INS Arihant (ATV) News and Discussion -2

vina · Post by **vina** » 03 Aug 2009 16:00

the general ratio is about 0.35 that is only 35% of the energy available for the submarine in the reactor core can actually be extracted and used to drive the propeller shaft and other auxiliary units

Shanakrovitch. You are off by a good 20%. points. In reality,it will be closer to 15%, best case 20%. Nothing more in a PWR possible. Even in a best land based nuke with the best PWR of the 1st gen type, the thermodynamic efficiency doesn't top 20% in most cases .

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Aug 2009 16:02

the release of this news and pix had to be authorized from
the PMO.

the PMO is under no pressure at the moment to show something great. govt is stable.

maybe a coded signal to all tech denial western tinhorn
regimes that we have broken through the straits and hit
the open water now. i.e. if they want to be in our good
books, they better agree to trade on our terms or risk losing another segment of the nuclear power market.

Areva for instance would be horrified to lose big deals to
Rosatom.

per broadsword, EF has reworked its offer to India (with UK sinking fast) to offer making us the 5th manufacturing
partner and make certain parts for all EFs worldwide.

long back when we were weak and in the gutter, I had
predicted brothers that some of these fatkat CEOs would
made to walk around all day from desk to desk in yojana bhavans in delhi to meet somnolent babus and their ministerial overlords. seems to be happening sooner than I thought.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 03 Aug 2009 16:06

Singha wrote:the release of this news and pix had to be authorized from
the PMO.

the PMO is under no pressure at the moment to show something great. govt is stable.

maybe a coded signal to all tech denial western tinhorn
regimes that we have broken through the straits and hit
the open water now. i.e. if they want to be in our good
books, they better agree to trade on our terms or risk losing another segment of the nuclear power market.

There was (and is) a lot of talk that the reactor is simply a Russian reactor integrated in India.. I think BARC has gone on a drive to clear that..

Like Kakodkar mentioned "nobody is going to give it for asking.. not even if you pay a lot to buy".. Being a tee-totaller, I am inclined to think it was designed & fabricated in India.. (Russian co-operation/consultancy duly acknowledged).

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 16:08

Shankar wrote:Austin let analyse

ok lets do

- we are getting akula 2 and our crews are trained by russians in ok 650b reactor operation -why should we try out a completely outdated reactor for our own submarine -whcih is very noisy to start with and SSBN which make lot of noise is dead duck in real combat

The Akula 2 crew were trained on OK 650B coz they have to manage those stuff on the Akula.

The ATV was in existence long before Akula 2 deal materialized , happened post 98.

Hence Akula 2 lease should not be linked with ATV , the VM was good enough to power a Arihant , its certainly not underpowered and speed is not a criteria and its not obsolete technology , atleast we learn from it , if i am not wrong the VM-4 powers the Delta 4

- the dispalcement figures as now confirmed at around 6500 tons surfaced and 8500-9000 tons submerged and have a speed close to 40 knots now confirmed can not be achieved with anything other than ok 650b type reactor core

Who needs 40 knots , are they suppose to keep up pace with a CBG doing 30 plus knots in open ocean ?

A 22 - 24 knots is good enough , what will matter is the silent speed

- we will need lot of Russian support during the entire life cycle of the submarine and they are standardising on ok 650 b core in all thier submarine borei and akula 2 and some other models too - it will be so easy to support our subs in future .

If they build a big submarine like twice the displcement of current they will go for twin VM.

- In the future bigger arihant we may have 2xok 650 b type -standardization makes life so easy

That would be nice , but all proof points to VM .. confirmed by some one who i will believe , if you can give a good and credible source for OK-650 i will believe

like you I find it heard to believe out of blue a akula clone can materialize with features even more advanced than akula 2 like thinner acoustic array for towed array etc.

No country will ever sell top of line tech unless they have something better and in numbers , A nuclear submarine ( SSN/SSGN ) is still considered a strategic asset.

We dont even know if the Akula-2 subs they are giving us is the one Russia uses it , they would certainly downgrade it in certain crucial aspects , so that Yindoos do not gain an insight into their submarine tech , any country will do that , even India would do as it is directly related to operational secrecy.

I would be happy of Arihant can match the quitening of LA or Akula-1 , in sonars and sensors they may excel , coz we (NPOL ) are good at it and have decades of experience in building those.

I di read some where and might have posted here also that russians gave us two ok 650 /vm5 one for land and other for submarine -(shall try to reach it once more) installation -most likely some sevmash related papers

IIRC BK in this book says OK-650 imported for ATV which i doubt

amit · Post by **amit** » 03 Aug 2009 16:10

Singha wrote:the release of this news and pix had to be authorized from
the PMO.

the PMO is under no pressure at the moment to show something great. govt is stable.

maybe a coded signal to all tech denial western tinhorn
regimes that we have broken through the straits and hit
the open water now. i.e. if they want to be in our good
books, they better agree to trade on our terms or risk losing another segment of the nuclear power market.

Singha,

To add to your post, I've been quite impressed at the calibrated way in which the Arihant is being unveiled to the world.

Frankly it shows that our military babus, Navy, BARC and all those folks who've been involved are very confident about their baby. And knowing the intense interest this baby has generated they are letting out dribs of information through very selected leaks, unveiling etc.

The coming out party will be when Arihant sails out of Vizag with its complement of sailors standing in a straight line with the Tricolour fluttering on the mast.

vina · Post by **vina** » 03 Aug 2009 16:15

- the dispalcement figures as now confirmed at around 6500 tons surfaced and 8500-9000 tons submerged and have a speed close to 40 knots now confirmed can not be achieved with anything other than ok 650b type reactor core

No sir. I think the 80MWe in Al Hundi is massive DDMitis. It is 80MWt. The Al Hundi reporter was definitely deaf when he heard it. I stick by what I wrote.

1)The displacement is around 6000 tons submerged.

2) Length is 110m (out of this I would take out 3 to 5 m for the sonar, so pressure hull should be 105m or so ).

3) Dia is 10m ( I think DDM is confused, The hump shouldn't be counted as part of dia. You should count only inner pressure hull dia)

The pic posted of the reactor compartment at Kalpakkam is the inner hull, with the ring stiffeners and lognitudinals welded outside (that is the advantage of the double hull, you can weld the stiffeners outside, leaving innersurface free and smooth and a lot of space).

4) Top speed is 26 knots or so , + 2/3 knots max if of lesser displacement.

Remember you saw it first on BRF (when the details come trickling out in a few years).

For all the VM -XX or OK-YY from Russians, perish that thought. They could not sell a reactor to India or nuclear materials, especially for military purposes. They are an NPT signatory and would be in breach if they did. Kakodkar sounds credible. The Russians would have been giving "consulting" advice and "knowledge transfer". All the engineering, fabrication and basic design would have been indigenous.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 16:19

vina wrote: For all the VM -XX or OK-YY from Russians, perish that thought. They could not sell a reactor to India or nuclear materials, especially for military purposes. They are an NPT signatory and would be in breach if they did. Kakodkar sounds credible. The Russians would have been giving "consulting" advice and "knowledge transfer". All the engineering, fabrication and basic design would have been indigenous.

Vina sir , Rest all is ok ... But AFAIK Naval Reactor does not fall under NPT preview

And Kakodkar is political scientist , please take what he says with a bagful of salt.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 03 Aug 2009 16:21

And Kakodkar is political scientist , please take what he says with a bagful of salt.

Austin, please cut out the unnecessary insinuations.
this is not the thread, nor is the allegation acceptable.

Drevin · Post by **Drevin** » 03 Aug 2009 16:22

It maybe good to take the worst case scenario. Once we accept that, anything more than that is a bonus.

It would give all of us a lot less blood pressure if we accept the more modest numbers for Arihant suggested by gurus. I cast in my vote with the figures of 6500tons submerged.

If it turns out to be better its a pleasant bonus

pce. Maybe its too late to start a vote for this now.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 03 Aug 2009 16:31

Austin wrote:
vina wrote: For all the VM -XX or OK-YY from Russians, perish that thought. They could not sell a reactor to India or nuclear materials, especially for military purposes. They are an NPT signatory and would be in breach if they did. Kakodkar sounds credible. The Russians would have been giving "consulting" advice and "knowledge transfer". All the engineering, fabrication and basic design would have been indigenous.
Vina sir , Rest all is ok ... But AFAIK Naval Reactor does not fall under NPT preview

And Kakodkar is political scientist , please take what he says with a bagful of salt.

I think that is a gross generealisation... and great discredit to Kakodkar..

If you can make such a statement - then it doesnt surprise me when NPA's make statements like "Agni is derived from US scout" or "India can use GSLV to launch nuke attacks on US".. I know i am stretching extrapolation to the limit - but I hope you get the drift..

Carefully watching NDTV video - you can see the confidence & pride in his statements.. If he were passing off a Russian supplied reactor as BARC's own, the guilt would kill him -- for a scientist his work should be his pride & plagiarism the greatest sin.. Lets not discredit the Russian assistance/co-operation/consultancy at all -- PM & RM themselves have acknowledged.. but it would be a disgrace if were to completely discredit our scientists of their efforts..

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 16:42

Ofcourse there is pride and why shouldn't it be , if you got the technology and know how to build it what is there to loose ? But do you think AK or any scientist will ever accept it ? they would make generic statement as they are doing it now , BARC would have added many unique things to it as AK and other scientist said they did.

Sorry but isnt he the same person who made many twist and turn with figures with we did the Indo-US deal ? they will do what is in the national/political interest , rest does not matter.

But if some tends to believe in what ever he says as at gospel truth , sorry then I have to disagree.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 16:53

Pakistan criticises India's N-submarine launch

What else can they do besides criticize , when we leased the original Chakra , the pakis were planning to lease the HAN , they would probably dust of the old file and run to china.

To not respond to India would be something of unacceptable to the Army.

As per wiki they have atleast 3 HAN Operational , since China is already building a new class of SSN and SSBN they can afford to give Paki 1 or 2 Han and keep us in check , any way we can hardly complain after leasing the Akula-2.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 03 Aug 2009 16:56

Austin wrote:Ofcourse there is pride and why shouldn't it be , if you got the technology and know how to build it what is there to loose ? But do you think AK or any scientist will ever accept it ? they would make generic statement as they are doing it now , BARC would have added many unique things to it as AK and other scientist said they did.

Sorry but isnt he the same person who made many twist and turn with figures with we did the Indo-US deal ? they will do what is in the national/political interest , rest does not matter.

But if some tends to believe in what ever he says as at gospel truth , sorry then I have to disagree.

If we have added our own unique things to a Russian supplied design and made it ourselves - we shoudl be happy with it.. However I am not inclined to believe that a VM-X or OK-XXX is what has gone into the Arihant.. what has gone into Arihant could very well have been a derivative of VM-X or OK-XXX , but not a Russian supplied VM-X or OK-XXX.. That is all I am getting to..

If it was simply a Russian supplied reactor - BARC could have just kept quiet.. Why would they take all the trouble of inviting journalists & show-off a Russian supplied reactor is their own?

The Indo-US nuke deal is much more complicated.. the negotiatiors & interlocutors have had to hide a lot of stuff bcoz they could not lose the negotiating handle when they sit with the US counterparts.. If one person has to be faulted for the lack of transparency during the deal making - that fault directly lies with PM Singh.. for pursuing his single minded view (whether good or bad), without scope for broader consensus..

I am not saying we should believe AK... but, in the same token - what he says also doesnt qualify for automatic distrust either..

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 03 Aug 2009 17:05

The Al Hundi reporter was definitely deaf when he heard it. I stick by what I wrote.

TSS is not some DDM to confuse MWt and MWe

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 17:09

rakall wrote: If we have added our own unique things to a Russian supplied design and made it ourselves - we shoudl be happy with it.. However I am not inclined to believe that a VM-X or OK-XXX is what has gone into the Arihant.. what has gone into Arihant could very well have been a derivative of VM-X or OK-XXX , but not a Russian supplied VM-X or OK-XXX.. That is all I am getting to..

They will never show you the reactor , any way it hardly matters , as long as we can now build it , be it derivative of VM-5 or KGB-650.

As long as we got this done it does not matter where it came from US or Russia.

If it was simply a Russian supplied reactor - BARC could have just kept quiet.. Why would they take all the trouble of inviting journalists & show-off a Russian supplied reactor is their own?

Most of the jurnos will not even know what they were shown , unless you tell them that is a reactor.

If BARC indeed managed to go it alone , we would have had a nuke submarine by late 80's or mid 90's

Ofcourse the nuclear explosion changed it all , it was now how quickly can we deliver , so it did not matter if BARC did it or came to us via KGB ....what matters is now we have it and we can do it.

The Indo-US nuke deal is much more complicated.. the negotiatiors & interlocutors have had to hide a lot of stuff bcoz they could not lose the negotiating handle when they sit with the US counterparts.. If one person has to be faulted for the lack of transparency during the deal making - that fault directly lies with PM Singh.. for pursuing his single minded view (whether good or bad), without scope for broader consensus..

These guys whether it is AK , RC will do what ever is in the national interest or what their boss told them to do , that's a fact of life.

If Mr PM does not matter who he is ABV or MMS or Sonia or LK decided this is good in his wisdom the rest will have to obey or come around with his decision.

I am not saying we should believe AK... but, in the same token - what he says also doesnt qualify for automatic distrust either..

AK will do what his boss says or is in national interest rest hardly matters

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 03 Aug 2009 17:12

From the hindu PWR building shows indigenous capability, says Kakodkar
From hindustantime

Arihant propulsion reactor unveiled wrote:Barely a week after the launch of INS Arihant, India’s first nuclear submarine, the prototype of a little-known and highly guarded propulsion reactor fuelled by indigenously enriched uranium that made the building of the submarine possible, was unveiled for the first time to the world on Sunday.

“We have successfully demonstrated our indigenous capability to build a nuclear submarine with the development of a compact nuclear power pack for submarine applications,” S. Basu, Propulsion Reactor Project director and Anil Kakodkar, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), declared here.

The 42-metre-long land-based prototype submarine with eight compartments housing complex electrical and control systems and simulating ocean conditions, is a virtual testing ground for “similar systems that will go into a sea boat,” Atomic Energy Department officials said.

After taking mediapersons around the critical facility of the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) built at the Madras Atomic Power Station complex at Kalpakkam, about 60 km south of Chennai, the top scientists, including S. Banerjee, BARC director, disclosed key details of this “land-based prototype submarine”, whose 83 MW mini light water reactor (LWR) and other systems have gone into the making of the Arihant over the past five years.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 17:12

Gerard wrote:
The Al Hundi reporter was definitely deaf when he heard it. I stick by what I wrote.
TSS is not some DDM to confuse MWt and MWe

Yes he is respected jurno and knows his stuff , but any one can go wrong.

But if we indeed managed to get 80MW(e) from a single reactor in our first attempt , then the old news posted in BRF which said that the Aliens are in contact with Netas and have told them the universal truth must be true , they prolly got hold of some scientist as well.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 03 Aug 2009 17:14

on the Jin does anyone know if such windows are always like that or closed underwater ?

More modern designs have spring loaded limber hole covers so as to minimize this source of noise.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 03 Aug 2009 17:17

Austin wrote:Pakistan criticises India's N-submarine launch

What else can they do besides criticize , when we leased the original Chakra , the pakis were planning to lease the HAN , they would probably dust of the old file and run to china.

To not respond to India would be something of unacceptable to the Army.

As per wiki they have atleast 3 HAN Operational , since China is already building a new class of SSN and SSBN they can afford to give Paki 1 or 2 Han and keep us in check , any way we can hardly complain after leasing the Akula-2.

Well... it is very much like IA acquiring T-90's bcoz Paki's got T-84.

I can only imagine what would have happened if the Abrams had performed well during the Paki trials on the day Gen.Zia Ul Haq died.. may be that would have given a good push to Arjun.. Or may be a good push to Merkava?

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 03 Aug 2009 17:21

One cannot forget that Russian Ambassador said it was a Akula

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 17:33

Raj Malhotra wrote:One cannot forget that Russian Ambassador said it was a Akula

He must be on Vodka and does not follow his bosses diktat to reduce quota

Seriously though is he an ex KGB guy ? His interview says he came to India in 70 as Ria Novosti jurno , common and a good cover for KGB personal

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 03 Aug 2009 17:35

D u believe the good Ambassadorski can tell the difference between Akula and Stolichnaya? Well.. scratch that, he must be an expert on Stolichnaya..

Omar · Post by **Omar** » 03 Aug 2009 18:18

Sinking billions into nuclear weapons

Why are webmasters posting Praful Bidwai articles on the front page?

bart · Post by **bart** » 03 Aug 2009 18:27

Raj Malhotra wrote:One cannot forget that Russian Ambassador said it was a Akula

To a Russian, Akula means the 26,000 Ton (40,000 Ton Submerged) monsters of the Typhoon class. What he said cannot be taken with any level of credibility.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 18:59

Jokes apart , the Ambassador is not a dumb guy and knows what he talks , he probably means the submarine is as advanced as Akula , the reporter should have probed that further by putting questions at him ........the jurno himself would have been not aware of what Akula is.

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Aug 2009 19:05

The reactor aboard INS Arihant is not VM-X or OK-XXX..period it is an indigenous design. BARC's attempt to design and develop a miniaturized reactor dates back to 80's (idea even before).Infact the slides shown in NDTV video clearly depict the evolution of the compact PWR from a std 1000Mwte PWR design.It makes little sense infact inappropriate to assume and claim that BARC will claim a foreign reactor to be their own and even publish specs and journals on a borrowed design.

IN personnel might have received training on a OK-650b but then aren't we expecting Nerpas to join the fleet sometime in near future ?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 19:11

Where the reactor came from is irrelevant , BARC will never admit it for obvious reason and no one will ever talk about it.

Looking at their PR overdrive to dispel any myth that it came from any where but BARC , shows you how eager they are to prove it came from them

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Aug 2009 19:13

since 60% of the stuff onboard the Arihant is Russian in source, it could be the 160 consultants are dedicated to the steam turbine, propulsion machinery, heat exchanger, control systems, electricals, welding overseers and various other supervisory and consulting roles as opposed to being nuclear scientists helping with the pure reactor side of things. even some of the stuff made by Cos in India will be to Russian specifications and QA metrics thats for sure.

ofcourse there will be reactor room technicians to teach us the tricks of operating a submarine reactor at sea under various conditions.

anyway it doesnt matter -- we are in the open water now
and better to plan for the future than fight about the past.

Drevin · Post by **Drevin** » 03 Aug 2009 19:24

Austin wrote:He must be on Vodka and does not follow his bosses diktat to reduce quota

So u sayin the ambassador actually risked quite a bit personally, in speakin to the press

Again Austinji you know more than you revealing to us at br. Anywayz I dont blame you.

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Aug 2009 19:30

Austin mian...you seem to be desperate to prove the foreign origins of the reactor and all you have to support your pov is the allegation that Dr. Kakodhar is on a PR overdrive

this itself is amusing.

The different power rating and the clear evolution from the 1000Mte PWR as depicted in the slides are clear indicator of reactor's origins. Arihant 's dimensions and mission profile do not match any of the RU subs and obviously this translates to req for a diff powerplant .

IN has never hidden the fact that its fleet comprises of platforms imported or incorporating RU components, there is no reason what so ever for IN and personnel in BARC to lie and claim things which are not true.I believe we need to draw a line when we speculate specially when there are official statements which indicate otherwise and we have no proof to substantiate.

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Aug 2009 19:33

GD yes EF folks are desperate specially when the BAE is running at a risk of closing down the EF plant for UK has curtailed its order for more aircraft. Time for MOD to squeeze some juice.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 19:43

negi wrote:Austin mian...you seem to be desperate to prove the foreign origins of the reactor and all you have to support your pov is the allegation that Dr. Kakodhar is on a PR overdrive this itself is amusing.

The different power rating and the clear evolution from the 1000Mte PWR as depicted in the slides are clear indicator of reactor's origins. Arihant 's dimensions and mission profile do not match any of the RU subs and obviously this translates to req for a diff powerplant .

IN has never hidden the fact that its fleet comprises of platforms imported or incorporating RU components, there is no reason what so ever for IN and personnel in BARC to lie and claim things which are not true.I believe we need to draw a line when we speculate specially when there are official statements which indicate otherwise and we have no proof to substantiate.

Negi sahab , I am not desperate to prove any thing , these are confidential matter and no one will ever revel it.

Tell me will any one in BARC , DAE , Russia will ever says these reactors are of Russian origin even if they are ? No they wont.

We will never know the truth and its irrelevant as long as we have the technology and know how to build a Nuclear reactor for submarine.

So if a happy statement for you is to say its a Indian Reactor with all indian inputs well so be it , if AK says so it will be true

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 03 Aug 2009 19:44

Well there are more than enough open source notings on how BARC was stuck till 80s with the reactor and then the Russikes came to help -- post which a power plant was made. Given the 60% direct Russian components + the above piece of news, I think the discussion on whether the Russikes sent direct blueprints or came here and designed or worked with Indians to make the reactor is moot.

It is unlikely that Russikes would help in non critical 60% and not in the critical parts. Most Russike help would be where we were weakest logically.

In this scenario claiming that the "reactor has been built in India" is "Ashwatthama hato...." all over again, which as Austin said is pretty pointless to discuss, Drona is slayed and that's what matters. Lets carry on with the Mahabharata.

Meanwhile calling AK a political scientist is not a slur by any means. He is one. The heads of AECs are not nerds in labs speaking only in exact mathematical notations.

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Aug 2009 19:50

^ Austin mian..how convenient since it is confidential a Jingo on forum can allege it is not Indian but infact a RU reactor ? I would be more vocal than you about BARC and IN falsifying things but for god's sake where is the proof ?

Infact leave alone the proof ...my question to those supporting this RU reactor theory is...what are the doubts about indigenous capability ? .From the looks of it it seems folks here do not believe that India Inc can make a compact pressurized PWR and hence speculations about the RU reactor.

Else I don't see anything in the open source which indicates that reactor is not of Indian origin (designwise).

mandrake · Post by **mandrake** » 03 Aug 2009 20:02

Austin wrote:
negi wrote:Austin mian...you seem to be desperate to prove the foreign origins of the reactor and all you have to support your pov is the allegation that Dr. Kakodhar is on a PR overdrive this itself is amusing.

The different power rating and the clear evolution from the 1000Mte PWR as depicted in the slides are clear indicator of reactor's origins. Arihant 's dimensions and mission profile do not match any of the RU subs and obviously this translates to req for a diff powerplant .

IN has never hidden the fact that its fleet comprises of platforms imported or incorporating RU components, there is no reason what so ever for IN and personnel in BARC to lie and claim things which are not true.I believe we need to draw a line when we speculate specially when there are official statements which indicate otherwise and we have no proof to substantiate.
Negi sahab , I am not desperate to prove any thing , these are confidential matter and no one will ever revel it.

Tell me will any one in BARC , DAE , Russia will ever says these reactors are of Russian origin even if they are ? No they wont.

We will never know the truth and its irrelevant as long as we have the technology and know how to build a Nuclear reactor for submarine.

So if a happy statement for you is to say its a Indian Reactor with all indian inputs well so be it , if AK says so it will be true

Tell me will any one in BARC , DAE , Russia will ever says that Indian nukes are of Russian origin even if they are ? No they wont.
Tell me will any one in DRDO, Israel will ever say the ABM's are of Israel origin even if they are ? No they wont.
Tell me will any one in DRDO, ADA will ever say the LCA is of French origin even if they are ? No they wont.

All these are confidential only

, we have Maj. Philip Rajkumar's book in case of LCA, in case of Arihant we have none, perhaps in a decade from now we will get to know something. I don't know whats so hard to believe when BARC openly acknowledges the Russian consultancy in designing or i should say miniaturization of the reactor, and says it is their hard work with the consultancy that went in it and not some copy-paste design.

If BARC indeed managed to go it alone , we would have had a nuke submarine by late 80's or mid 90's

If BARC managed to get the design, it wouldn't take them almost 20 years from the time it knew it cannot do on its own to now.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 20:03

negi wrote:From the looks of it it seems folks here do not believe that India Inc can make a compact pressurized PWR and hence speculations about the RU reactor.

Lets put it this way ATV as a project is going on for atleast 25 years , we had reasonable success in developing commercial reactor during those period , ATV was always a high priority project directly under PM from Indira Gandhi days so project had all kind of support like Nuke bum , why is it we couldn't compact the reactor till mid 90's ? If BARC had suceeded we should have had a Nuclear submarine by early mid 90's even though it would be rudimentary and comparable to chink class or atleast Charlie 1 class since we had the entire drawings of it.

From previous literature on the subject , it was the reactor which was the Achilles Heels of ATV project or BARC inability or sudden ability to make it saw the Arihant seeing the light of the day.

But apart from talking point this is irrelevant , we can build it now.

pkudva · Post by **pkudva** » 03 Aug 2009 20:04

Guys,i was looking at all the data that people are talking and presuming on the design,tonns ,weapons etc. Frankly speaking let me tell you nothing is correct and we should be proud that we are not disclosing it.
let the assumption continue.
cheers to INS Arihant.
I will again repeat she much more that people believe with respect to sophestication and also in other aspects.

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Aug 2009 20:04

Sanku wrote:Well there are more than enough open source notings on how BARC was stuck till 80s with the reactor and then the Russikes came to help -- post which a power plant was made. Given the 60% direct Russian components + the above piece of news, I think the discussion on whether the Russikes sent direct blueprints or came here and designed or worked with Indians to make the reactor is moot.

No there is a difference posts have been made claiming Arihant pp is some OK-xx or VM-xx series (infact ok-650 as per several posts) and all this without any proof.

Using external help or third party components != Foreign product; likewise F-22 uses substantial control SW from BAE systems and PS-05/A radar for the JAS-39 uses antenna supplied by Raytheon are we supposed to use same logic and make similar statements about F-22 and PS-05-A Radar ?

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Aug 2009 20:13

Austin wrote:
negi wrote:From the looks of it it seems folks here do not believe that India Inc can make a compact pressurized PWR and hence speculations about the RU reactor.
Lets put it this way ATV as a project is going on for atleast 25 years , we had reasonable success in developing commercial reactor during those period , ATV was always a high priority project directly under PM from Indira Gandhi days so project had all kind of support like Nuke bum , why is it we couldn't compact the reactor till mid 90's ? If BARC had suceeded we should have had a Nuclear submarine by early mid 90's even though it would be rudimentary and comparable to chink class or atleast Charlie 1 class since we had the entire drawings of it.

From previous literature on the subject , it was the reactor which was the Achilles Heels of ATV project or BARC inability or sudden ability to make it saw the Arihant seeing the light of the day.

But apart from talking point this is irrelevant , we can build it now.

No you made posts claiming it was OK-xx and VM-xx series which is different from consulting and seeking help to overcome technical issues; Kaveri programme is facing similar bugs (in diff league) and they might consult safran or Saturn and 5 years down the line god willing if Kaveri takes to air are you gonna say Kaveri is a RU/FR engine ?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 20:22

negi wrote: No you made posts claiming it was OK-xx and VM-xx series which is different from consulting and seeking help to overcome technical issues; Kaveri programme is facing similar bugs (in diff league) and they might consult safran or Saturn and 5 years down the line god willing if Kaveri takes to air are you gonna say Kaveri is a RU/FR engine ?

Yes the reactor is based on VM-xx design ( i didnt claim OK-xx that was shankar catch him and wack him , he wants 40 knots

) That is what my source tell me , BARC may have improvised it is I can agree with , but the essence of it is based on VM-xx.

Ofcourse I am not speaking the Gospel Truth , so I may well be wrong.

Since AK is beyond suspicion , we will believe him.