[Aditya G]

What I understood from tsarkar, that his argument was not towards the tech jargon per se, but rather evaluating Arihant by comparing her against US classifications such as SSN, SSBN and SSGN:

Arihant is in adequate SSGN compared to Oscar class.
Arihant is a slow SSN compared to Los Angeles
Arihant does not pack enough punch compared to Ohio Class

Arihant however, is made to IN requirements and hence is #1 for Indian Navy. It is not a no-holds-barred design as there were several constraints in terms of money, time, technology, knowledge etc But IN has successfully crafted a design which can serve multiple roles in just about right doses.

[Karthik S]

Gurus, can there be multipurpose submarines? From what I understand, the attack submarines are smaller but faster and more agile than ballistic missile submarines, which are larger and slower due to different mission requirements. Therefore, will Arihant class submarine will be as fast or agile as say LA or Akula class, carry weapons for usual attack submarine profile and also carry ballistic missiles to fulfill the role of a ballistic missile submarine?

[Eric Leiderman]

Karthik S

The Arihant is a compromise solution between a SSN and a SSBN as with all compromises she will not be as good as a dedicated platform for a single function.
However given our resources and the timeframe to get an operational platform/s, It is the best solution available.

The Navy as always is looking at a practical solution (they are basically engineers/ trying to build a good platform with multiple hurdles to overcome.) , it does not have to be the Uber best now, but over time will morph into what the dedicated requirements are.

[Philip]

Also remember that the sub is our very first N-boat and is as much a tech-demo prototype as a working N-sub.
With the experience gained we will now be able to design and build both SSN/SSGN and SSBNs.The follow-on boats of the first series will it appears retain the dual capability role while larger SSBNs will follow when much longer-ranged ICBMs have been developed. With pvt industry (L&T) ready to take up the challenge,both SSNs ancontinue to can simultaneously at HSL and L&T's yard near Madras.MDL or MDSL as signed ow being described,can continue to build AIP boats along with other pvt yards like Pipapav which have signed on agreements for repair and refit of Kilos with Russia.

The new challenge is going to be designing both sub and missiles for the larger SSBN class with around 16 8-10000km range ICBMs which will give us true SSBN capabilities.SSN/SSGN challenges can be met with a few more Akula-2 /Yasen tech boats from Russia and the same tech for the 6 SSNs to be built locally.

[Cain Marko]

What I understood from tsarkar, that his argument was not towards the tech jargon per se, but rather evaluating Arihant by comparing her against US classifications such as SSN, SSBN and SSGN:

Arihant is in adequate SSGN compared to Oscar class.
Arihant is a slow SSN compared to Los Angeles
Arihant does not pack enough punch compared to Ohio Class

Arihant however, is made to IN requirements and hence is #1 for Indian Navy. It is not a no-holds-barred design as there were several constraints in terms of money, time, technology, knowledge etc But IN has successfully crafted a design which can serve multiple roles in just about right doses.

Thank you TSarkar for the contribution and AdityaG for the summary. So, the Arihant is essentially the IN's counterpart of IAF multirole fetish - na ghar key na ghat key perhaps, but at least 100% desh key!

Whatever works - I trust the men and women in uniform know what they are doing far better than us armchair types. This is a massive achievement, all the more so because of the unique profile. Super impressive. In terms of large acquisitions, I just hope the IN orders another Vikrant class before it goes for the Vishal.

[member_29172]

tsarkar never said the multi role was inferior and yet the subsequent comments have managed to twist the comment as such. Do yourselves a favor and get rid of your personal biases and inferiority complex.

Here's what tsarkar actually said :

Please do educate me with your infinite wisdom on which category does INS Arihant come under.

Is it SSN, because it carries torpedoes?
Is it SSGN, because it carries K15, BrahMos & Nirbhay?
Is it SSBN, because it carries K4?

Once you identify the category, please also educate me the basis of which INS Arihant was specifically designed in that category.

Where did he mention that the multirole subs were inferior?

[shiv]

Ok I have an embarrassing confession to make. What is an SSN? What is an SSBN?

[Sidhant]

Shiv saar... SSN is submersible ship nuclear basically hunter killer I guess. SSBN is submersible ship ballistic nuclear which is nuclear power propelled submarine carrying ballistic missiles most likely nuclear tipped. Please forgive this nanha if you asked the question in sarcasm.

[Cain Marko]

tsarkar never said the multi role was inferior and yet the subsequent comments have managed to twist the comment as such. Do yourselves a favor and get rid of your personal biases and inferiority complex.

Here's what tsarkar actually said :

Please do educate me with your infinite wisdom on which category does INS Arihant come under.

Is it SSN, because it carries torpedoes?
Is it SSGN, because it carries K15, BrahMos & Nirbhay?
Is it SSBN, because it carries K4?

Once you identify the category, please also educate me the basis of which INS Arihant was specifically designed in that category.

Where did he mention that the multirole subs were inferior?

Hopefully that was not directed at me....if it was, please be direct about it and I can respond

[Philip]

The simplest explanation.An SSBN carries nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles ,part of a nuclear power's strategic triad, meant to be the most survivable of all strategic N-assets (armed with a dozen+ ICBMs),which include land based missiles and air delivered N-missiles. This gives theoretically a nuclear nation a "second strike" capability in case its land and air delivery systems are wiped out in a surprise pre-emptive strike.In India's case China and Pak ,solely or in a combined strike. An SSN is a hunter-killer N-powered sub that is primarily meant to seek out enemy SSBNs hiding in the world's oceans and destroy them before they can launch their ICBMs. SSNs do not carry ICBMs but can and often do carry LRCMs which could also have N-tipped warheads.SSNs also carry (USN and RuN) N-tipped torpedoes to destroy enemy N-subs. Other tasks that SSNs carry out apart from conventional attacks against enemy shipping,warships and subs are ISR and special forces ops insertion using dedicated modules sometimes carried aboard an N-sub's hull. ISR today is perhaps the most important use in peacetime of an SSN. Secretly recording the acoustic signatures of enemy subs and SSBNs in particular,is a top priority.

With the advent of UUVs,the UW equiv of UUAV/UCAVs,the capabilities of both SSBN and SSNs are undergoing changes.They can operate these unmanned mini-subs like a mothership. Subs are no longer as safe and secure as before with a plethora of long-endurance UUVs and drones dedicated to detecting them and then tracking their course. These are in addition to teams of ASW warships,helos,aircraft and sats. The two most commonly used tactics of SSBNs are operating them in safe bastions,sanitised zones close to home naval bases,sometimes made even more difficult to penetrate because of geographical features. The Scandinavian coastline and Russia's northern seas are great for subs. The other tactic is to send them far out into the world's oceans where they can find a safe and secure spot to lurk undetected. During the CW,Soviet subs used to run the gauntlet of the GIUK gap (Greenland,Iceland,UK) in the North Sea/Arctic Circle,and operate off the US coastline. teams of NATO ASW aircraft,warships and subs,aided by SOSUS sensors on the seabed would try and detect and track Sov subs. When the CW ended,ASW warfare took a back seat in global navies,but the huge upsurge in sub acquisitions around the globe and especially the Russian renaissance in N-sub design and production,surpassing CW levels in ops,has brought back ASW warfare as a priority today.

[SaiK]

good posts philip

[sohamn]

Thank you, Sohamn, for pointing out my immaturity.

Please do educate me with your infinite wisdom on which category does INS Arihant come under.

Is it SSN, because it carries torpedoes?
Is it SSGN, because it carries K15, BrahMos & Nirbhay?
Is it SSBN, because it carries K4?

Once you identify the category, please also educate me the basis of which INS Arihant was specifically designed in that category.

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to educate you...

Can Arihant be designated as SSN ? - An SSN is primarily tasked with hunting down SSBNs, SSNs and protecting the fleet against other rouge subs. This requires high top speed and very low sound signature. So answer is "No". Arihant can't be an SSN. Furthermore, you can't expect a nuclear tipped missile carrying sub engage in conventional warfare. What happens if an enemy attacks Arihant which results in an nuclear explosion and destroys the fleet? Would you know in the heat of battle if you were attacked via nuclear missile ? Would you use nuclear 2nd strike option?

Can Arihant be designated as SSGN ? - An SSGN needs to carry cruise missile, and the ability to carry cruise missile requires different capabilities. For e.g. you should have a good radar to detect an enemy ship, you should be able to read and identify signatures and classify under a threat category. You need to have a different fire control system for tactical cruise missile. You need to have advanced communication facility to constantly communicate with base operations. You need to have higher speed to move away from theatre of operations when your missiles are fired. So answer is "No", Arihant can't have an operational role of SSGN. Also, Arihant haven't been known to have any capability to launch any cruise missile like Brahmos.

Can Arihant be designated as SSBN ? - An SSBN needs to have long range missile system and is mainly used for nuclear deterrence. Since it mainly operates from safe havens , it doesn't require high speed or super low noise signature. Arihant carries K4 ( 3500 Kms intermediate range BMs ) and will be able to launch its missile from the relative safety of bay of bengal. It exactly fits the role of an SSBN and hence all jingo's have rightly categorized it as SSBN.


BTW, Navy hasn't it come up with any nomenclature because it only operated one type of sub, that is SSKs. When they come up with something to categorize different types of subs, we can surely use it. Till that time I see no harm in using popular nomenclatures like SSNs, SSBNs and SSKs.

You can use whatever you want to use, but don't comment or criticize people when they choose to use the popular nomenclatures.

[nirav]

^Enemy attacks Arihant,results in nuclear explosion, destroys the fleet.

[John]

Can Arihant be designated as SSN ? - An SSN is primarily tasked with hunting down SSBNs, SSNs and protecting the fleet against other rouge subs.

That is not true there are lot of specialized SSN during cold war some were tasked with just intercepting enemy fleet like the Alfa submarine. SSN is simply an attack submarine.

[Aditya G]

The week says that s-3 is now actually called "s-3plus" and will be powered by a reactor twice the power @160 MW.

[srai]

...

... which category does INS Arihant come under.

Is it SSN, because it carries torpedoes?
Is it SSGN, because it carries K15, BrahMos & Nirbhay?
Is it SSBN, because it carries K4?

Once you identify the category, please also educate me the basis of which INS Arihant was specifically designed in that category.

@Shaurya

The problem of a ballistic missile is its weight & volume. The Russian Delta class lacks hydrodynamics and is used as a missile barge operating in safe havens under Arctic ice protected by land based naval aviation.

If we build a boat with a large number of ballistic missiles, its hydrodynamics suffers. Ability to quickly dive & re-surface suffers. This is compounded by a first generation power plant.

Also, in the late 90's & early 00's, it was not deemed economically feasible to build separate classes for carrying ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and torpedoes.

So we hit upon a compromise solution. Build a submarine with a BM launching tube that can also hold cruise missiles. Carry lesser number of BMs so as not to compromise hydrodynamics, noise and maneuverability.

The US made the similar Virginia Payload Module (VPM) much after we did.

INS Arihant is a true versatile multirole submarine being able to carry out strategic deterrence or land attack with equal ease. The 12 K-15/Brahmos/Nirbhay is comparable to a salvo of 16 Brahmos from a Type 15A Kolkata.

More recently, in light of the Chinese string of pearls, the strategic deterrence role is gaining emphasis, and hence fitting more ballistic missile tubes is considered. Given the shortage of attack submarine, nuclear powered submarines are also being considered.

However, the multirole submarine philosophy remains strong in IN. Remains to be seen how the new designs will look like.

We should call Arihant SSBGN then That would cover all the nomenclature.

[ldev]

An SSN is a nuclear-powered general-purpose attack submarine. SSN is the US Navy hull classification symbol for such vessels; the SS denotes a submarine[1] and the N denotes nuclear power. The designation SSN is used not just in the United States Navy (USN), but throughout NATO under STANAG 1166.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSN_(hull ... on_symbol)

As far as I know, India is not a member of NATO and such US Navy classifications for submarines do not apply to India or the Indian Navy even if some BRF members are heavily influenced by US Rambo style pop culture and want the Indian Navy to follow US Navy nomenclature.

TSarkar, thank you for the tremendous education you have provided and continue to provide.

[ShauryaT]

Tsarkar: Thank you for your views. While I do not have any specific contradictions, there may eventually be a difference in understanding of the historical or future evolution and you are a much closer observer of the IN than I am, so feel free to correct. I will layout my understanding below.

I am compelled to use the western derived terms for the roles these subs play for lack of my knowledge of relevant IN terms. A SSN hull plays the role of a SSKN and/or an SSGN but not an SSBN. Similarly a SSBN hull can double up as an SSGN. The primary difference between a SSN and SSBN comes down to propulsion and weight/volume, as you have explained this impact well. All of them may carry torpedoes, but the “primary” role differences between them are a matter of capabilities and design. So, at least when I am using these terms, it is not by way of the payload mix as much but the “primary” role these subs are designed to perform.

Historically, IN was primarily interested in an SSN capability and that was the charter for DRDO/DAE to build and power from the late 70’s, until events of 1998 changed course to defer to the needs of the triad. While the Arihant design, as you have explained is a compromise solution arrived at that time due to factors involved then, the pertinent question for today is what does the future look like. Is it still this compromise design that leads to a unique doctrine or more towards a traditional understanding of the role designations, with today’s resources and state of evolution?

It is expected that Arindhaman and its follow on the S4 will double the number of silos in S2/Arihant, with most likely an impact on its agility, firmly castigating them to the SSBN role.

With the DAC and CCS approval of the 6 SSN’s, who’s details in terms of size, payloads, propulsion are not known and most likely a matter of debate between DRDO/DAE and the IN. The suspicion is the IN is back to asking for primarily an SSKN with a secondary role as an SSGN – on the lines of the Akula. This difference is articulated by way of DAE wanting to design an SSN, with its current 83 MWt reactor, optimized for a more compact version of the Arihant design and the IN preferring a more Akula sized reactor.

The use of SSKN is to be read in its expanded form for fleet protection, interdiction and hunter/killer of enemy SSKN’s and SSBN’s and not just in the narrow sense by just the last part as traditionally understood. So, torpedoes and SLCM/AShM (Brahmos) would be its primary weapons and LACM by way of Nirbhay in a secondary role. An SLBM role (capability?) for these six approved subs is precluded. The most important factor that would go into making this decision is the propulsion we can manage to build/acquire.

As for the SSBN, while we will have the three dedicated SSBN based on the Arihant design, it is expected that sometime after the SSN project is well under way, a new larger SSBN will be designed, but that is a far off decision and do not expect more than 2 such new large SSBN’s to be in play. In the meanwhile, multiple options exist to arm LACM on to either of the platforms SSN or SSBN, as operationally multiple options will exist but overall, I do expect the IN to move along classical SSN/SSBN routes with land attack being a secondary role. Your thoughts?

[ramana]

Can some one create a table of power reactors vs sub features like displacement and hull oval?
And just for comparison power reactors for aircraft carriers as function of displacement?

This 16 tube bastions are killing the power plants.

[shiv]

Shiv saar... SSN is submersible ship nuclear basically hunter killer I guess. SSBN is submersible ship ballistic nuclear which is nuclear power propelled submarine carrying ballistic missiles most likely nuclear tipped. Please forgive this nanha if you asked the question in sarcasm.

No no sarcasm. Thanks I really did not know.

Personally I see this whole debate about SSN and SSBN to echo a general Indian tendency to say

xyz have done this before, they should know
xyz do it in this way, they must be right
if we have not done it the xyz way, something must be wrong
Why is it wrong? Because xyz state these reasons for doing it their way. We have not stated any reasons

We see this across the board in all fields, although it is getting better. It used to be rampant in medicine as well. About 20 years ago I was grilled by a colleague for doing something that was not being done in America. It was not being done in America because insurance would not pay for it. But for this guy the reason was immaterial,

When we speak of Close Air Support we say "CAS requires Titanium bucket and two engines above wings" Or else CAS cannot be done

The same thing is true here. I seem to hear people say "How can you combine SSN and SSBN?" Just not done. America/Russian/Brit SSN have ## knots speed' Ours can't have ## speed because we can judge from the puny reactor size and the fact that we are first timers and we have gone ahead and combined everything rather than dedicated SSN/SSBN separate

In short nothing we do can be right unless we copy. And when we copy if it is not equal to the copied item, it is inferior.

[shiv]

I have an old Bolero, weighs a ton, 2500 cc engine that hits 90 kmph with some effort. My nephew has a Maruti Alto 800 cc , weighs <700 kg that crosses 110 kmph with ease. On the other hand my cousin has a 2000 cc BMW that hits 160 kmph without panting. How does engine capacity correlate reliably with speed?

True capabilities of submarines are never revealed. How come we know so much? is someone letting out secrets, or is it all hot air?