Indian Nuclear Submarines -3

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 06 Dec 2017 03:43

x-post from the Naval thread. Thanks Philip.

Philip wrote:Trying to throw further light on our ATV progr.,here is another report of last yr.,with the key info. posted.

http://katehon.com/article/russian-indi ... ooperation

Akula-II and Arihant Agreement

Acknowledging the work done by BARC and Indian Naval engineers, nontheless, the argument on the role of Russians in the design, fabrication and operationalization of the Indian nuclear submarines (the first two) remains an open question. On Russian role, CNS cites for reference the words of PM Manmohan Singh from the year 2009. Acknowledging the Russian cooperation, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had invited Russian Ambassador to Vizag for the ‘premature’ launching of the Arihant. Arihant was launched before it was commissioned. It was called a launch but it was not commissioned, it has still not been commissioned. According to the CNS, “the Russians were involved in the greatest detail, minutest detail, at least for the first two submarines”. (CNS) CNS also adds that the Russian were intricately involved in Mark series for the first boat and for the Mark I, II, III and Mark IV for the second submarine. Thus, there are two interpretations of the Russian role in the ATV project but the larger picture is that Indian deterrence capability emerges from this effort and even if the Russian component is assumed to be higher than officially stated, eventually the submarines will be almost totally indigenously manufactured.

*(there is no dispute on this aspect at all,we've mastered/building making an N-sub from scratch)

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 06 Dec 2017 03:50

(CNS) CNS also adds that the Russian were intricately involved in Mark series for the first boat and for the Mark I, II, III and Mark IV for the second submarine

What exactly does this mean?

One thing to keep in mind is that Russian design help and assistance in building the Arihant does not mean that the Arihant's reactor is Russian designed which some are claiming here.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 06 Dec 2017 07:31

They must have helped at critical junctures when things were stuck. That is the inference one can derive.

In one of the LCA videos, a retired IAF very senior officers reports that the LCA's AoA from 22 to 24 was problematic and a russian expert on control law software helped solve the coding.

Consultants don't do the work for you. They give their expert opinion, being masters in that field, with prior experience in solving a related problem.

The Arihant and its sister boats, being Indian designs, would have encountered a unique set of challanges of their own. Indian designers would eventually have overcome them all, but consultants surely speeded up things.

But the indications are that there was even deeper collaboration. We don't have any details of the sub-systems in the subs. Perhaps many systems were sourced directly from Russian suppliers? Many may have been made in india.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2017 07:39

While all this may be true - it is important to recall that ALL foreign consultants will take credit when something works and will distance themselves from the result when things fail. The "advice" given by Americans about LCA control law, the advice received from BAe about IJT stall and spin and the way BAe washed their hands off those Jag accidents due to faulty slat motor hydraulics need to be mentioned while we generously and dharmically award credit to our gurus for their blessings.

When Sukhois or MiGs crash, the fault is with Indians. When things work, credit goes to the supplier/designer.

Gagan, I have never seen anyone mention this. Very little is mentioned about AoA expansion of LCA - except maybe Aero India related conference videos. Can someone corroborate or produce the link.

In one of the LCA videos, a retired IAF very senior officers reports that the LCA's AoA from 22 to 24 was problematic and a russian expert on control law software helped solve the coding.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 06 Dec 2017 09:48

Gagan wrote:They must have helped at critical junctures when things were stuck. That is the inference one can derive.

In one of the LCA videos, a retired IAF very senior officers reports that the LCA's AoA from 22 to 24 was problematic and a russian expert on control law software helped solve the coding.

Consultants don't do the work for you. They give their expert opinion, being masters in that field, with prior experience in solving a related problem.

The Arihant and its sister boats, being Indian designs, would have encountered a unique set of challanges of their own. Indian designers would eventually have overcome them all, but consultants surely speeded up things.

But the indications are that there was even deeper collaboration. We don't have any details of the sub-systems in the subs. Perhaps many systems were sourced directly from Russian suppliers? Many may have been made in india.

Let's take your explanation a little further. Now that you've ascribed an Indian achievment to your masters, can you also help us understand the reason for why these "consultants" did what you say they did? Was it for the money, for leverage, for control or for from the kindness of their bleeding hearts?

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 06 Dec 2017 09:51

Vivek K wrote:Let's take your explanation a little further. Now that you've ascribed an Indian achievment to your masters, can you also help us understand the reason for why these "consultants" did what you say they did? Was it for the money, for leverage, for control or for from the kindness of their bleeding hearts?

deleted
Please avoid personal comments

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Dec 2017 11:50

If you read the posts carefully,it was WE who approached the Russians after our attempts at designing an SSBN failed. A few decades earlier,we were offered an N-sub. It was a little later obtained during Rajiv G's reign. However,it was politely refused first because we needed to understand how to build a conv. sub first,which resulted in the HDW U-209s being procured.To master even that,we took 8 yrs. (if I'm right) in assembling the first sub!
In hindsight,the CNS of the day was perhaps right in preferring the Swedish offer which contained far greater TOT than that of the Germans,but the decision was "political".

Indo-Russian friendship took decades to develop to the level of trust that existed in '71,where it sent its nuclear assets to warn off the Americans who had sent the Enterprise into the IOR to prevent E.Pak from being liberated.This relationship exists even now,where it can equip us with its cutting edge weaponry well-knowing that their tech. secrets will not be divulged to others.In that context as an act of a good friend,they delivered what we asked for,and the ATV prorgamme,which is now producing a series of SSBNs based upon the Arihant speaks for itself. From open info we're told that Akula sub tech is a major part of the ATV.While the boat is an SSBN,not an SSGN and there are obvious differences such as the sail,silos,etc.,much of the internal eqpt. may be common to both types,why we're leasing two more Akulas according to some reports. In the quoted post,a fig. of "6" to be leased was agreed upon earlier! That may not happen as the programme for the 6 SSNs has been officially announced to have begun.Let's be patient and see how that evolves.

A media report said that the damage to the Chakra's sonar dome was when it came alongside (the pier),returning to base.Two sonar panels have to be replaced,which could've been done easily by the IN,but will be done by the Ru team under terms of the lease,as the boat technically belongs to Ru and any repairs,etc. must be done /authorised by them.The repairs will take 3 months,said the report.

In retrospect,we appear to have been more successful at building our N-subs than conv. boats,when you compare the time taken to build the Scorpenes.There was an issue in a def. mag. which gave a lot of info of the various components in the ATV programme which had been supplied by various Indian firms,based upon drawings/details recd. from the "outside help". We have to bring down the build-time for subs,esp. conv. boats as in another post,the Chinese are building 2.5 subs each year.We need to be able to build at least 2 subs each year with two conv. sub lines -one in the pvt. sector and two lines for SSBNs and SSNs. The SSBNs could continue to be built at HSL,but the SSNs in a parallel programme,perhaps at L&T's Katup. yard off Chennai,since they're also supplying hulls for the SSBNs. The proximity of Kalpakkam which is building the N-reactors is also v.close to Chennai making logistics,tech. help much easier.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 06 Dec 2017 20:09

Gagan wrote:
Vivek K wrote:Let's take your explanation a little further. Now that you've ascribed an Indian achievment to your masters, can you also help us understand the reason for why these "consultants" did what you say they did? Was it for the money, for leverage, for control or for from the kindness of their bleeding hearts?
Vivek Beta,
Calm down a bit, don't get excited
Please re read what is written above. Understanding will dawn upon you

Beta yourself buddy! Can you provide details of
a) Russians had commissioned 70 Akula-II nuclear submarines - where are these subs or was only Prhaladan the only person that the Soviets disclosed all their secrets to?
b) The design turned a corner in 1995 and "the Russians were involved in the greatest detail, minutest detail, at least for the first two submarines". Why only the first two?
c) Arihant was launched before it was commissioned. It was called a launch but it was not commissioned, it has still not been commissioned. (Article is dated October 17, 2016, Arihant was commissioned in August 2016) - was this Gent kept out of the loop? Was he under suspicion for something?

So why did it take 14 years for the Arihant to be "prematurely launched" and then commissioned when there was proven technology being used? Why does the Gent not even talk about S-1 (ground prototype reactor)? Why was it built? If the reactor and all tech was borrowed, then there would be no requirement to scale the reactor up in the Aridhaman.

These look like the ramblings of a person who thinks very highly of himself. Why did Sethna and Ramanna chose not to agree to his ramblings since the 80s? And the India nuclear program has made good progress notwithstanding this Gents craving for Russian assistance.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 06 Dec 2017 20:14

Philip wrote:Indo-Russian friendship took decades to develop to the level of trust that existed in '71,where it sent its nuclear assets to warn off the Americans who had sent the Enterprise into the IOR to prevent E.Pak from being liberated.This relationship exists even now,where it can equip us with its cutting edge weaponry well-knowing that their tech. secrets will not be divulged to others.In that context as an act of a good friend,they delivered what we asked for,and the ATV prorgamme,which is now producing a series of SSBNs based upon the Arihant speaks for itself. From open info we're told that Akula sub tech is a major part of the ATV.While the boat is an SSBN,not an SSGN and there are obvious differences such as the sail,silos,etc.,much of the internal eqpt. may be common to both types,why we're leasing two more Akulas according to some reports. In the quoted post,a fig. of "6" to be leased was agreed upon earlier! That may not happen as the programme for the 6 SSNs has been officially announced to have begun.Let's be patient and see how that evolves.

Can you explain this -
What does Russia gain from their "largesse" and that will help you and us put a value to the relationship. Since you are the biggest Russophile on this forum perhaps you should do this exercise - is it leverage, bloc building as a bulwark to the west, friendship because Russians and Indians are born to be friends, friendship is the essence of Russian existence?

Also, if there was Russian assistance so easily available - why did the ATV take so long and with tested tech being used, why is the Arihant underpowered.

I think you need to write this up and develop it to support your view point and to help us understand.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 06 Dec 2017 20:48

Vivek K wrote:Lotsa questions, asked angrily, with answers in the posts above

Vivek K beta
Please re read what posters post here, again
You ask a lot of very good questions. Very appreciable indeed!

Good questions. Fortunately, the answers to those questions usually lies in the post you yourself quote.

Son, again, I advise you to re-read the posts that you quote.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 06 Dec 2017 20:52

Oh really? Or are you unable to provide a response to the questions raised.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 06 Dec 2017 20:57

Stop asking questions and post the answers for a change son
We want to know what you think. No one is interested in rhetorical questions.
They make you sound like a troll

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 06 Dec 2017 21:18

Vivek K wrote:Can you provide details of
a) Russians had commissioned 70 Akula-II nuclear submarines - where are these subs or was only Prhaladan the only person that the Soviets disclosed all their secrets to?
b) The design turned a corner in 1995 and "the Russians were involved in the greatest detail, minutest detail, at least for the first two submarines". Why only the first two?
c) Arihant was launched before it was commissioned. It was called a launch but it was not commissioned, it has still not been commissioned. (Article is dated October 17, 2016, Arihant was commissioned in August 2016) - was this Gent kept out of the loop? Was he under suspicion for something?

So why did it take 14 years for the Arihant to be "prematurely launched" and then commissioned when there was proven technology being used? Why does the Gent not even talk about S-1 (ground prototype reactor)? Why was it built? If the reactor and all tech was borrowed, then there would be no requirement to scale the reactor up in the Aridhaman.

These look like the ramblings of a person who thinks very highly of himself. Why did Sethna and Ramanna chose not to agree to his ramblings since the 80s? And the India nuclear program has made good progress notwithstanding this Gents craving for Russian assistance.

You have a very inquisitive mind, asking about the existance of 70 Akulas and all.
Shabash!
Please feel free to contact the AUTHOR of that article via email for further details
Also once you find out the names of the 70 akulas please don’t fail to share them with the rest of us here

prasannasimha · Post by **prasannasimha** » 06 Dec 2017 21:27

Please avoid personal attacks and keep the discussion civil. Applies both to Gagan and Vivek

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 06 Dec 2017 21:31

It is pointless to discuss anything with someone who has no responses to any of the questions raised. And he is on my foes list so I will be blanking his responses out. BTW, I have not called the poster any name - just asked him questions that he choses to dodge with personal attack as a smokescreen. Unless he can provide a meaningful response, I am done with him.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Dec 2017 00:58

If according to V the Arihant is underpowered the Q must be raised with BAARC, who some claim designed and developed the reactor without any external help, as well as the basic sub design ! However, the more accurate reason- if you study the numerous posts is that the Arihant was the first SSBN a tech-demo with only 4 missile silos.Secondly, quieting is more important than speed for an SSBN and if its "official" speed is stated as being around 25 kts then you can expect its actual performance to be greater, like the range given for BMos.

The next 3-4 will have more silos and more powerful reactors.I think Sandeep U in IT or another mag gave us recently a future perspective which is almost identical to my last quoted detailed post covering the history of the ATV, the then chief's visit to Russia and the roadmap being agreed upon.

The other rambling Qs are quite confusing, esp. bringing Sethna and Ramanna into the pic. and when the ATV-1 was actually commissioned.The IN/ GOI is extremely secretive about our SSBN progr. for obvious reasons, why there is a cloud of secrecy reg. ATV-2's status.A common sense reason as to minute Russian help for the first 2
subs is so that our teams learn by then the intricacies of SSBN building as the next boats , from ATV-3 onwards will be identical, other than the last of the first series A slightly modified boat supposed to have a new BM.This could yet again serve as another tech-demo boat for an even more powerful second series of SSBNs armed with ICBMs.

Nevertheless news that an IN team would be embedded in Russia to oversee another Akula being built for the IN in order to replicate the same back in India ,could also be linked with the news of the SSN progr. being officially kicked off. There will now be two parallel N-sub programmes running.SSBNs for the SC (strat. command) and SSNs plus SSGN Akulas built in Russia on lease for the IN.

If the questioner wants even more minute details, I suggest that he write to the PMO or CNS for the same!

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 07 Dec 2017 01:46

Philip wrote:If according to V the Arihant is underpowered the Q must be raised with BAARC, who some claim designed and developed the reactor without any external help, as well as the basic sub design ! However, the more accurate reason- if you study the numerous posts is that the Arihant was the first SSBN a tech-demo with only 4 missile silos.Secondly, quieting is more important than speed for an SSBN and if its "official" speed is stated as being around 25 kts then you can expect its actual performance to be greater, like the range given for BMos.

The question was - if the Arihant is based on proven technology then why does it need to prove the tech again and start with a smaller reactor. The correct answer - The Arihant reactor is based on an identical reactor on land (the S-1). The sub was launched in 2009 and commissioned in 2016 - i.e. it went through teeting issues that were rectified and took 7 years of work. Why did a proven sub have to go through so much or have to go through trials at all? If the Arihant was based on a Russian design, it would have been commissioned quickly after launch and not have to go through long trials.

The next 3-4 will have more silos and more powerful reactors.I think Sandeep U in IT or another mag gave us recently a future perspective which is almost identical to my last quoted detailed post covering the history of the ATV, the then chief's visit to Russia and the roadmap being agreed upon.

Why is a scale up needed if like your refered article says that the Russians provided help with the "minutest details". So if the Arihant represents fabrication of a Russian sub in India, they should be able to build the final product straight away using already proven technologies.

The other rambling Qs are quite confusing, esp. bringing Sethna and Ramanna into the pic. and when the ATV-1 was actually commissioned.The IN/ GOI is extremely secretive about our SSBN progr. for obvious reasons, why there is a cloud of secrecy reg. ATV-2's status.A common sense reason as to minute Russian help for the first 2
subs is so that our teams learn by then the intricacies of SSBN building as the next boats , from ATV-3 onwards will be identical, other than the last of the first series A slightly modified boat supposed to have a new BM.This could yet again serve as another tech-demo boat for an even more powerful second series of SSBNs armed with ICBMs.

The other questions challenge "alternate facts in Prahladan's post". I can understand you're having difficulty with the truth.

BTW you should put together a treatise on what I've asked you before
"What does Russia gain from their "largesse" to India. Does it give them friendship as equal partners in shared values, leverage over the buyer through dependence, usefulness in bloc building as a bulwark to the west? Since you have invested so heavily - perhaps also through your day job into all things Russian, explaining your world view and why India must bow to the Russians would be useful for us to understand where you're coming from.

If the questioner wants even more minute details, I suggest that he write to the PMO or CNS for the same!

Thanks for the suggestion - I probably will.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Dec 2017 01:53

Good! Do so.My name will never be found in any list!

Just for the record, where was the Arihant a "proven design"? It is the first of its class. Even our conv. diesel Scorpenes are taking 2 yrs. of trials before commissioning.The Arihant was an operational tech-demo for larger subs in the series.The "S-1" was merely the reactor at Kpkm. tested in full to validate the design/ fabrication.Read the old issue of Frontline which has details.

As to who gains what, pl ask that Q to the PM too.The Indo-Russian relationship is now 70+ years old since we gained independence and Mrs.Pandit sent as ambassador.There have been so many PMs during this time.I suggest that you enquire both from God and the Devil who are now housing them for the answers!

Interesting supposed tale reg.Mrs.Pandit when she presented her credentials to Stalin. I was told about this whilst looking at the credentials of a new ambassador to be presented to the President of a certain country.Stalin looked at her credentials (cert.in Eng.) and asked what lingo did we in India speak,"English? Don't you have your own language?", he allegedly snorted.The cert./ credentials had to be hurriedly changed into using both Eng. and Hindi before he saw her!

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 07 Dec 2017 03:01

What's going on here?!

If I see any further posts discussing another poster, it will result in an immediate warning and a 2 week ban.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 07 Dec 2017 03:34

Gagan wrote: Consultants don't do the work for you. They give their expert opinion, being masters in that field, with prior experience in solving a related problem.

That depends upon the consulting model (staff augmentation v/s strategic consulting) and the $$ paid. In consulting there is price for everything

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 07 Dec 2017 05:55

Very true Arjun Pandit ji
But beyond a point, this discussion about foreign consultancy is unproductive.

ALL submarine builders have had free flow of knowledge from all over and have refined their skills with repeat iterations and upgrades.

If a second line of subs is being talked about and designed, then the designers are busy with the next generation of subs

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 10 Dec 2017 22:00

A peek into India's top secret and costliest defence project, nuclear submarines
India's indigenous nuclear submarine project hums in top gear with the launch of its second ballistic missile submarine. But other projects face huge technical challenges.

India's top secret nuclear submarine project reached another decadal milestone last month with the launch of a second ballistic missile submarine, the Arighat . On November 19, Union defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman cracked the auspicious coconut on the fin of the submarine in the drydock of the Ship Building Centre (SBC) in Visakhapatnam in a low-key ceremony. Following this, the SBC's drydock was flooded and the submarine quietly floated out. It will be at least another three years before the navy commissions the Arighat.
The event skipped the high-profile public ceremony of the Arihant's launch in 2009 even as the four-decade Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV) project to field a series of ballistic missile firing nuclear submarines is now moving at a furious assembly-line pace.
Two new units, the S4 and S4 'star', displacing over 1,000 tonnes more than the Arihant class will move into the SBC drydock vacated by the two Arihant class submarines. These submarines, fitted with eight ballistic missiles or twice the Arihant's missile load, will be launched by 2020 and 2022. An official says the Arighat launch has more to do with creating more work space within the cramped SBC for assembling the S4 and S4*. The ATV project is India's costliest defence project. The programme to build four SSBNs (hull classification symbol for a nuclear-powered, ballistic missile-carrying submarine) is India's largest defence programme, estimated at Rs 90,000 crore. Each of these nuclear-powered sharks costs upwards of Rs 4,000 crore, not counting the infrastructure created by the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) to build their nuclear powered reactors and the Defence Research and Development Organisation's (DRDO) submarine launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs).

The project's pan-India spread-headquartered in New Delhi, hull fabrication facility in Gujarat, missile development in Hyderabad, nuclear reactor in Tamil Nadu and final assembly in Visakhapatnam-is the biggest Make in India industrial ecosystem-nearly 60 per cent of the submarine's components are indigenous. It is also the cornerstone of Indo-Russian strategic cooperation; top officials admit the project would not have been possible without extensive Russian design and technical assistance. Ahead of the submarine arm's golden jubilee on December 8, the ATV programme has nearly doubled in size with a Rs 60,000 crore project to build six indigenous nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs).
"It has kicked off, " navy chief Admiral Sunil Lanba told the media about the SSN project on December 1. "It is a classified project? the process has started." Design work for the indigenous SSNs displacing around 6,000 tonnes is under way at a newly constructed submarine design centre in Gurgaon. SSNs are armed with conventional cruise missiles and torpedoes but powered by nuclear reactors which give it excellent underwater speed and endurance.
The navy has opened up talks for the lease of another Akula-class submarine from Russia for over $2 billion, to replace the existing INS Chakra when it is returned in 2022 after the end of its lease. (The Chakra is currently non-operational after an incident last August). Meanwhile, final design work is under way on a new series of 13,500-tonne ballistic missile submarines. Called the 'S-5', it will be twice the weight of the Arihant class SSBNs and armed with 12 nuclear-tipped missiles. Earlier this year, the DRDO flagged off its K-6 SLBM project, a missile with an ICBM-like range of 6,000 km. The first phase of Project Varsha, a nuclear submarine base, will be completed by 2022. The base will house India's SSBN fleet in concrete pens blasted out of the hills at Rambilli 50 km south of Visakhapatnam, reportedly at a cost of Rs 30,000 .
THE THIRD LEG OF THE TRIAD
A nuclear engine allows a submarine to travel almost indefinitely underwater. They don't have to surface to recharge their batteries like conventional diesel-electric submarines (SSKs) and they move faster underwater because they avoid surface wave resistance.
The Arighat, like the Arihant, is a ballistic missile submarine or a boomer because it carries nuclear-tipped missiles and forms the third leg of a triad of air, land and sea-based nuclear weapon carrying platforms, enunciated in India's draft nuclear doctrine after the May 1998 Pokharan-2 nuclear tests. When India observes the 20th anniversary of the tests five months from now, it will have a modest sea-based deterrent with one SSBN in service and a second soon to join it.
"The triad becomes effective when you have a submarine operational at all times. In our case, a triad is operational only part of the time-when the Arihant sails out to sea," says strategic analyst Bharat Karnad. When an Indian SSBN sails out of Visakhapatnam and into the Bay of Bengal, it can virtually disappear for months, remaining underwater, its endurance limited only by the endurance of its crew, communicating only through extremely low frequency (ELF) antennae which it trails in the water. While bombers, mobile missile launchers, missile trains and ground-based launchers can be tracked, nuclear submarines are virtually undetectable. This is what makes them the most precious asset of the nuclear triad.
Submarines thus become an important component of India's 'no first use' policy for nuclear weapons because they act as guarantors of 'assured retaliation' or a second-strike, preventing any surprise first-strike by a nuclear-armed adversary. They are vital at a time when China's PLA Rocket Forces can target any point on the Indian mainland with nuclear tipped missiles and India has fewer retaliatory options.
The Arihant has so far been equipped with 12 B-05 SLBMs which have a range of 750 km-which means a distant transit to an adversary's shores. A 3,500-km range missile, the 'K-4' is still in trials-the DRDO is to conduct a fourth test of the missile sometime in December, from a specially designed submersible pontoon launcher in the Bay of Bengal. Final tests of the K-4 from the Arihant are due in the Bay of Bengal in the near future. These are to be followed by tests of a K-5 missile, a 5,000-km SLBM, a project started in 2015. The 'K series' missiles are all named after former president A.P.J. Abdul Kalam. The K-4 and K-5, each of which can carry a two-tonne warhead will give the triad a longer, more robust leg.
Information about the ATV project is meagre. It operates directly under the supervision of national security advisor Ajit Doval and is now wrapped in deep levels of secrecy. A navy proposal for a high-profile launch of the Arighat where the PM and cabinet ministers would be present was overruled by the PMO. Security around the project is the heaviest for any publicly known military facility (the navy recently cited security concerns to acquire a public road passing near the SBC in Visakhapatnam).
Naval top brass are chary of even discussing the project either in public or in private. "That (the ATV) is a classified project... I'm not going to take any questions on that," navy chief Admiral Sunil Lanba told the media a press conference on December 1, a marked departure from a predecessor who claimed, rather disingenously in 2010, of the INS Arihant undertaking 'a deterrent patrol by 2012'. The Arihant was inducted into service in August last year after weapon trials but continues to undertake extensive trials but without a prolonged sea deployment. An actual deterrent patrol-where a nuclear-missile armed submarine goes into its operational area armed with nuclear warheads-is thought to be further away.
The launch of the Arighat comes amidst fast-changing geopolitical developments. The Chinese navy has deployed and initiated the fastest submarine expansion of any navy since the end of the Cold War with an operational undersea force of 63 vessels-5 SSNs, 4 SSBNs and 54 SSKs.
It recently sold a class of eight conventionally powered diesel-electric submarines to Pakistan, at least some of which are likely to be fitted with nuclear-tipped missiles.
"Sea-based deterrents are going to become more important as time passes, especially for a country with a no-first use policy," says strategic analyst Rear Admiral Raja Menon (retired). "The location of your nuclear weapons becomes known and even a half per cent knowledge of your existing weapon sites each year could add up to something substantial over the years, thus degrading your deterrent."
THE HUNTER-KILLERS
A solitary two-month patrol by a Chinese submarine in late 2013 came as a rude wake-up call for India's security establishment. Chinas most advanced SSN, a Shang class, sailed out from its bastion in Hainan island on December 13, 2013 and returned after a two-month 'anti-piracy' patrol in the Indian Ocean, on February 12, 2014. R&AW assessments termed the deployment 'seriously aggravated India's security concerns'. The ATV headquarters soon dusted out plans for building a series of six indigenous SSNs, shelved by the government over a decade ago due to budgetary constraints. Plans called for a series of submarines capable of speeds of over 25 knots and diving to 500 metres.
SSNs are like multi-role fighter jets, ferocious underwater predators. The navy's INS Chakra, for instance, can run underwater at speeds of close to 30 knots, more than twice the speed of conventional diesel-electric submarines, stalk and hunt warships and attack shore targets.
But like fighter jets, their performance lies in their propulsion plant, in this case a high output nuclear reactor which can cope with the tremendous bursts of sustained speed without degrading reactor output. And this is where the Indian Navy and BARC are said to be staring at a technological abyss. An 83 MW SSBN reactor like that of the Arihant, is essentially meant for slow, steady operation, using it onboard an SSN would call for more frequent refuelling cycles.
One solution believed to be under contemplation is for BARC to design a twin-reactor configuration for the SSN to meet its increased power demands. Another solution currently being explored would be to get foreign design assistance and leapfrog from India's second generation reactor technology to fourth gen.
DREAMS OF A BEHEMOTH
The ATV headquarters building in New Delhi's cantonment area has a rather unusual name: 'Akanksha' or desire. Since its start in the 1970s, the nuclear submarine project has been a dream-never constrained by finance, only by technology.

BARC's prototype 83 MW light water reactor at Kalpakkam, the S-1, used to train nuclear submariners.

There's a reason for the modest size of the Arihant class submarines and why they are called 'baby boomers'. When the Pokharan-2 nuclear tests announced India's entry as a nuclear weapons power, the Arihant class were meant to be SSNs. Post the tests, they were converted into SSBNs-DRDO inserted a plug with four short-ranged ballistic missiles. The design got another tweak a decade ago after an intervention from then finance minister P. Chidambaram who was on the political committee which monitors the classified programme. The minister questioned the billions being spent on a boat launching just four nuclear tipped missiles. The ATV project team came back with an 'Arihant-stretch'-an additional 10-metre-long plug for four K-4 SLBMs to be integrated into the S-4, then on the design board. The plug would increase the weight of the submarine by nearly 1,000 tonnes without significantly altering its performance. An additional unit, the S-4* was sanctioned in 2012 when it became clear that the S-5 would take a longer development cycle and would result in the ATV line being idle.
Plans for building a new series of strategic nuclear submarines had begun over a decade ago when the missile payload and reactor capacity constraints of the Arihant class submarines became evident.
In 2006, a high-level committee under Dr R. Chidambaram, principal scientific advisor to the government of India, assessed India's ability to design and construct a class of three new SSBNs the 'S5', to be fielded beginning in 2021. It budgeted Rs 10,000 crore, to be divided among BARC, DRDO and the ATV project headquarters, to begin the project by 2015. The project continued in the development stage and an indication of a possible long lead construction time began when the government sanctioned a fourth unit around five years ago (squeezed between the two projects as the 4*) to keep the nuclear submarine line employed. (S-1 being the shore-based pressurised water reactor at the DAE facility in Kalpakkam, iterations of which are on the Arihant class.)
The S-5 is the true-blue SSBN on par with those fielded by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council.
Plans drawn up over a decade ago called for an SSBN of 13,500 tonnes, a behemoth displacing nearly the weight of India's first aircraft carrier the INS Vikrant and armed with 12 SLBMs with ranges of 6,000 km and with multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicle (MIRV) capability.
In February this year, the DRDO's Hyderabad-based Advanced Naval Systems began a fourth separate SLBM project-the K-6 missile. This three-stage solid-fuel missile with a 6,000 km range is said to be completely different from the K-4 and K-5. It will carry MIRVs and will be ready for induction in less than a decade. These new missiles, over 12 metres tall and over 2 metres in diameter, will carry a three-tonne warhead. The K-6 will ensure that the future Indian SSBN's bastion area will be within the Bay of Bengal, from where it can target all its potential adversaries. A former head of India's Strategic Forces Command hinted at this in a 2014 think tank event in Washington when he said that India's sea-based deterrent would eventually "be secured in havens, waters we are pretty sure of, by virtue of the range of the missiles. We will be operating in a pool in our own maritime backyard." From the safety of its depths, Indian SSBNs would be able to target all its potential adversaries with its 6,000-km range ballistic missiles (SLBMs).
The SSBN fleet is based on the east coast for reasons of geography-the Indian continental shelf dips sharply into the abyssal Bengal fan. A submarine can dive and be concealed just 2 nautical miles from harbor (a submarine on the west coast can dive only after sailing out for 80 nautical miles).
The S-5 is on the drawing board but the project team has already started ordering its ancillary equipment. A new dockyard is being created at the SBC and sources say the project will have an indigenous component of over 80 per cent when they are built a decade from now.
Yet, as is the case with the indigenous SSN, the main challenge in building the S-5 lies in its propulsion plant-a 190-MW nuclear plant- says an official familiar with the project. Development work has started on this new plant will have thrice the output of the Arihant's 83 MW reactor which uses Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU). A former BARC official and part of the Reactor Projects Division which built the Arihant's reactor is confident the 83 MW can be scaled up. "One of the biggest challenges in a naval reactor is compacting it to fit a confined space. Since the new platform (S-5) will have a bigger volume and displacement, upscaling the present reactor should be no problem."- Without a breakthrough in propulsion technology, India's sea-based deterrent will continue to be a modest one.

By Sandeep Unnithan.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indi ... 04982.html

So it's not Aridhaman, it's Arighat. Very good info, hope all that's given is accurate.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Dec 2017 23:14

Tx Kartik for that post of SU's extensive article. It gives a good perspective of the entire masterplan .The key for the future is going to be the reactor, twice as powerful reqd.for the second series of SSBNs which will carry our true ICBMs.Let's see how that is resolved in the specific timeframe.

The Akula's OK-650 B/M
reactors are rated at 190MW , Yasen has a new KPM 200MW.plant.Either one would suit our second series of SSBNs.We are familiar with the OKB-650 on the Chakra.The IN team reportedly being sent to watch an Akula being built for us may also be acquiring some classified help reg. the reactor which would assist BAARC in finalising its design/ building the same.SU's article mentions the invaluable assistance we've had from Ru with the programme.

2 yrs or so ago there were reports that the IN wanted Yasen class subs. However at the time Ru was reluctant to do so for two reasons.They had only one fully commissioned and it's high cost.The new ones are of an even more improved design.In the IN's context we need to standardise on two types of plants,for the SSNs and SSBNs.

As mentioned by SU, the Arihant was intended to be an SSN originally , converted into an SSBN with a plug of only 4 silos, a sort of tech-demo prototype.Therefore its reactor, upgraded, should be adequate for the 6 SSNs unless we want our SSNs to be larger and as capable as the Akula.The Yasen is actually supposed to be a bit smaller.RUs future SSNs will be approx. our ATV-1's size.With such a paucity of official info., we won't know if a new design is required and its desired capacity.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 11 Dec 2017 01:41

^^ not revealing if we are still considering russkie involvement to compact the near 200mw for the S5. But the displacement is double.. so we have room. BARC must get empowered

Rishi_Tri · Post by **Rishi_Tri** » 11 Dec 2017 03:53

Submarine Type Reactor Tons Status Number Launched Commissioned
INS Arihant SSBN 83 MW 6000 Deployed 1 2012 2016
INS Arighat SSBN 83 MW 6000 Launched 1 2017
S4 SSBN 83 MW 7000 Construction 1 2020^
S4* SSBN 83 MW 7000 Construction 1 2022^
S5 SSBN 190 MW 13500 Design 3
SSN 83 MW 6000 Design 6

We may have 14 nuclear submarines in next 15 years or so.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Dec 2017 05:20

Not sure whether S3 to S-4+ have slightly more powerful reactors, recollect an older report.The 3rd. gen OKB-650 ,50K HP reactors are a proven design with over 60 built for both Sov. era N-subs as well as the current 4th-gen subs like the Yasen SSGN(1 reactor),Borei SSBN (2 reactors-single shaft) which is 15000t+ dpl. This reactor is also aboard the Chakra and our future Akula/s to come.It would be logical to assume that our future larger BAARC built reactors may be based upon this proven design.Using 2 smaller reactors of the ATV-1 class is doable, but developing a more powerful reactor that can be used for future larger subs a must.

From SU's article , we may from S-5 onwards, the second series of SSBNs, equipped with true ICBM capability,require such a reactor for a sub of almost the same size of our Akula-2/3s.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Dec 2017 09:15

so it seems the size and payload will be slightly smaller to the vanguard, troimphant and very similar to the Jin1 class SSBN (12000t , 12 tubes)

information is deliberately hazy on the real ratings of their power plants and top speeds possible.

the british developed the RR reactor pwr2 for the vanguard class and wanted to use it for astute class SSN later. due to the size, and the cost associated with modifying the powerplant they took the easier route of enlarging the astute size which might account for it being considerably larger than prior british SSNs and its "tallboy" kind of hull shape.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 11 Dec 2017 09:27

Are the ATVs being built one at a time - it took 8 years to build launch the second sub!

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 11 Dec 2017 10:12

Rishi_Tri wrote:Submarine Type Reactor Tons Status Number Launched Commissioned
INS Arihant SSBN 83 MW 6000 Deployed 1 2012 2016
INS Arighat SSBN 83 MW 6000 Launched 1 2017
S4 SSBN 83 MW 7000 Construction 1 2020^
S4* SSBN 83 MW 7000 Construction 1 2022^
S5 SSBN 190 MW 13500 Design 3
SSN 83 MW 6000 Design 6

We may have 14 nuclear submarines in next 15 years or so.

Plus a few Akulas on Lease.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 11 Dec 2017 10:23

Can the Akulas be taken to war under the terms of the lease?

sum · Post by **sum** » 11 Dec 2017 10:32

abhik wrote:Are the ATVs being built one at a time - it took 8 years to build launch the second sub!

Certainly seems so since article mentions that even Arighat was pushed out to make room for starting S4 and S4*

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 11 Dec 2017 10:45

Vivek K wrote:Can the Akulas be taken to war under the terms of the lease?

Very good question , for that we have to find the operational deployment pattern of earlier avatar of chakra.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Dec 2017 11:41

I'm sure they can. Little point in leasing them for 10 yrs. and when we're getting perhaps upto two more! But I think there are definite restrictions of fitting them with N- weapons, intl. treaties, some old .media reports.I think the lease was a device to get around treaties too.No P- 5 member has sold N-subs or N-subs tech to others.Only
P-5 allies like the UK have been given Trident,etc.

SoKo wants US N-sub tech
Talks have been started but some analysts say that conv.AIP boats are better suited to dealing with NoKo.It indicates that SoKo want to play a much greater role in the Pacific keeping China and rivialry with Japan in mind.

mody · Post by **mody** » 11 Dec 2017 13:46

The article by SU, says the INS Chakra is non-operational since August (not sure 2016 or '17?). He mentions due to some incident.
Does anyone have any info on this?

The Arighat getting launched and K4 test from pontoon planned for December and if that succeeds, then from Arihant next are the big news from the article.

The Arighat launch was not covered by the media at all or more likely, MoD and PMO did not want it to be covered by the Media. SU is the first one to report on this.
Within 2 years S2 and S3 will be prowling the Bay of Bengal.

schinnas · Post by **schinnas** » 11 Dec 2017 13:54

Vivek K wrote:Can the Akulas be taken to war under the terms of the lease?

During war, all is fair game. When push comes to shove, we will not be reading the fine print. We can always apologize later in do or die situations.

sum · Post by **sum** » 11 Dec 2017 14:04

The article by SU, says the INS Chakra is non-operational since August (not sure 2016 or '17?). He mentions due to some incident.
Does anyone have any info on this?

Ummm, was widely posted all over BR and even recenetly, IN chief mentioned about the damanged Sonar on the Chakra due to some collision(??)

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 11 Dec 2017 14:48

Singha wrote:so it seems the size and payload will be slightly smaller to the vanguard, troimphant and very similar to the Jin1 class SSBN (12000t , 12 tubes)

information is deliberately hazy on the real ratings of their power plants and top speeds possible.

the british developed the RR reactor pwr2 for the vanguard class and wanted to use it for astute class SSN later. due to the size, and the cost associated with modifying the powerplant they took the easier route of enlarging the astute size which might account for it being considerably larger than prior british SSNs and its "tallboy" kind of hull shape.

Triomphant class is 12.5T surfaced and 14.5T submerged. But it carries 16 SLBMs. Does that mean ours is carrying fewer missiles for it size?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Dec 2017 15:29

We've less potential enemies! Around 5-6 sub-launched BMs with 3 MIRVs each BM will give us between 120-180 warheads , plus I think a substantial no. of road/ rail mobile BMs too.This is other than air-launched LRCMs, etc.

Supratik · Post by **Supratik** » 11 Dec 2017 16:26

Arighat seems to be Arihant class. Aridhaman, if it exists, maybe S4 or stretched Arihant class.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Dec 2017 16:47

I thought the "Gat" nice name for it- brings back memories of Cagney and The Saint; had 8 silos for K-4/,5s from earlier info.It is S-4+ That will field a new BM and from the silhouette in a prev. report on our N- sub programme , would have a larger hump.