INS Arihant (ATV) News and Discussion -2

Patrick Cusack · Post by **Patrick Cusack** » 08 Sep 2009 04:46

NERPA SPECS from http://www.deagel.com/Nuclear-Attack-Su ... 55002.aspx
Accommodation: Crew 50
Number of Weapons: 40 torpedoes/missiles/mines
Dimensions: Beam 13.6 m, Draft 9.7 m, Length 114 m
Weights: Displacement Submerged 12,770 t, Displacement Surfaced 8,500 t
Performance: Endurance 100 day, Max Operating Depth 500 m (1,640 ft), Top Speed Submerged 35 kt (65 kph), Top Speed Surfaced 20 kt (37 kph)
Power: Power 190 MW
Other: Torpedo Tubes 10 six 533mm and four 650mm torpedo tubes

Based on all that I have on the web with regards to Arihant - it sounds very identical to Arihant. Strategically speaking this is good - one built by Russia another built in India with a lot of parts commonality it makes servicing so much easier. It will help the Indian engineers a lot when it comes to Arihant 2, 3 etc.

ss_roy · Post by **ss_roy** » 08 Sep 2009 07:24

My thoughts on the ATV saga till now:

The original ATV design (early 1990s) was almost certainly based on a Charlie 2 design, modified to carry a few ballistic missiles.

The second major ATV design (now Arihant) was probably finalized in the early 2000s. Given the specs of Arihant (as we know them today) and the extensive russian experience with Akula class vessels, it is likely that Arihant is internally based on the Akula-I design. However the need to fire ballistic missiles would have had a considerable effect on the external shape and placement of various modules inside the submarine, hence it probably does not look like an Akula.

The 2nd and 3rd ATVs might be bigger Arihants (ballistic + cruise missiles) or a smaller indianized Borei (true ballistic missile sub). While the first appears more likely, the second possibility cannot be dismissed. India is buying Akula-IIs from Russia, which have nuclear cruise missile capability. Many chinese targets are coastal, and an Indian Akula-II will (for all practical purposes) be indistinguishable from a Russian Akula-II near the chinese coast.

It might be that India will use 2-3 Akula-IIs to patrol the chinese coast (cruise missiles + nukes) as a stop gap measure, untill we have more than 3 subs with significant ballistic + nuke capabilities.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 08 Sep 2009 07:29

You wont see much changes between S-2 and S-3,4 as was stated by the retired admiral

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Sep 2009 08:55

Its very difficult to guesstimate the weight/yeald of Russian new warhead , if one considers the thumb rule of half the warhead weight plus half BUS for MIRV and Decoys.

But the new missile from Russia have those manouvering capability ( Bulava and RS-24 which is MIRV'd Topol-M ) , they have both the BUS and Active Warhead to defeat the US ABM or atleast complicate interception.

Now if you remove the passive MIRV from the picture and add a warhead with a small propulsion , control , guidance plus BUS plus decoys , then the actual warhead size will be smaller than 90 kg.

Similarly it has been recently reveled that the yeald of Topol-M single warhead missile ~ 800 kT and not the 500 kT as originally thought , from a weapons designers POV keeping the weight same with a yeald greater by ~ 300 kT , it should the advancement in TN warhead technology.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Sep 2009 08:58

Nuclear submarine India’s best second strike bet: Roy

On July 26 this year, India joined the select group of five nations to have its own nuclear propelled and nuclear armed submarine called Arihant. Code-named Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV), the submarine is a project conceived in the 70s and initiated by Indira Gandhi in the 80s.

It was a secret project so no one knew whether India was definitely making such an advanced weapon. Vice Admiral (Retd) MK Roy was the naval officer who was the first chief of this project and was there when it all began. He spoke with Shashank Chouhan of Zeenews.com and told him about how this almost impossible dream was achieved and how India has become safer now.

Shashank: In what ways does Arihant make India safer?

Roy: The last century saw major developments in space and underwater realms. This submarine is a product of the higher end of that phase. It is the biggest and best possible platform that India has got to defend itself. The salient features of Arihant are that it does not need to surface for months to recharge its batteries since it runs on nuclear fuel. With a speed of upto 25 knots, it can easily chase fast enemy ships. It has unlimited endurance and completes the three dimensional aspect of security.

Targets on land can be easily detected, jets are not that fast and radars can pinpoint them. But Arihant remains 200 mts underwater so no one can ever know where in the vast ocean it is. It’s our best bet at second nuclear strike.

Shashank: What was on the mind of the policymakers when they asked you to build this submarine?

Roy: Well they said ‘we want to have a three dimensional force with nuclear power which is a deterrent for the enemy.’ The only target we had was defending India from any attack. Also, it was the next natural step in the technological development of our armed forces.

Shashank: Did you get to meet Indira Gandhi? What did she tell you?

Roy: (looks on with quiet wonder) Next question please...that’s a secret.

Shashank: How important was Russia’s contribution to the development of the submarine?

Roy: Marshal Ustanov, the Soviet Defence Minister, and Admiral Gorshkov, the Commander-&-Chief of Soviet armed forces, offered to transfer technology to India for the construction of a nuclear submarine as well as for training and operating it. A Russian delegation visited India for the same and they reported to their bosses that India had met all the requirements for such a transfer. Dr Raja Ramanna, the country’s top nuclear scientist who was my classmate from Madras college, broached the subject with me as I was the chief of Eastern Command then. I said we wanted a nuclear propelled submarine that could also fire nuclear missiles and we used to discuss this issue in detail. Eventually these conversations took the form of the ATV Project as I accompanied Ramanna and other officers including Admiral Ganesh, Nigam etc. to Moscow.

The Russians arranged to train our officers for operating nuclear submarines and also leased us the Charlie nuclear submarine for practical training and use. But there was no import of technology- only transfer of knowledge.

Shashank: Why did the project get delayed?

Roy: The delay in the ATV project was primarily due to political, industrial, technological and social changes in Russia from 1985 onwards. Supplies were delayed, factories had closed and the initial contract (in roubles) changed to hard currency (US dollars) which required time-consuming checks and balances.

But our work never stopped. While the Russians were away, there was a great cooperation between the PSUs like BHEL, BEL, DRDO and private companies like L&T, Walchandnagar, Tata, Kirloskars etc. It was a unique learning period for the Indian defense administration.

Shashank: What do you have to say about Admiral Sureesh Mehta’s recent observation that we are not competing with China and that only three submarines are enough?

Roy: Only one good submarine is enough for effectively responding to any misadventure. It is the quality of weapons that matters and not quantity and the nuclear submarine is the most sophisticated piece of war technology.

We shouldn’t be China obsessed as far as seas are concerned as they are not a threat in the Indian Ocean and ours is a regional Navy. Yes they have submarines, but so do we so that’s not a problem. The two countries have growing trade relations and we protect their oil route in Malacca Straits.

Shashank: What about Pakistan’s charge of Arihant triggering an arms race in the subcontinent?

Roy: Look who’s talking? There is no race here. Pakiatan Navy is nowhere near to ours. That is a country which has been importing technologies from dubious sources. India has the right to look after its interests. But we are not aggressive in our approach.

Shashank: What problems did you face in this project?

Roy: The problems were basically in building the technology- the design, reactor, hull design, periscope, electronic warfare system, sonar etc. But because private and public sector had joined hands, we could sail through.

Finance and red tape was never a problem. The Defence Minister headed the group and he cleared all problems in a jiffy. Bureaucracy always helped us- they never created any roadblocks. PM Rajiv Gandhi, Dr Arunachalam (Security Advisor to Defence Minister), Venkatraman and others were very keen to see the submarine made quickly.

Shashank: What is your take on the Gorshkov deal?

Roy: We have said many times we need three aircraft carriers to defend India from all three ocean sides. I myself commandeered the INS Vikrant and know that it is enough. Who is going to sell us a fully operating machine like that in open market? The Russians are ready to ‘gift’ it with Kamov copters and MiGs.

The problem is that we have to pay for the refit in dollars. But it is not and should not be a question of price. It’s about India’s security. It’s expensive, but look at the expense the Army and Air Force are indulging in. Navy does not ask for much in this country. And there is no basis of saying we did not negotiate properly. With every passing year the cost will escalate, but we will pay only that with which we are okay.

Shashank: In age when air superiority is considered the defining edge with any armed force, what is the importance of Navy?

Roy: You see the Mughals neglected India’s vast marine borders and had to pay the price as the British crossed Bombay, Goa and Calcutta and marched up to Delhi. Don’t forget that the Earth is basically an island in the oceans. The sea connects all countries and having a viable sea monster at disposal is absolutely essential to protect our sovereignty.

Shashank: When you were made the in-charge of the project, what did you think?

Roy: We don’t think! Everything is scientifically calculated and dexterously planned in advanced. We just followed what had been laid on paper with full commitment.

Shashank: How did you feel when the submarine was launched finally?

Roy: (with a mild smile) There was absolute silence. They say I had tears in my eyes when Arihant touched water. I missed Raja Ramanna the most. He was a great man, a great scientist and a great musician too. I don’t think our country has honoured such people enough. This was a very difficult, multi-technological project. Many were involved in it. Not enough has been done for all.

Shashank: Did your family ever know you were heading the ATV?

I never discussed my work with family, much less talk about state secrets! But they were really happy when they came to know about it this year and were surprised.

Shashank: You have been there done that. What is the one thing India needs today to become an impregnable fortress?

Roy: Forget sea, land or air power. We need comprehensive security for the individual- clean water, sanitation, health, opportunities. If these things come, automatically the rest will follow. We can’t go on making tanks after all. Individual in the society should feel secure on all fronts. Our education, health systems need urgent changes. Forty percent of our countrymen are below the poverty line. I am glad that I have lived to see today’s time- there is a lot more freedom and opportunity today. My grandson has a rockband and is cool about his career. That’s all good, but it’s not enough for the millions.

Of course that doesn’t mean we leave our borders for the enemy. For development, we need to be secure from outside too.

PS: Link correction done , Thanks tsriram

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 10 Sep 2009 10:16

Austin,
Could you please check the url in that post?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Sep 2009 14:34

Tx Austin,that was a fine piece by Adm.MK Roy.His emphasis upon seeing to the needs of the 40% below the poverty line is a great insight into the reason why India is being held back when it could develop far faster given all our assets.I'm not sure though about his "one sub" will do statement.We have two villains of the piece,China and Pak on two fronts.We need to dedicate separate strategic deterrent subs for each villain and that would require at least three subs for each theatre.Pak is supposed to now have about 80-90 N-weapons acording to the latest US revelations! and this figure is likely to go up even fruther.it appears that the military elite of Pak have an international N-agenda ,with N-needs far beyond just the "threat" from India.Is Pak doing the Saudis and the Chinese a favour also?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 10 Sep 2009 14:53

Austin wrote:Nuclear submarine India’s best second strike bet: Roy

Shashank: What do you have to say about Admiral Sureesh Mehta’s recent observation that we are not competing with China and that only three submarines are enough?

We shouldn’t be China obsessed as far as seas are concerned as they are not a threat in the Indian Ocean and ours is a regional Navy. Yes they have submarines, but so do we so that’s not a problem. The two countries have growing trade relations and we protect their oil route in Malacca Straits.

Adm Roy sure knows his way around the English language.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Sep 2009 18:48

Philip wrote:I'm not sure though about his "one sub" will do statement.We have two villains of the piece,China and Pak on two fronts.We need to dedicate separate strategic deterrent subs for each villain and that would require at least three subs for each theatre.

Well i think it is not the question of only "one sub" , but about numbers , reach and oomph factor of each SSBN.

For eg UK maintains just one submarine on active patrol at any point of time , yet she feels its a credible deterrent for any one since they do not have land bases ICBM or Air launched missile.

For now we just have one TD i.e S2 , the S-3 and S4 based on S2 will be of same configuration , as far as SLBM goes it lacks the intercontinental reach , the number assuming we manage to get a ~ 5000 Km SLBM going in the next 10 years on S3 and S4 will be only 3-4 SLBM per submarine.

And the oomph factor of our TN warhead , well the less said the better.

So the current S2 based design will not deter any one , we need to wait till we manage to solve our problem of numbers,reach and yeald , till then we can gather the necessary experience operating Nuclear submarine , an industry that can build such submarine with 100 % indigenous content , while we hope that DRDO does a fine job with SLBM and BARC with its refined and lighter proven and credible TN warhead.

After all the euphoria as things have settled down , we realize now that we have a long way to go.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 11 Sep 2009 04:07

Correct ! This is first step in the marathon. Winning or losing is a long way to go. Can we trip others on the way? for that GoI, DRDO and BARC has to change to a different gear and improved work culture.

Quality come where there is bonafied way to make profit and personal gain. Pay peanuts and you will get monkeys will stay true.

Have foresight, order in quantity, plan in local capability, plan in export for profitability, and India will be in reckoning.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Sep 2009 16:52

The Russians also deserve our thanks

bart · Post by **bart** » 11 Sep 2009 18:19

Austin wrote:The Russians also deserve our thanks

That mjoshi character seems to have some bone to pick with our scientific establishment.

Check out his thoughts on APJAK and the way he disses our missile successes:
http://mjoshi.blogspot.com/2009/09/issu ... ation.html

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 12 Sep 2009 10:30

bart wrote:That mjoshi character seems to have some bone to pick with our scientific establishment.

Check out his thoughts on APJAK and the way he disses our missile successes:
http://mjoshi.blogspot.com/2009/09/issu ... ation.html

>>manoj joshi said...
Who said no one in the world will supply India with the tech? Who supplied Pakistan.

Since china supplied pakistan with missile tech, does this manoj joshi want india to follow the same route and beg before china for missiles?
Should india's independent foreign policy also be sacrificed to get some chini missiles like the pakistanis have done.
And finally why would china arm india with missiles, when it considers us to be it's strategic enemy.

Why are idiots like these allowed to run newspapers.
This is the same person who made allegations that the IA was not prepared to goto war after 26/11. Time for manoj joshi to retire before his newspaper readers forcibly admit him to a mental hospital.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Sep 2009 10:39

From a military POV and practical capability goes , it does not matter where paki got their missile/warhead from Chini or Noko .

The bottom line is they have it and they can/will use it against india.

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 12 Sep 2009 10:52

^But at what cost, if we also want to be someone's "taller than mountains friend" then shutdown drdo and start importing missiles in contravention of intl treaties. Also open nuclear black market and sell some of those missiles along with nuke tech to intl terrorists and pariah states to earn extra money. Why waste time and money in research and development when taking shortcuts we can become rich and powerful on donated arms.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 12 Sep 2009 11:25

Austin wrote:From a military POV and practical capability goes , it does not matter where paki got their missile/warhead from Chini or Noko .

The bottom line is they have it and they can/will use it against india.

You are not differentiating Indians and Pakis. Pakis are chamchas. We are not. Pakis are supposed to work for uncles aunties and other ..dies. Their role is to serve their masters. We belong to the master category and hence has to build things on our own. Indeed it does not matter for the Pakis from where they get military hardware and how they get it. Haseena motorhama is least bothered about ethics and legality of her profession. It's money that matters.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Sep 2009 15:59

Well Abdul could not make it , so Abdul stole it.

From Indian military POV it does not matter if Abdul could make it or not , coz Abdul has it and our military has to deal with it that is the reality.

The rest talk about being chamchas , having scientific capability , being a pariah or with a begging bowl is something Abdul is least concerned about.

Remember Bhutto once said we will eat grass but we will get the bum that is the bottom line for them.

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 12 Sep 2009 16:34

^But "Abdul" cant use the missiles or bombs without asking "Mao". Remember the news of "joint control" of pakistani nukes with china soon after bush went for a picnic in afghanistan and wanted to prevent pakistani nukes from falling into wrong hands.

So having the weapon in hand and being capable of using it are two different things.

Was reading the sept DRDO newsletter and came across this.

As Director, Research Centre Imarat, Hyderabad
from 2001-2005, Dr Saraswat conceptualized and
established facilities for building Technologies for
Ring Laser Gyro (RLG), Fibre Optic Gyro (FOG)-
based Inertial navigation System, Electro-Mechanical
Actuators (EMA), Electro-Hydraulic Actuators, Micro
Electro Mechanical System (MEMS)-based sensors,
Rate Tables to calibrate navigation systems for
missile guidance & control. He conceptualized
and established facilities for development of micro
and nano sensors for future avionics. All these
technologies are denied by developed countries
under Missile Technologies Control Regime
(MTCR). With the motto of self-reliance in defence
technologies through indigenisation, he established
productionisation of many critical technologies with
PSUs and industry.

All these technologies which we need today and in the future too. If these were not developed in India then in the next decade we would be still at the mercy of foreign arms dealers.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Sep 2009 20:38

Avinash R wrote:^But "Abdul" cant use the missiles or bombs without asking "Mao". Remember the news of "joint control" of pakistani nukes with china soon after bush went for a picnic in afghanistan and wanted to prevent pakistani nukes from falling into wrong hands.

So having the weapon in hand and being capable of using it are two different things.

That is what we want to believe , based on intel agera wegra , which is of zero value to military.

The Military will always believe the 90 odd nukes are usable and when the time comes Abdul will use it , and SFC will have to plan accordingly with its own response.

I repeat it does not matter if those 90 odd nukes are stolen , as long as they have it and have proven to work , it is a usable system.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Sep 2009 22:26

When the Pakis use the nukes it doesnt matter how they got it. What matters is whether what we got works. All this hardworking, poor souls with massive egos that give elastic milestones cant cut it when the outside world is working overtime to arm our enemies. Did Bhisma, Drona et al save the Kauravas?

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 16 Sep 2009 23:02

Cross positing my post from POK-II fizzle thread:
-----------------------------------------------

shiv wrote:If you recall the old days when Prithvi I was said to be able to carry a 1 ton payload 150 Km. Later we heard about Prithvi II with 500 Kg payload and 250 Km. Doesn't it seem absurd to have these stupidly small ranges? Even a MiG 21 can carry a bigger load of conventional weapons for a longer distance.

Blasphamy !!! One cant speak against a 90 mile range mijjile that Ex-president APJ Kalam created.

Absurd or not Mig 21's air breathing jets ISP is much more than ISP of liquid rocket engine of Prithvi. I also think Prithvi flies faster than Mig thus almost impossible to be shot down by Indian enemies (just wait a little longer and TSP with its new ABM radar based system will be able to take down Prithvi).

Imagine if we had nuclear warheads that weigh 250 Kg. How far would Prithvi go then?

Of all the missiles made by IGMDP only one saw day of light in usable quantities, called Prithvi, and that too a lame duck with very short leg (BTW lower payload on Prithvi cant result in longer range, because the aluminum body missile is incapable of re-entry for those high velocity regime and will melt on re-entry) . Trishul is canned and dead. Akash is no where to be seen in Akash yet, and by the time it is deployed, the types of targets and war-fighting it has been designed would have aged and been long dead. Astra has only a tested rocket motor as yet, and barely a dozen or two of Agni-II are manufactured . All while Ex-president Kalam floated the IGMDP in DRDO, later spent time in the south block and even more later in Rastrapati Bhavan. His project management legacy has left a legacy of un-met commitments.

Here is an article that I largely agree with:
The issue is not "belief" but validation - by Manoj Joshi

arunsrinivasan · Post by **arunsrinivasan** » 16 Sep 2009 23:07

^^^ I was taken to task by many people for just posting that article a some days back. Thanks for validating this.

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 17 Sep 2009 05:10

http://www.drdo.com/pub/nl/2009/may09.pdf
.....
Shri Pravin Kumar Singh, Sci C, Naval Materials Research Laboratory (NMRL),
Ambernath, has been conferred, successful development of strategic components like
Porous Carbon Gas Diffusion material and molded graphite Bipolar Plates crucial for Fuel
Cell Technology.
.........
Shri Nissar KE, Sci C, Naval Physical & Oceanographic Laboratory (NPOL), Kochi,
for his significant contributions in the development of algorithm for Advance Defence
System. A large number of advanced signal processing algorithms for detection, tracking
and automatic recognition of torpedoes were developed for the first in the country for an
Anti-Torpedo Defence Systems.

RavinM · Post by **RavinM** » 17 Sep 2009 05:46

http://mjoshi.blogspot.com/2009/09/issu ... html[quote][/quote]

The nerve of this guy!! calls indian scientists bluffers, calls himself a journo, sourcing from wiki, and wants to reverse engineer rusted bowls! I wonder what his news paper is called? Zoo??

vina · Post by **vina** » 17 Sep 2009 06:55

Pokhran II thermonuclear test, a failure . An opEd piece in Al-Hundi by Santhanam who practically demolishes whatever the BARC team has said until now and challenging BARC to show actual data and prove what they are saying is true.

I think that is a fair point. If you actually are dead sure that the TN bomb was not a fizzle, prove it with actual data. Mumbling it is all fine wont do. Getting facts right is the first step. The next steps on what to do can follow.

RavinM · Post by **RavinM** » 17 Sep 2009 08:18

First, after the TN test, its shaft remained totally undamaged: if the fusion stage had worked, the shaft would have been totally destroyed. Secondly, the A-frame sitting astride the mouth of the shaft, with winches to lower and raise personnel, materials and so on, also remained completely intact. If the fusion stage had worked, the ‘A’ frame would also have been totally destroyed.

Looks like Santhanam sir has nailed it this time. There can hardly be any logical argument if something this fragile was intact after the explosion. He has no DATA ,but he's analysed it well within his own rights. I have a strong feeling, such revelations are gonna lead to the big bang again!!!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Sep 2009 08:44

Not necessary. MMS can come forward and say the CMD is based on the tested weapons.

Fat chance!

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 17 Sep 2009 09:14

Deleted - wrong thread

wig · Post by **wig** » 17 Sep 2009 09:20

RavinM wrote:
First, after the TN test, its shaft remained totally undamaged: if the fusion stage had worked, the shaft would have been totally destroyed. Secondly, the A-frame sitting astride the mouth of the shaft, with winches to lower and raise personnel, materials and so on, also remained completely intact. If the fusion stage had worked, the ‘A’ frame would also have been totally destroyed.

the issue is disconcerting. if brajesh mishra, then nsa; dr chidambaram. dr kalam , late president of india, drdo, dae and a host of others lied white facedly to the nation on a matter of such vital importance then they are guilty of treason, no less.
the whole world seems to have known that the thermonuclear weapon failed and factored it into their war games. but we the nation were wilfully mislead. there has to be some punishment for such liars and cheats. the worst part is that they are shamelessly unrepentant. drdo is still putting out statements and using the fig leaf of confidentiality for concealing information that could clarify the doubts. my faith in them is rattled. but more dangerous for the nation is that men of their ilk still infest the corridors of power in different awatars. will they respond with any deterrent action to the enemy at all or simply lie and let more civilans and service men die in vain defending our borders, our homes and hearths.

wig · Post by **wig** » 17 Sep 2009 09:24

[quote="Austin"][quote="Avinash R"]^But "Abdul" cant use the missiles or bombs without asking "Mao". Remember the news of "joint control" of pakistani nukes with china soon after bush went for a picnic in afghanistan and wanted to prevent pakistani nukes from falling into wrong hands.

and; pray, why would, "mao" deny the faithful, "abdul" the pleasure of using his nukes or better still handing them over to some non state actor for use.
that would ensure that our lying leaders could even "using a voice vote" fail to retaliate knowing fully well the origins

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 18 Sep 2009 19:02

LIVEFIST: Admiral Arun Prakash: The Arihant In Perspective

shanksinha · Post by **shanksinha** » 18 Sep 2009 19:26

The article by Manoj Joshi as linked by Mr Austin is well written and mostly the truth. But it is also horribly out of date in the current times of mindless Russia bashing and Unkil suck-up.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 18 Sep 2009 19:54

Oh pshawwww to your whines about soviet bashing.

There is no altruism as a couple of you think there is

Here is from the Admirals article

The promised Russian assistance, both material and intellectual did come; albeit in fits and starts which accounted for most of the programme delays, and at prices which escalated at a breathtaking rate.

So thay had us over a barrel and mercilessly screwed us - and we still have people who cannot face reality.

Bottom line - there are no friends - only interests -

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 19 Sep 2009 16:50

Surya wrote:Bottom line - there are no friends - only interests -

Absolutely. Russia is not a friend but all-weather ally of India. Same can't be said about greedy Americans. They backstabb their own allies.

Americans should get themselves aligned to this reality rather than being uneasy with rosey Indo-Russian relationship. The day they understand this better, they will realize a better confidence in themselves on bilateral ties rather than current phase of paranoia which makes them stick to Pakistan.

What Admiral said in Arihant article was directed towards American audience. He is telling them in his subtle language - "Don't be scared. Arihant is peaceful onlee."

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Sep 2009 23:30

Arihant: Strengthening India’s Naval Capability - Rajaram Panda

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Sep 2009 14:59

The fall of the Soviet Union had a cascading effect on countries which acquired large amounts of military eqpt. from it and India was no exception.This was because the Soviets scattered production of their weapon systems and key components of systems among the Republics.Earlier,India had to just order eqpt. from one central source,the Russian govt.,while after the fall,it had to order individually from the various manufacturers,leading to delays,etc.happily,this situ has been rectified and we now see the Russian defence industry being modernised,centralised and made more efficient ,producing a number of new aviation products such as the Yak-130 jet trainer,on order for the Russians and Algerians,plus advanced versions of the Flanker.This has required a scale down of the size of the former Soviet military and amalgamation of the various individual manufacturing companies into more efficient corporations.

The ATV programme was also hit during this period and extra costs are not the sole perogative of the Russians.Why just take a look at the Scorpene deal,where their conventional subs are as expensive as an Akula-2 as I posted earlier! The hard fact is that Russia is the only nation prepared to sell us and cooperate with us in developing our indigenous nuclear sub progammes,even to designs of their underwater bases,etc.We cannot dream of acquiring a similar tech. collaboration from the US,with its tech-piracy through the use of the EUM

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 20 Sep 2009 17:20

Philip wrote:We cannot dream of acquiring a similar tech. collaboration from the US,with its tech-piracy through the use of the EUM

Forget of tech you have mentioned Philip, even technology that is decades old and will be replaced very shortly will not come without strings attached and not to mention malicious codes........

-Nitin

RameshC · Post by **RameshC** » 20 Sep 2009 18:18

fact is US has never sold nuke sub technology to anyone. they remain very quiet in their sub ambitions so no chance of US help to anyone. so dream on. The only help they gave was with UK with Trident D-5s and what a help, the Trident remains the fastest ICBM in the world. Russia/USSR did all that for cash, late 80s and 90s Russia had no cash and hence the relied a lot on our purchases to come back.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 20 Sep 2009 18:55

Philip - For the Nth time as Austin has pointed out - the Scorpene issues is MDLs fault -

And even if not the fact the French and Russians do the same proves the point - there are no friends.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 21 Sep 2009 13:57

Is it possible to get a overview of the current status of the ATV? There is soooo much noice by repeating the same news again and again. It is really difficult to detect the correct signature of it