INS Arihant (ATV) News and Discussion -2

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 29 Jul 2009 14:22

Whats that small red thing in first picture posted by Gagan

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 29 Jul 2009 14:31

That seems to be an escape hatch. you can see this red and white circle in nearly all russian origin subs. Maybe it is where the the russian sea rescue vessel can dock.

Som Mukhopadhyay · Post by **Som Mukhopadhyay** » 29 Jul 2009 14:34

The Arihant sail/fin is on the conning tower as is evident from the different drawings/skeches and illustrations. Some US Navy subs have a different arrangement for their sail and no noticable humps instead a flat platform

USS Nebraska

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Jul 2009 14:52

Interesting , But Comparison is futile ..............
Makes me think why is some one showing me a picture of Tejas and asking why doesn't it look like F-22

bart · Post by **bart** » 29 Jul 2009 15:15

arun wrote:Brahma Chellaney believes that developing an ICBM before a SSBN ought to have been the path forward.

All in all a pretty scathing article:

Substandard Capabilities

Brahma Chellaney . 29 July 2009, 12:00am IST

……………. Of the three technologies nuclear propulsion, SLBM and ICBM the most complex are the first two. Developing a nuclear-weapon-strike capability from underwater is far more difficult than firing missiles from the ground. Yet, while seeking to develop an SLBM-armed nuclear sub, India still does not have an ICBM project, even on the drawing board. India wants to go down in world history as the first nation to deploy an SSBN without having developed an ICBM. 'Incredible India' indeed. ……………….

TOI

Pretty pointless rant from him, India does have ICBM technology as BRF have known for a while. The only thing that we don't have just yet is the packaging to have an Agni 3+ class missile fired from a submarine, and this is a technology that has taken every country time to master. All these things have been developed in parallel projects and it so happens that the sub is ready or close to getting ready earlier. So long as the scientists are working on developing it, I don't think there is any reason for concern. If there is any one field where DRDO has excelled and gone from strength to strength it is ballistic missiles.

And his logic is pretty weird, does he expect that we first perfect ICBM technology, then only start work on submarines?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 29 Jul 2009 15:36

@ BC article, I think what BC is trying to highlight that a SSBN can not be an SSBN without a nuclear ballistic missile working on it which can meet the needs (hitting China+) from IOR.

He is deliberately trying to puncture the balloon of self-satisfactory congratulations.

Knowing BC I think we can safely discount explanations such as he does not know what he is talking of (surely it can be claimed that the sub takes a year in Harbour trials etc and we can have a SLBM-ICBM by then?)

Please note another very important throw away sentence in that article, where he talks about non-weaponized TN device/techonolgy.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Jul 2009 15:55

Akshut wrote:Many people are suggesting different designs of Arihant.
.
Could it be this? From Aero India.
.

Yes

narayana · Post by **narayana** » 29 Jul 2009 16:02

bart wrote:
arun wrote:Brahma Chellaney believes that developing an ICBM before a SSBN ought to have been the path forward.

Pretty pointless rant from him, India does have ICBM technology as BRF have known for a while.

Yep,we do have the tech,and we are in no hurry to tom tom to world that we have that,Things to do now are ,get sagarika fully tested and inducted, test fire Agni 5 and go ahead with developing SLBM version of Agni-3.

i dont think we need 8000 km SLBM.

and if BC doesnt agree about ICBM,refer him to Arun_s

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Jul 2009 16:07

OK folks pliss answer some REAL questions.

If you have a pressurised water reactor - is the water only the coolant/heat exchanger or is it the same water that runs the turbines?

Is the steam turbine (for power generation) a closed system? Can any steam turbine be a completely closed system?

If it is not a closed system where is the excess heat vented?

How is oxygen generated for the sub? Just electrolysis? What happens to the hydrogen?

If sea water is used for water requirements what happens to all the salt deposits that will develop soon as sea water is boiled off to get pure water?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Jul 2009 16:33

the water heated by reactor code is radioactive. it passes as steam through a network of normal water that
gets the heat and goes into the steam turbines.

the two must never mix. if there is a leak the entire engine room will get radioactivated.

somehow, after turning the turbine vanes the water is condensed and fed back into heat exchanger
to pickup the heat from reactor water again and again.

I think reverse osmosis is used to get drinking water from sea water and then with a excess
of electrical power on N-sub they some electrifical means to get oxygen. perhaps the hydrogen
is mixed with water again and vented near the props.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 29 Jul 2009 16:34

Sanku wrote:@ BC article, I think what BC is trying to highlight that a SSBN can not be an SSBN without a nuclear ballistic missile working on it which can meet the needs (hitting China+) from IOR.

He is deliberately trying to puncture the balloon of self-satisfactory congratulations.

While what he is saying is definitely true -- there is no need to "deliberately trying to puncture the balloon of self-satisfactory congratulations"... That is the job of paki's & I hope BC doesnt qualify as one..

It is a step worth celebrating.. So No Kabab mein haddi please.. Save it for another time.. (Anyway V.Adm Raman Puri did answer all the concerns theat BC had in that 5-part interview on Headlines today)

You need an SLBM & you need a SSBN -- you need both with equal importance... There is no denying that.. You cant temper the enthusiasm just bcoz one is developed before the other... you cant expect both of them to be ready at the same time.. By the time Arihant completes sea trials (2-3years) -- who knows the SLBM might be ready for firing -- and ready for integration when Arihant-2/3 are ready for sea trials..

I think -- IN knows what it has, what it needs and what it wants... things will fall in place in time.. you cant bulldoze your way with technology..

Anyway -- whos knows when/what the next "solid fuelled Prithvi" test fire will be ?

Added later: Arihant construction was allowed to be started in 1998, even though the reactor was not ready.. The reactor was ready for testing only in 2004... If somebody had asked - "why build it when the reactor is not ready?" & then "why launch SSBN if SLBM is not ready?" -- then Arihant would have been launched only in 2015 !!! But the next 6years of testing can be very very valuable -- and there is no need to lose that opportunity..

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 29 Jul 2009 16:35

I can only make an educated guess about your earlier questions, Shiv but on this one:

shiv wrote:If sea water is used for water requirements what happens to all the salt deposits that will develop soon as sea water is boiled off to get pure water?

I have seen Demineralisation Water Plants for Power Plants which work exactly like Hema Malini's Kent Water purifiers with Ion exchange resins, reverse osmosis technology etc. which bring down the salt/impurities content in the water to near nil. So much so, that the treated water can be called soft water (water which is devoid of any anions/cations/impurities) to form scaling, foaming and sludging in the boilers. Ofcourse, the waste (sic) also called as sludge, is thrown into the gutter. Here - in the deep blue sea.

Som Mukhopadhyay · Post by **Som Mukhopadhyay** » 29 Jul 2009 16:41

Reverse osmosis Desalination plants are part of submarine machinery which provides desalinated water. Nuclear Submarines require 3000psi of O2 for life support and use an electrolytic oxygen generator (EOG) to convert water into oxygen and hydrogen gases.

http://www.treadwellcorp.com/products.htm

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Jul 2009 16:41

There is a difference between proven ICBM capability and potential ICBM capability.

Agni-3 might have ICBM ranges with the right warhead , but it has been proven only to variable IRBM ranges.

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 29 Jul 2009 16:42

INS ARIHANT -PROJECTED COMMISSIONING SCHEDULE -SHANKAROSKY

-4 WEEKS - in water -elctrical and process connection check -reactor start up
-4-6 weeks - reactor system check for leakage ,control rod movement -instrumentation calibration etc
6-10 weeks - night time shallow water run inside Indian territorial waters low speed at 25% reactor power

10-20 weeks - rectification of leakages,loose connections,coolant pump clean up ,instrument calibration ,external sensor calibration
20-36 week - long duration shallow depth run say 50 meters
36-46 week - check up -instrument calibration - feed back analysis ,rectification /replacement of components found defective
46-52 week - extended shallow water run lasting 3 weeks or more
- 52-60 weeks - total check including condition of hull by ultrasonic radiography ,life supprt system like oxygen generator and desalination plant
60 -62 - medium depth submergence in steps of 50 meter of so till normal operating depth of 300 meter
62-66 weeks - check of all external pressure bearing components
66-70 weeks - deep submergence trial in stages of 50-100 meters think in 50 meters increment to nver exceed depth with in stage inspection like that done in 52-60 weeks
70-80 week - reactor to full power in shallow water and then slowly to maximum depth
80-90 weeks - Caliban of sonars ,testing of sonar decoys and torpedo decoys
90 week-98 week wespon trial - 525 mm torpedo -air defense weapons
100 week - test laucnh of agni 3 SL some where near orissa coast to nicobar islands in singles and then one with full salvo laucnh

feed back analysis -rectification one more round of test and induction to indian navt some where in 2011 end

Launch or INS CHITRA (SECOND ARIHANT CLASS ) -2012
LAUCNH OF 3rd ARIHANT - 2014)

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 29 Jul 2009 16:46

Shankar wrote:
Launch or INS CHITRA (SECOND ARIHANT CLASS ) -2012
LAUCNH OF 3rd ARIHANT - 2014)

I would think the 2nd & 3rd boats of Arihant class will likley have a name starting with "Ari" onleeee...

Som Mukhopadhyay · Post by **Som Mukhopadhyay** » 29 Jul 2009 16:51

PWR heats water to below saturation conditions in excess of 240 bar, transferring this heat to raise steam in a secondary circuit to drive the boat’s turbines, providing power to boat auxiliaries and the main propulsion system.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 29 Jul 2009 16:58

The things that go against ATV being just a charlie:-

Indo-Russian team started working together on the training/design since 1984, why would they take so much time till 1998 to start metal cutting unless it was a new design?

India got all latest jing bang from Russia like Brahmos, Su-30mki, Klub, R-77, K-172, Il-78, no reason to take such a old charlie tech when Russians were in deep economic trouble in 1998?

Why would Russia remanufacture old equipment abandoned in 1980s when it needed funds to keep plants alive?

Hence, it would say that this sub is the latest and the brightest. The 4th and 5th Sub would be evolved from Arihant design like say 8x4 VLS tubes and slightly more powerful reactor and this evolution will continue till we have a heavy version of Arihant with 16x4 VLS tubes which we can call a boomer. Note that our Boomers need not be as big as other navies as our missiles can be of shorter range, our patrols will be also of shorter range, our sailers will probably forced to live in more cramped spaces.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 29 Jul 2009 17:00

narayana wrote:and if BC doesnt agree about ICBM,refer him to Arun_s

Actually BC's position is pretty much agreement with Arun_S position, please note the question here is NOT of technology.

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 29 Jul 2009 17:02

OK folks pliss answer some REAL questions.

If you have a pressurised water reactor - is the water only the coolant/heat exchanger or is it the same water that runs the turbines?

Is the steam turbine (for power generation) a closed system? Can any steam turbine be a completely closed system?

If it is not a closed system where is the excess heat vented?

How is oxygen generated for the sub? Just electrolysis? What happens to the hydrogen?

If sea water is used for water requirements what happens to all the salt deposits that will develop soon as sea water is boiled off to get pure water?

The water which acts as coolant in the reactor core does not produce steam
The hot water at around 170 deg c and pressure close ot 200 bar is taken to a primary heat exchanger where it is cooled by another water circuit .This is a shell n tube type exchanger with radioactive water in the tubes and normal water in the shell

The normal water also under very hig pressure closure to 170 bar is taken to a flash drum where pressure is reduced to a
round 70 bar(or whatever is the working pressure required in the high pressure turbine) and it flashes to produce high pressure steam with temperature corresponding to saturation temperature at the pressure

Sea water is never used in the reactor not in the primary radio active heat extraction circuit or secondary normal steam generator circuit

The work is extracted in two stage first from 70+ bar to around 15-20 bar in the high presure turbine
then 20+bar to 5-6 bar in low pressure turbine

all the condensed water is returned to secondary cooling water circuit through the cooling water pumps which again pumps up the normal water to required pressure required in the primary heat exchanger

High pressure turbine drives the propeller shaft through a reducing gear box and provides the main propulsive power

Secondary or low pressure turbine drives an alternator to generate the electrical power for the utilities and electronics and the weapon system and the desalination/reverse osmosis plants .oxygen generators

oxygen generation is in numvber of stages

first carbon di oxide scrubbing of the circulating air in potassium hydroxide pellets or dimethyl amine scrubbers under pressure there by improving oxygen content

By sucking in air from atmosphere when at snorkeling depth

By high pressure pure oxygen bottles and small liquid oxygen containers which provide the make up oxygen

Oxygen production by electrolysis is highly risky since the by product is hydrogen gas and generate an explosion hazzard

water production is almost always by desalination of sea water using reverse osmosis /ultra filtration

when the sub nears surface the air is sucked in ,the old air vented out a the same time . Compressors also suck in air and compress them into high pressure cylinders .Usally all subs carry nearly 60-90 days oxygen in high pressure gas bottles or liquid containers under presure

recently membrane type oxygen generators which actually filter out the moisture and carbon do oxide by passing through membranes thereby improving oxygen concentration in air is also used but their use in nuclear submarine is not confirmed

Som Mukhopadhyay · Post by **Som Mukhopadhyay** » 29 Jul 2009 17:03

Curious to know whether the prime mover of INS Arihant is steam turbine or is it permanent magnet propulsion motor??

Any clues???

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 29 Jul 2009 17:03

rakall wrote: While what he is saying is definitely true -- there is no need to "deliberately trying to puncture the balloon of self-satisfactory congratulations"... That is the job of paki's & I hope BC doesnt qualify as one..

Hardly, Paki's dont do anything like that, they just add to our self congratulations by being themselves and providing entertainment.

BC is sending a pretty sharp message. Those who miss that do that at their own peril. I personally will save my celebrations till a much much later time. As of now, its at best a small smile for me. (Which in no way means that this is a small achievement -- it is huge), however I do not grudge anyone who wishes to celebrate.

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 29 Jul 2009 17:08

Sanku wrote:BC is sending a pretty sharp message.

BC is the kind of guy, who when the entire country celebrates, he tells you why you shouldn't be! Perennially dissatisfied and negative.

Som Mukhopadhyay · Post by **Som Mukhopadhyay** » 29 Jul 2009 17:14

For example this Siemens permanent magnet motor is used as a prime mover in many submarines (not sure though INS Arihant has opted for electric motor prime mover to lower noise levels)

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 29 Jul 2009 17:15

readwell Corp’s Model 6L16 EOG was first introduced in 1965. It breaks up distilled water by passing an electric current through an electrolyte solution (30% potassium hydroxide) in 16 high-pressure cells, connected in series. This equipment can produce 150 standard cubic feet per hour of oxygen, and variants remain the primary oxygen producers aboard the USA’s SSN-688 Los Angeles Class fast attack submarines and SSBN-726 Ohio Class ballistic missile submarines. Treadwell also produces Oxygen Generation Plants (OGPs) for the new SSN-21 Seawolf Class fast attack submarines, which include OGP electrolysis modules that depend on proton exchange membranes for oxygen separation.

The US Navy is moving to upgrade both of these system

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/tre ... s-2-04690/

electrolysis was method used till LA class for production of oxygen and british submairnes used some oxygen generating candles whcih once caused an explossion on board

I assume Indian sub has on board lox tank and carbon di oxide scrubber with low pressure proton exchange membrane oxygen generator for emergency use only

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 29 Jul 2009 17:20

Curious to know whether the prime mover of INS Arihant is steam turbine or is it permanent magnet propulsion motor??

shankarosky thinks it is steam turbine

even to run a motor you need power and that power has to be produced in the steam circuit though steam generator - so the noise factor of steam and coolant pump you cannot avoid only the reduction gear may be downsized a bit that is

But electric motor gives super silence when running on on board batteries in case of forces reactor shut down but less than 20% of max speed and that provision all nuclear subs have even when the main prop is running on steam turbine gear box system

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 29 Jul 2009 17:21

Sanku wrote:
rakall wrote: While what he is saying is definitely true -- there is no need to "deliberately trying to puncture the balloon of self-satisfactory congratulations"... That is the job of paki's & I hope BC doesnt qualify as one..
Hardly, Paki's dont do anything like that, they just add to our self congratulations by being themselves and providing entertainment.

BC is sending a pretty sharp message. Those who miss that do that at their own peril. I personally will save my celebrations till a much much later time. As of now, its at best a small smile for me. (Which in no way means that this is a small achievement -- it is huge), however I do not grudge anyone who wishes to celebrate.

If you read my pist carefully -- you may please find that I am not disagreeing with his message..

I am saying -- "right message at the right time" ! "Right message in the right tone" !

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 29 Jul 2009 17:24

rakall wrote:
Shankar wrote:
Launch or INS CHITRA (SECOND ARIHANT CLASS ) -2012
LAUCNH OF 3rd ARIHANT - 2014)

I would think the 2nd & 3rd boats of Arihant class will likley have a name starting with "Ari" onleeee...

+1
Arijit and Arinash maybe

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 29 Jul 2009 17:29

What about the reactor? A body can travel theoretically at that speed provided it has adequate power

make no mistake Arihant does not move on piddly 80MW T reactor -it is an out an out out VM5/OK650 reactor as used in akula 2 made in India
Ok 650 core produces 190MW thermal energy that can propel a Borrei class to 29 knots of submerged speed sure can propell out 8500ton to 40 knots
No way Russians will give consultancy on a reactor which is not their design and and on a boat which does not meet their proven specification

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 29 Jul 2009 17:37

Brahma Chellaney believes that developing an ICBM before a SSBN ought to have been the path forward.

All in all a pretty scathing article:

His writing is so negative - so excessively sarcastic and demeaning - he may be a good defense correspondent writer but have very little understanding on higher end of defense technology ot how systems are developed desperately and then integrated at apex

It sounds he is not happy with Arihant - though he did not specifically say so

he also obviously not aware of the extent of development in missile field or the true capability of our agni series - or he does but trying to create a passive image of a nuclear submarine

It is exactly this mind set that got us into 62 type mess

Like NDTV report on chandryan sensor failure -he gloats on things yet to be done rather than the stupendous achievement called INS ARIHANT

while my name is shankarosky and half blood russian -also Iam really 100% indian and just dont understand the petty minded analysis of this guy who may not even have a scientific engineering background -can some one tell me what is his educational qualification ?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 29 Jul 2009 17:43

rakall wrote:I am saying -- "right message at the right time" ! "Right message in the right tone" !

Fair enough to each his own.

As far as BC is concerned I think is algo is to give pretty much the same message, and the timings he chooses are the ones that usually designed to grab max attention. Anyway its OT so lets stop here.

Som Mukhopadhyay · Post by **Som Mukhopadhyay** » 29 Jul 2009 17:44

''even to run a motor you need power and that power has to be produced in the steam circuit though steam generator - so the noise factor of steam and coolant pump you cannot avoid only the reduction gear may be downsized a bit that is ''

@ Shankar Sir...... I thought modern nuclear subs are designed in a way to reduce acoustic signatures....a steam turbine with reduction gear and a long shaft (bearnings, bushes et al) contributes to more noise.

Instead electricty generated by onboard steam turbine feeds into a central electrical bus which powers many sub-systems including a permanent magnet motor prime mover which has with very low signatures for noise, electrical-and magnetic fields and heat emission.

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 29 Jul 2009 17:45

According to Russky Telegraph, the hulls of the submarines laid down in India are almost blueprints of the newest Russian attack submarine, the Severodvinsk-class, which is currently under construction in Severodvinsk, Arkhangel'sk County. Indian submarines reportedly will be outfitted with one PWR reactor with a power output of 190 MW. The same machinery is placed on the Severodvinsk-class submarine.

No information is currently available on the weaponry for the Indian nuclear-powered submarines. In the meantime, India's friends from Russia plan to armour their Severodvinsk-class with SS-N-15/16 missiles.

http://www.bellona.no/bellona.org/engli ... ssels/9518

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 29 Jul 2009 17:46

Shankar wrote:
Brahma Chellaney believes that developing an ICBM before a SSBN ought to have been the path forward.

All in all a pretty scathing article:
His writing is so negative - so excessively sarcastic and demeaning - he may be a good defense correspondent writer but have very little understanding on higher end of defense technology ot how systems are developed desperately and then integrated at apex

Shankar, et al please find out a little more about BC and his postures.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahma_Chellaney

Brahma Chellaney

Brahma Chellaney is Professor of Strategic Studies at the New Delhi-based Centre for Policy Research, an independent, privately funded think-tank. Until recently, he was also a Member of the Policy Advisory Group headed by the External Affairs Minister of India.

Professor Chellaney is widely regarded as one of India's leading strategic thinkers.[1] Stanley Weiss in the International Herald Tribune, for example, called him "one of India's top strategic thinkers."[2] He is very well known as a commentator on regional and international issues in the field of strategic affairs.

Professor Chellaney was a potential contender for the post of India's National Security Advisor, had an opposition-led coalition come to power in India's nationwide elections held during April-May 2009. He remains active, however, in Track I and Track II dialogues.

He is often considered to be the hawks of all hawks and Patriot No 1 (for the more Govinda style Indian folks)

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 29 Jul 2009 17:54

Chris, I think Pseudo names like lordofmonday etc are against forum rules, Admins must have noticed it. please use somthing which resembles your real name.

Tanaji · Post by **Tanaji** » 29 Jul 2009 18:06

Shankar wrote:
What about the reactor? A body can travel theoretically at that speed provided it has adequate power
make no mistake Arihant does not move on piddly 80MW T reactor -it is an out an out out VM5/OK650 reactor as used in akula 2 made in India
Ok 650 core produces 190MW thermal energy that can propel a Borrei class to 29 knots of submerged speed sure can propell out 8500ton to 40 knots
No way Russians will give consultancy on a reactor which is not their design and and on a boat which does not meet their proven specification

Are you implying that the Russians gave the middle finger to the NPT?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 29 Jul 2009 18:26

The model sub is not the Amur 950,but a larger modified Amur with an 8-cell Brahmos section.I would hazard a guess that this version of Amur will be 2000-2500t displacement because of the Brahmos section.This design has been shown at both the last Aero-India shows and at and at the land and naval Def-Expos at Delhi.It is the design which I had advocated the IN buy for its second line of conventional subs,which can also come with a fuel-cell AIP.The first few subs can be quickly built in Russia and the rest locally.Such Brahmos,Klub and Shkval equipped Amur subs could play havoc with Paki shipping as well attack its shore bases from locations of safety.This type of sub will be the fastest type that we could acquire to reeplace older subs which need to be phased out.Western sub designs cannot field Brahmos,which is unique.They also do not even have the equivalent of Kulb,with its supersonic terminal warhead.

Now that the ATV has been launched and the IN's plan to build 5 of them,along with lease/purchases of Akulas,it might reflect a re-thinking on the part of the IN and MOD,that we need more nuclear subs to counter China and secure our strategic deterrent in greater proportion to our earlier inventory of conventional/AIP subs.Nevertheless,the Kilos themselves are long in the tooth despite their refits and upgrading to fire Klub missiles and so are the U-209s.That our two Foxtrots,museum pieces worldwide, are still "trotting" along despite their age,is a tribute to the IN for keeping them still seaworthy and able to be of use.

Meanwhile,here's a (mature ?) response from the CNS of the Paki navy.

Indian Express

INS-Arihant no security threat, says Pak Naval Chief

Tags : Pak Naval Chief, nuclear submarine, INS Arihant

Posted: Wednesday, Jul 29, 2009 at 1415 hrs
The Pakistan Navy does not consider India’s launch of its first indigenously-made nuclear submarine as a major security threat to it, The News reports.

Pakistan Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Bashir Noman said the launch of India’s first indigenously made nuclear-powered submarine INS-Arihant is not a major concern for the country’s naval force.

Admiral Bashir, who is currently in China to witness the commissioning of the first China-made frigate for Pakistan, said Islamabad and New Delhi must maintain a good relationship.

“We are not focused on India. India is a neighbour, so we must have good relationship,” said Bashir.

He said Pakistan Navy’s prime objective is to combat terrorism, piracy, and other illegal uses of the sea such as drug trafficking, and protecting the sea lines of communication in the Indian Ocean.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Jul 2009 19:00

K-152 Nerpa

I am of the opinion for 2nd line of conventional sub we should go for a enhanced and enlarged version of Scorpene design with VLS and AIP , this will go a long way stream lining logistics ,weapons , training and shore facility and reduce the cost of operating and maintaining submarine.

There is practically little to no advantage in operating two different types of conventional SSK , not to mention if India designs its own SSK as is envisaged in 30 year submarine plan there would be a 3rd type.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 29 Jul 2009 19:15

The Russians will not allow the Scorpene to have Brahmos,that's the problem, and the Scorpene is much delayed,with France also trying to beat the Germans for the next order of subs for Pak.The Brahmos Amur will cost less or equal than a Kilo class,jhalf the price of a Scorpene,say the manufacturers and will be both cost-effective and far more lethal,silent and capable than a Kilo.The Russians have also offered a joint Italian-Russo AIP Brahmos design.China is building 4 lines of subs,two nuclear and two conventional.We should acquire the best from both east and west.I had earlier advocated even upgrading our old U-209s with Germany with U-214 tech,so that we could keep these subs capable of another decade+ inservice,plus evaluate swestren subs and the AIP syatems,Later on we could design a future conventional sub that would incorporate the best tech for 2020+.

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 29 Jul 2009 19:23

there has been speculation that L&T could build the Amur subs if it is chosen. It would be a good way to bring in private investment in this sector. The Scorpene if chosen will have to built at MDL, where the necessary infrastructure already exists the Scorpene follow on. But, MDL is already struggling, and I frankly think they have bitten more then what they can chew. MDL would have to finish the first 6 Scorpenes and then start building the new ones which could take the commissioning time to around 2020. Amur could also share some of the infrastructure that exists for the Kilo class.