Indian Naval Discussion

Drevin · Post by **Drevin** » 03 Jun 2009 18:41

isn't ssn's main role to find and destroy rivals ssbn's ??
since its basically a "shock trooper" kind of philosophy it freely is expected to jump into the thick of submarine battles .... hence the massive redundancy built-in for longer survivability .... hence the larger size.

isn't ssbn's role to stay hidden and always be ready to launch CM/BM(s) within short notice ??
since its job is to evade combat and to hide .... its requirements are less imposing than an ssn's....

what are the strategic design goals for each class. Guru's feel free to educate us lesser mortals

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 03 Jun 2009 18:48

That makes nearly 36 missiles if they are all nuclear tipped then what kinda active nuclear warhead numbers are we looking at?

Also what is the usually projected warhead number(in % vis-a-vis another country) for a nation to count as 'Credible deterrent'

Warhead numbers will vary wildly especially if the missiles are MIRVed.

SivaVijay · Post by **SivaVijay** » 03 Jun 2009 19:39

Drevin

The irony is if we take the US case the Ohio is a 16000 ton monster while the US main attack (SSN) Los Angeles is around 6000 tons.For Russia the Typhoon is a monster at 22000 tons and their main SSN akula is 12000 ton.

Now is not our case a inverse of these....

VSudhir

I am not talking about MIRV ed missile , my question is if we are planning 6 ATV's and if they are to have MIRV or 36 Sagarikas then are we talking about 36*6 ready to launch active nuclear warheads. That is 216 warheads in itself, I am wondering how big is our nuclear armoury....

may be we are not as innocent as we seem to be.....

Drevin · Post by **Drevin** » 03 Jun 2009 20:52

Is it confirmed that the "indian" definition of ssbn conforms with the american/russian ones.

sivavijay you are right. I was just being indulgent

I guess speculaton is strictly avoided on br.

sum · Post by **sum** » 03 Jun 2009 21:03

he submarine - being built at Hazira in Gujarat under the secretive 20-year-old ATV project - will slide into the sea but remain docked for some time as its nuclear reactors are fired up and all systems are checked

Last heard ( from BR chaiwalls) was that the hull was made at Hazira and floated down to Vizag for assembly with a planned second ATV to be made completely at Hazira....

Not sure if the quoted statement is DDM or an indication of the second ATV also being built..

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 03 Jun 2009 21:20

Singha wrote:INS Meenakshi (the beautful first born), INS Mandakini (tempting enemies to their doom) and INS Mritunjaya (victory over death)

aah ! I love those names ! sultry sirens luring their enemies to their doom..

Rupesh · Post by **Rupesh** » 03 Jun 2009 21:20

36 Sagarikas then are we talking about 36*6 ready to launch active nuclear warheads. That is 216 warheads in itself, I am wondering how big is our nuclear armoury....

may be we are not as innocent as we seem to be.....

36 sagarikas

. I don't think thats possible for 6000 tonne sub. The Russian Typhoon class SUB could carry only 20 missiles. We should be happy if our ATV can carry even 6 sagarikas/Agni IIISL.

marimuthu · Post by **marimuthu** » 03 Jun 2009 21:26

I think the first sub will carry 4 A-3SL or 12 sagarika. May the later versions are big ones with 12 A-3SL. I dont see the later ones carrying sagarikas.

p_saggu · Post by **p_saggu** » 03 Jun 2009 22:10

I think DDM has the number of missile tubes confused. There are supposed to be

4nos

2.4 m dia launch tubes each will deploy a tri launcher equipped with a .74 m dia sagarika missile. = 12 missiles in the ATV.

Later this can be replaced with 4 nos Agni 3 SL (Maybe each with 3 MIRVs so that the number of warheads deployed remains the same)

The hull is built in sections at the L&T plant in Hazira, then shipped on barges to Vizag. The second ATV was supposed to be on the designing board - supposed to be 10000 tons +.

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 03 Jun 2009 22:52

Rupesh wrote:36 sagarikas . I don't think thats possible for 6000 tonne sub. The Russian Typhoon class SUB could carry only 20 missiles. We should be happy if our ATV can carry even 6 sagarikas/Agni IIISL.

You are quite right that a 6000 tonne sub may not be able carry 36 six ton missilles. But then we don't know the weight of ATV yet.

ATV - 104m long with 15m beam (as claimed by Wiki) - Volume 9184 m3
Virginia class - 115m long with 10.4m beam (submerged displacement 7800 tons) - Volume 4882m3
Ohio class - 171m long with 13m beam (submerged displacement 18,750 tons) - Volume 11342m3

Edited: Actually now that I look at it again submerged displacement numbers don't seem to make sense. Sea water has density of about 1027kg/m3. Therefore a 4882m3 volume can only displace about 4882 ton of water. Don't know to make sense of volume with quoted submerged displacement.

Sontu · Post by **Sontu** » 03 Jun 2009 23:05

marimuthu wrote:I think the first sub will carry 4 A-3SL or 12 sagarika. May the later versions are big ones with 12 A-3SL. I dont see the later ones carrying sagarikas.

^^^ Yes I even had the same info ..if I remember correct ..I read from India Today earlier.
So right now it will have 12 Sagarikas (and later 4 A-3SL with 3-4 MIRVs on each ) on the first ATV.
But later ones will be bigger ones and may have more SLBMs.

Sontu · Post by **Sontu** » 03 Jun 2009 23:12

abhiti wrote:
Rupesh wrote:36 sagarikas . I don't think thats possible for 6000 tonne sub. The Russian Typhoon class SUB could carry only 20 missiles. We should be happy if our ATV can carry even 6 sagarikas/Agni IIISL.
You are quite right that a 6000 tonne sub may not be able carry 36 six ton missilles. But then we don't know the weight of ATV yet.

ATV - 104m long with 15m beam (as claimed by Wiki) - Volume 9184 m3
Virginia class - 115m long with 10.4m beam (submerged displacement 7800 tons) - Volume 4882m3
Ohio class - 171m long with 13m beam (submerged displacement 18,750 tons) - Volume 11342m3

^^^ Good reserch ..going by the Volume of the Subs (which should be dircetly propotional to the displacement.....Our Baby Boomer ATV should be around 9-10 000 tons ..Gurus any idea ?
If this is true, then our beloved Baby Boomer does not looks like a "Baby"

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Jun 2009 23:22

PER the article: the 3 Sagarikas per tube ar supposed to be 0.75m dia, while the Agni is 2 m dia!! For what ever that is worth. The Sagarika should have limited range compared to theAgni I would imagine.

rkhanna · Post by **rkhanna** » 04 Jun 2009 02:07

the Akulla II is a SSGN. (Nuclear Guided Missle Sub). No Ballistic Missles. Only Cruise Missles. Somebody correct me if i am wrong.

rajsunder · Post by **rajsunder** » 04 Jun 2009 02:33

http://www.eenadu.net/story.asp?qry1=10&reccount=27

The gist of the news is that, Russia is now planning to induct the the nuke sub into Russian navy before giving it to INDIA(it does not mention for how long) as per the news release by novosti news agency.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 04 Jun 2009 02:34

nothing new, that was always the plan. they are leasing it, not selling it.

rkhanna · Post by **rkhanna** » 04 Jun 2009 02:54

nothing new, that was always the plan. they are leasing it, not selling it.

Exactly. The lease is for 10 years with an option to buy later (which the Navy will most likely not do)

John · Post by **John** » 04 Jun 2009 03:04

rkhanna wrote:the Akulla II is a SSGN. (Nuclear Guided Missle Sub). No Ballistic Missles. Only Cruise Missles. Somebody correct me if i am wrong.

Its torpedo tubes can fire tube launched missiles (IN has Klub and Exocet part of scorpene deal).

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 04 Jun 2009 09:39

Not to mention SLCM. We dont have any now, but hopefully someday not too far in the future, we will have land and sub-based Nirbhay

SivaVijay · Post by **SivaVijay** » 04 Jun 2009 10:42

If we do have a SSBN then what would be it's operational area? will it be patrolling only in the IOR(since we are so passionate and content with IOR alone), or will it be a global patrol.
My guess is a IOC patrol will not suffice , for one our Northern neighbour is one step ahead and has set up listening posts and bases all around IOR(even now he would have scrambled assets to collect data on ATV as it is launched) just to keep tag on our assets so that he need not search if he decides to shoot. The best thing is to go around Indonesia, OZ and then enter the pacific and then lie silently in waiting in the Dragon's backyard....

Maybe I watch too much Tom Clancy

SivaVijay · Post by **SivaVijay** » 04 Jun 2009 14:53

According to wikipedia we have 3 ATV submarines in construction......

Let this be true.....

(fingers crossed)

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 04 Jun 2009 15:43

Rupesh wrote:Water trial of indigenous N-sub on August 15

This august 15th thingy seems too suspicious to be the actual first launch, doesn't it!!

vsudhir wrote:
Singha wrote:INS Meenakshi (the beautful first born), INS Mandakini (tempting enemies to their doom) and INS Mritunjaya (victory over death)
Are these ATV names chosen already?

Wow.

I would have suggested an INS Kalki for our indiangenious SSBN.

Excellent Names.... but doesn't Meenakshi mean "she who is bestowed with eyes shaped like a fish"????

Another nice name i can think of for the ATV is INS Markandeya, "The Immortal one"... but pseudosecularists may object.

rkhanna · Post by **rkhanna** » 04 Jun 2009 15:55

Its torpedo tubes can fire tube launched missiles (IN has Klub and Exocet part of scorpene deal).

Exactly. And that is why its called a SSGN. It cannot fire Ballistic Missiles. Only SSM/Cruise Missiles.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 04 Jun 2009 16:37

We can always name the nuclear subs with some of our illustrious fore fathers

My suggestion

INS MOHANDAS KARAMCHAND GANDHI

INS LAL BAHADUR SHASTRI

INS SUBHAS CHANDRA BOSE

INS LOKMANYA TILAK

INS INDIRA GANDHI

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 04 Jun 2009 17:02

Don't think it's a very bright idea naming a Nuke sub after Gandhi ji.

Indrajit · Post by **Indrajit** » 04 Jun 2009 17:10

My List would be.

INS ASHOKA

INS SHIVAJI

INS SAMUDRAGUPTA

INS RANAPRATAP

INS INDIRA

rahulg · Post by **rahulg** » 04 Jun 2009 17:17

INS Tipu , would be my choice.

Chandragupta · Post by **Chandragupta** » 04 Jun 2009 17:18

Nihat wrote:Don't think it's a very bright idea naming a Nuke sub after Gandhi ji.

Yes, for all we know, she might just refuse to fire.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 04 Jun 2009 17:28

better not drag in IG into this or we will soon see INS Laloo Prasad yadav.

better make it a rule/convention not to name after people who stood in elections.

anyway, IN does not name ships after people who lived in recent history.
exceptions have been made for Netaji (INS Netaji Subhash, base at kolkata) and IIRC there was a ship named after Adm AK Chatterjee, also IN's first Indian full admiral, if memory serves right.

also, ships of the same class should have some commonality in their names. IN too follows this practice e.g rajput class, talwar class all have ships that have a common thread among their names.

Coming to historical names I would prefer if some of the lesser known heroes are given a spot, lachit borfukan, birsa munda.

and of course the stalwarts of the armed revolution, Bhagat Singh, Surya Sen, Jatin Das etc.

--------------
samudragupta will most likely than not be the next IAC. Also, how can people forget Chandragupta Maurya ??

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 04 Jun 2009 17:31

Let the subs come first,and let the babus name them at least if that brings some hurry hormones in them

btw
first ATV should be called INS Mangal Pandey, this inspires more than politicians

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 04 Jun 2009 17:39

naming a ship is a much more serious affair than you say, or at least it ought to. and babus don't name ships.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 04 Jun 2009 17:44

Rahul M wrote:naming a ship is a much more serious affair than you say, or at least it ought to. and babus don't name ships.

so what is the criteria behind naming a SHIP on a politician?

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 04 Jun 2009 18:06

Chandragupta wrote:
Nihat wrote:Don't think it's a very bright idea naming a Nuke sub after Gandhi ji.
Yes, for all we know, she might just refuse to fire.

Let us consider a nuclear submarine / nuclear warhead as a Weapon of Peace, nor a weapon of war. And Gandhi stood for peace and Ahimsa. If we have powerful weapons which we never have to use, that is the best use !!!!

An old PT teacher would often tell us that legs are better weapons in a fight than hands, just run away !!

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 04 Jun 2009 18:32

Samay wrote:
Rahul M wrote:naming a ship is a much more serious affair than you say, or at least it ought to. and babus don't name ships.
so what is the criteria behind naming a SHIP on a politician?

mind stating that in english ?
while you are at it kindly also let me know which IN ships are named after politicians. (if that's what you meant)

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 04 Jun 2009 18:38

Naming process in a nutshell,

NHQ send out a signal to all fleet unit and establishments requesting names. Officers and Sailors send their choices that is assessed by NHQ. The shortlist is again sent out for comments. Thereafter a final name is selected.

For example, I recollect a lot of exchanges regarding naming INS Jalashwa. It was named after the hippopotamus reflecting its amphibious nature, however many officers remarked that the desi name for hippopotamus is Jal-hasti, not Jal-ashwa.

So it is a partly democratic process.

Politicians, once in a blue moon, do get a chance to name units -

IN air stations are named after birds - Hansa, Garuda, Shikra. Mayura was selected as the name for Andamans air base - given that peacocks hunt snakes. Indira Gandhi was invited to commission the base (or lay the foundation stone - cant remember). On learning the name, she wrote back that the peacock is a flightless bird that struts its feathers while mating and she will not commission a fighting base named after such a vain creature. Hence a new name was selected - INS Utkrosh

If memory serves right, ABV was quite keen but didnt get any chances other than Tejas. Or was Vikramaditya his idea?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 04 Jun 2009 19:17

IIRC Vik was his idea.

HariC · Post by **HariC** » 04 Jun 2009 19:22

One day , my dream will be fulfilled when nuke sub INS DEVE GOWDA will take to the waters

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Jun 2009 19:28

Correction,150-185 vessels planned by 2017.New in one (name unmentionable) media publication says that the Akula (Nerpa ),to be named the Chakra, is an "Akula-3" (like the Gepard in service with the Russian Navy are 3+ gen. SSGNs) and will have 18 Klub missiles for anti-ship and land attack.The total weapon load is around 40.Displacement dived,13,800t.It will arrive in the fall after its commissioning in August and arriving a month later.The same report also says that two more SSGNs (ATVs) will be ordered fabricated at MD and shipped to Vizag for final assembly.Displacement 4,880t surface.

What was interesting was a report on France's new SMX-24 on offer to India for the future sub line,which has some revolutionary features,modular sections which can be reconfigured for different operations,UUVs carried which have a 200km range,revolutionary propulsion with fuel cells/LOX and superconductor tech.,38 heavyweight weapons,and a submerged endurance of 30 days.Good pic here.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/de ... 57f4ac4555

p_saggu · Post by **p_saggu** » 04 Jun 2009 20:19

HariC wrote:One day , my dream will be fulfilled when nuke sub INS DEVE GOWDA will take to the waters

Oh, but there is already one.
It is the folder where the files for Pending Naval / Military acquisitions gather dust at Sena Bhawan.

Vivs · Post by **Vivs** » 04 Jun 2009 21:27

p_saggu wrote:
HariC wrote:One day , my dream will be fulfilled when nuke sub INS DEVE GOWDA will take to the waters
Oh, but there is already one.
It is the folder where the files for Pending Naval / Military acquisitions gather dust at Sena Bhawan.

INS Deve Gowda can kill with its eyes closed ....