Indian Nuclear Submarines -3

[Rakesh]

Kit, also remember this ---> that 65,000 ton CATOBAR is not going anywhere with the political masters in New Delhi. The Indian Navy knows it, but more importantly the US Govt knows it. So shift focus from the JWGACTC (Joint Working Group on Aircraft Carrier Cooperation) to something that the Govt of India is more keen on funding ---> nuclear powered submarines.

Mark this post kit. In the near future, you will hear a new joint working group being set up. Something like JWGNSC (Joint Working Group on Nuclear Submarine Cooperation). Heck, AUKUS could be expanded to include even India at a future date. INAUKUS?

Doing this serves the purpose of shifting India's focus away from Russian (more Akulas) or French (LEU reactor design) nuclear powered submarines to American ones.

That is what Ashley Tellis' article is all about. Create that foundation (in people's minds) for the next technology platform to dangle India with.

[Pratyush]

^^

I see this report in context of the progress India has made in terms of the 190MW submarine reactor.

If it's going to be ready for deployment by 2024 as reported previously. Then it stands to reason that the accompanying nuclear submarine will be ready for production by that time as well.

This is the last best hope for the Americans to hook India in it's strategic system.

If this opportunity is lost them India is truly autonomous.

[kit]

^^

I see this report in context of the progress India has made in terms of the 190MW submarine reactor.

If it's going to be ready for deployment by 2024 as reported previously. Then it stands to reason that the accompanying nuclear submarine will be ready for production by that time as well.

This is the last best hope for the Americans to hook India in it's strategic system.

If this opportunity is lost them India is truly autonomous.

Indeed if the 190 mw report is true., ( can you post a link please ? ) only aero engine tech is left in the military frontier ., and the fabs in economic front ( for now)

[Pratyush]

https://www.business-standard.com/artic ... 031_1.html

Dating back to 2017. Says that the BARC has finished the design for 190 MW reactor for a submarine.

[kit]

https://www.business-standard.com/artic ... 031_1.html

Dating back to 2017. Says that the BARC has finished the design for 190 MW reactor for a submarine.

Oh that , the IN refused to pay for the design and development!.. need to find other sources if that eventually worked out!

[Pratyush]

The navy only refused the reactor for aircraft carriers. Not submarines.

The aircraft reactor was to have been designed for above 500 MW.

[kit]

Kit, also remember this ---> that 65,000 ton CATOBAR is not going anywhere with the political masters in New Delhi. The Indian Navy knows it, but more importantly the US Govt knows it. So shift focus from the JWGACTC (Joint Working Group on Aircraft Carrier Cooperation) to something that the Govt of India is more keen on funding ---> nuclear powered submarines.

Mark this post kit. In the near future, you will hear a new joint working group being set up. Something like JWGNSC (Joint Working Group on Nuclear Submarine Cooperation). Heck, AUKUS could be expanded to include even India at a future date. INAUKUS?

Doing this serves the purpose of shifting India's focus away from Russian (more Akulas) or French (LEU reactor design) nuclear powered submarines to American ones.

That is what Ashley Tellis' article is all about. Create that foundation (in people's minds) for the next technology platform to dangle India with.

Dont think AUKUS is going anywhere

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... xperts-say

Rex Patrick, former South Australian senator and submariner, said Australia “will not get submarines off the US line”. “The US engage in operations all around the world and they’re important operations and the US Navy is not going to cede a capability so that Australia can get submarines [so they can] dip their toe in the water,” he said.

“All the publicly available material points to the US not providing us with a submarine.”


Hellyer said there was also “no way” the UK could spare a submarine as it is only building seven of the Astute class (which is one of the options being considered for Australia) before it moves to a new model. “The UK is currently wrapping up its Astute program,” he said. “They need to wrap that up to transfer the resources to the Dreadnaught program.

“They have no capacity to build us submarines.”

So much for all that hullaballoo

[Pratyush]

Kit,

I am afraid that this is not a correct reading of the AKUKUS.

The submarine can easily be the Astute class. In the same way the Australian's have built the Canberra class aircraft carriers , the Adillade class Anti Aircraft destroyers and the future type 26. The reactor can come from the UK. Every thing else gets built by Australian yards.

That can get them the first submarines by 2030. If construction is started today.

But I think that the Australian Navy is going to design something unique which can be powered by the Astute reactor.

[kit]

Kit,

I am afraid that this is not a correct reading of the AKUKUS.

The submarine can easily be the Astute class. In the same way the Australian's have built the Canberra class aircraft carriers , the Adillade class Anti Aircraft destroyers and the future type 26. The reactor can come from the UK. Every thing else gets built by Australian yards.

That can get them the first submarines by 2030. If construction is started today.

But I think that the Australian Navy is going to design something unique which can be powered by the Astute reactor.

2030 ?! Gosh you are optimistic!.. I am willing to bet not a single submarine is going to be built and commissioned in Australia till 2040, unless they buy subs off the shelf built elsewhere

[Rakesh]

Don't think AUKUS is going anywhere

....

So much for all that hullaballoo

It was a misnomer (media creation) that AUKUS was going to be Virginia Class submarines for the Australian Navy. That was never the plan.

AUKUS is designed to serve two purposes;

1) Have US Navy submarines operate from bases in Australia.

2) Provide the Australian Navy with nuclear powered, but conventionally armed, submarines.

With regards to the second point....those boats were not going to come from American Shipyards ---> i.e. General Dynamics Electric Boat and
Huntington Ingalls Industries' Newport News Shipbuilding. They are the principal contractors for the Virginia Class submarines. Apart from the China factor, the other key factor in AUKUS is the sustainment of the British nuclear submarine yard ---> i.e. BAE Systems Submarines at Barrow-in-Furness, England. When the UK got nuclear submarine technology, they got it from the Americans. Basically they got the crown jewels from the US i.e. the HEU (Highly Enriched Uranium) reactor design.

So the Australian boat will feature a UK developed HEU reactor (which has its origins in the US) and all the related technologies. The US is key to this deal, as the UK cannot export the reactor to any third country without the explicit approval of the United States. Once that approval was acquired, only then can BAE Systems Submarines design & develop nuclear powered submarines for the Australian Navy. The Royal Navy's Astute Class are brand new boats and it will be another 2 - 3 decades, before SSN(R) - Submersible Ship Nuclear (Replacement) - will hit the water.

Currently BAE Systems Submarines is working on the Royal Navy's Vanguard Class SSBN replacement (the Dreadnought Class SSBN) and is expected to arrive in the early 2030s. These are all very expensive programs to manage and operate. If BAE Systems Submarines can make money selling similar boats to friendly foreign countries, it makes ample business sense to do. Thus you have AUKUS. Like I said earlier, the China factor is one issue...but another equally important issue is the sustainment of the British nuclear submarine yard ---> i.e. BAE Systems Submarines at Barrow-in-Furness, England. It is all about JOBS.

Rest assured, the AUKUS program to develop nuclear powered submarines for the Australian Navy will be seriously delayed in time and cost overruns. But that will be mitigated with US (and even UK) Navy submarines operating from Australia.

[srin]

^^^ When you now have a captive and rich customer like Australia (which has also burned its fingers with its Collins class), why would anyone provide them an existing design ? It is better for the MIC of US & UK to milk it for all its worth - offer a concept design, fully paid for by the Aussies and then manufacture it for a few double digit billion $$. That's what the French tried to do with Shortfin Barracuda offer, and that's what the Americans are trying to do.

[hnair]

Rakesh, the next tech marvel by Al-Bunion Navy is the Dreadnought class, which will hopefully not get stuck in sand or throw all modesty away by kissing some Frenchie boat like the 2009 “consummation in high seas”.

But the AUKUS has got nothing to do with subs from the US POV. It might about subs from the Khaidi-land’s POV as sold to their voters. For US, it was a realization that the first line of defense in Asia is no longer secure from cheeni threat. Guam is at risk and Japan might go rogue at any point. So they just needed a larger breathing space to “evacuate” to in a future war.

H&D won’t allow all the Anglo-Saxon sides to admit, but they are copying the cowardly paki’s playbook of “strategic depth”, instead of standing and fighting with back to the wall as they claim in public (the paki side makes brave noises during peace-time but has detailed plans to book themselves into Pashtun’s hospitality, when IA limbers up for business). It has reached that pass probably because no one in Asia is ready to be their sepoy anymore.

(That said, I am a big fan of Royal navy’s fleet planners and their ship designs since Nelson’s HMS Victory. The know their game alright. Not so with Aus)

[ldev]

Like I said earlier, the China factor is one issue...but another equally important issue is the sustainment of the British nuclear submarine yard ---> i.e. BAE Systems Submarines at Barrow-in-Furness, England. It is all about JOBS.

It is about sustainment of the skill and technology base in nuclear propulsion, acoustics etc. as well, otherwise it dies. Just as on the aircraft side of the equation, after the 4th gen Eurofighter, the Brits went in as a Tier 1 partner with the US for the 5th gen F-35 but have decided to revert to the Eurofighter model for the 6th generation Tempest, to preserve the technological base.

On the Australia front, it is unlikely that any Australia specific SSN will hit the water before the 2040s. Sensing this opportunity the South Koreans who have become very aggressive of late with arms exports have offered their Dosan Ahn Changho-class conventional submarines with SLBM launch capability and AIP propulsion as an interim solution after the retirement of the Collins class of Australian submarines. Supposedly the South Koreans claim that they can supply 7 submarines in 7 years and it's operational radius, map given below, will be adequate for Australia's interim requirements. Also that the AIP propulsion enables it to stay submerged for 20 days at a time!!

[Rakesh]

Like I said earlier, the China factor is one issue...but another equally important issue is the sustainment of the British nuclear submarine yard ---> i.e. BAE Systems Submarines at Barrow-in-Furness, England. It is all about JOBS.

It is about sustainment of the skill and technology base in nuclear propulsion, acoustics etc. as well, otherwise it dies. Just as on the aircraft side of the equation, after the 4th gen Eurofighter, the Brits went in as a Tier 1 partner with the US for the 5th gen F-35 but have decided to revert to the Eurofighter model for the 6th generation Tempest, to preserve the technological base.

On the Australia front, it is unlikely that any Australia specific SSN will hit the water before the 2040s. Sensing this opportunity the South Koreans who have become very aggressive of late with arms exports have offered their Dosan Ahn Changho-class conventional submarines with SLBM launch capability and AIP propulsion as an interim solution after the retirement of the Collins class of Australian submarines. Supposedly the South Koreans claim that they can supply 7 submarines in 7 years and it's operational radius, map given below, will be adequate for Australia's interim requirements. Also that the AIP propulsion enables it to stay submerged for 20 days at a time!!

A 3,000 ton variant of the Dosan Ahn Changho Class submarine is on offer to the Indian Navy under Project 75I. Only DSME of South Korean and Navantia of Spain are left in the competition. The South Koreans are favoured to win the contest.

[KSingh]

He is batting for America. Always has and always will.

https://carnegieendowment.org/2022/07/1 ... -pub-87400

"The bottom line, therefore, is that within the Southern Asian triangle, China remains the dominant nuclear power: this is not surprising, given its ambitions to challenge the United States as the global hegemon. But the pursuit of this aim has widened its nuclear superiority over India in consequential ways, even if New Delhi has not yet felt compelled to mitigate this challenge, again for sensible reasons of its own. On many counts, Pakistan remains the second-most-capable nuclear power in Southern Asia, whether measured by the number or the diversity of its nuclear weapons. Yet this advantage is less politically significant than it seems because India, its principal antagonist, is unlikely to prosecute any military operations that make Islamabad’s nuclear reserves relevant for purposes of defense. This fact, however, is itself an overdetermined tribute to the success of Pakistani deterrence. The plodding expansion of India’s nuclear capabilities then suit New Delhi’s status quo disposition just fine, and its third-place status in the regional nuclear sweepstakes does not seem to alarm its decisionmakers unduly because of their conviction that India’s modest nuclear reserves today suffice to protect their interests in all plausible threat scenarios involving China and Pakistan."

Is the "west" encouraging Indian nuclear capabilities ?

Regardless of the number surely having a viable at-sea deterrent (SSBNs armed with SBLM) makes india a clear second and at a level Pakistan cannot even hope to ascend to? SSBNs are by far the most effective nuclear deterrent in existence and almost all P5 nations depend on them as the main element of their nuclear deterrent


I notice Tellis almost ignores the SSBN or SBLM projects of India. He himself noted that the U.K. maintains a tiny stool pile as compared to Russia but its strategy is centred around SSBNs

[KSingh]

Kit, also remember this ---> that 65,000 ton CATOBAR is not going anywhere with the political masters in New Delhi. The Indian Navy knows it, but more importantly the US Govt knows it. So shift focus from the JWGACTC (Joint Working Group on Aircraft Carrier Cooperation) to something that the Govt of India is more keen on funding ---> nuclear powered submarines.

Mark this post kit. In the near future, you will hear a new joint working group being set up. Something like JWGNSC (Joint Working Group on Nuclear Submarine Cooperation). Heck, AUKUS could be expanded to include even India at a future date. INAUKUS?

Doing this serves the purpose of shifting India's focus away from Russian (more Akulas) or French (LEU reactor design) nuclear powered submarines to American ones.

That is what Ashley Tellis' article is all about. Create that foundation (in people's minds) for the next technology platform to dangle India with.

Not a chance in hell india gets US nuclear tech for military purposes, there are SO many rules and binding legislation inside the US to prevent a nation like india from getting that it would take 20 years just of talking to maybe get a concession. Apparently the rumours going around is for an AUKUS type grouping but the 3 parities being india, US and France wherein the US will ‘facilitate’ French N-corporation with India

The way things have been shaping up in recent years it definitely seems like india and France are the strategic partnership to watch. The US simply can’t work with a nation like India that won’t join NATO and who votes against them in the UN, IMF, WTO etc and especially isn’t part of the NPT

[Pratyush]

The question is why do India and France require US to baby sit us.

The second question i am asking is under the exception created by the Indian US nuclear deal. Can India source nuclear fuel for submarine and aircraft carrier propulsion. Under NSG safeguards from the Russians and the French.

[fanne]

L dev ji wha is the source of that graphics?

[kit]

L dev ji wha is the source of that graphics?

https://breakingdefense.com/2022/07/sou ... llins-gap/

[fanne]

it looks like (just by looking at map and doing some rough calculations) -
1. Fuel cell gives 4 times more endurance compared to just li on battery
2. If the Fuel cell gives 2 weeks endurance (on fuel cell, the sub only almost survives, no speed, etc.), then LION will give 4 days of endurance
3. The normal acid lead battery gives a day worth of charge.

No wonder AIP is a game changer.

[ldev]

L dev ji wha is the source of that graphics?

https://breakingdefense.com/2022/07/sou ... llins-gap/

This is one slide from a presentation done by Daewoo (DSME) to the Australian Navy. It is interesting the huge increase in operational radius they have shown as a result of the combination of AIP operations via Fuel Cells which is still under development and Lithium Ion batteries. AFAIK, the Koreans are planning to have later batches of the KSS-3 submarines for the Republic of Korea Navy with the Fuel Cell/AIP combo. If India can or has negotiated this AIP combo for the Project 75 class, then it will help mitigate any slippage in schedule in the IN SSN program given the huge increase in range and endurance provided to a conventional submarine by this AIP/Fuel cell combo. AFAIK, the Japanese are also exploring the AIP/Fuel Cell combo.

[ldev]

No wonder AIP is a game changer.

Not just any AIP, but fuel cell dependent AIP, that is what makes the difference. AIP technology in the French Agostas provided to Pakistan does not provide that kind of dramatic increase in range.

[fanne]

And in Fuel cell, while there are many types, each with its advantages, apparently on phosphoric acid fuel cell we are one of the best in the world. That has to be first tried on a sub (the Kilo that got retired this month). So we are getting there. A korean like sub is very much in our means.

[kit]

it looks like (just by looking at map and doing some rough calculations) -
1. Fuel cell gives 4 times more endurance compared to just li on battery
2. If the Fuel cell gives 2 weeks endurance (on fuel cell, the sub only almost survives, no speed, etc.), then LION will give 4 days of endurance
3. The normal acid lead battery gives a day worth of charge.

No wonder AIP is a game changer.

did i get it wrong .. the larger radius is for fuel cell+ li battery., smaller one just for Li battery., and of course all this depends on your sub use as well., if mostly littoral waters Li does the job well ( by the way i dont think all Li battery tech are the same., power densities and management etc., Japanese tech might be a generation ahead of the Korean. Wonder which fuel cell adapts to Li battery tech better .. anything in open source ? Keep in mind India also is working on Li battery tech for its subs.

[Aditya_V]

Best is Fuel cell with Lion batteries.

[Rakesh]

https://twitter.com/TheLegateIN/status/ ... kA-aAdN1Vg ---> SAIL's Bhilai Steel plant developing special grade steel for India's indigenous nuclear powered attack submarines (SSNs). The first three SSNs will have a 95% indigenous content.

[kit]

https://twitter.com/TheLegateIN/status/ ... kA-aAdN1Vg ---> SAIL's Bhilai Steel plant developing special grade steel for India's indigenous nuclear powered attack submarines (SSNs). The first three SSNs will have a 95% indigenous content.

Nothing in open source as to what grade steel , maybe different from DMR 249 used for vikrant. , can give a good idea of the diving depth , magnetic signatures and acoustics

[Pratyush]

Were we not making HY 80 grade steel in India?

[Rakesh]

https://twitter.com/TheLegateIN/status/ ... kA-aAdN1Vg ---> SAIL's Bhilai Steel plant developing special grade steel for India's indigenous nuclear powered attack submarines (SSNs). The first three SSNs will have a 95% indigenous content.

Nothing in open source as to what grade steel , maybe different from DMR 249 used for vikrant. , can give a good idea of the diving depth , magnetic signatures and acoustics

It is precisely for that reason, that nothing will be revealed.

[Rakesh]

https://twitter.com/SandeepUnnithan/sta ... pxiyMr05Vg ---> The Royal Navy to examine the balance between investment in submarines and warships | Navy Lookout. Points to ponder, when the ⁦@indiannavy⁩ sub fleet is at a 30-yr low and our SSN count is zero.

The Royal Navy to examine the balance between investment in submarines and warships
https://www.navylookout.com/the-royal-n ... -warships/
22 Sept 2022

[Rakesh]

Whither India's Submarines
https://www.delhipolicygroup.org/public ... rines.html
27 May 2021

By Commodore Lalit Kapur (Retd.)

[Rakesh]

Title + article will hurt the sensitivities and feelings of some on BRF

Why India will never turn its back on Russia
https://www.news9live.com/opinion-blogs ... sia-202268
15 Oct 2022

By Sandeep Unnithan

[KSingh]

Title + article will hurt the sensitivities and feelings of some on BRF

Why India will never turn its back on Russia
https://www.news9live.com/opinion-blogs ... sia-202268
15 Oct 2022

By Sandeep Unnithan

The year is 2022, it’s not sensible to be bogged down by romanticised accounts of history and I don’t see this GoI as being one for that, they are particularly vocal about realpolitik. So where it suits india Russia will continue to be engaged but the costs are rapidly outweighing the pros.

Besides Russia/USSR is not the only game in town any longer the French would love to take their place and india is far more capable to stand on its own feet too

[vinod]

Title + article will hurt the sensitivities and feelings of some on BRF

Why India will never turn its back on Russia
https://www.news9live.com/opinion-blogs ... sia-202268
15 Oct 2022

By Sandeep Unnithan

The year is 2022, it’s not sensible to be bogged down by romanticised accounts of history and I don’t see this GoI as being one for that, they are particularly vocal about realpolitik. So where it suits india Russia will continue to be engaged but the costs are rapidly outweighing the pros.

Besides Russia/USSR is not the only game in town any longer the French would love to take their place and india is far more capable to stand on its own feet too

That may be so, it is still a good strategic decisions for India to ensure Russia survives as a stable power. Russia is now an eternal thorn for the rest and keeps them focused there. That is good for the rest of the world.

[yensoy]

A weak Russia will mean the Chinese will overrun Siberia and with it have full access to all its endless resources. Russia continues to account for an extremely large landmass and that has its own value for us (e.g. overflights). There is no reason to throw Russia under the bus at this juncture. This is a white man's war much like WW1, WW2 and the cold war - let them fight it out.

[titash]

Title + article will hurt the sensitivities and feelings of some on BRF

Why India will never turn its back on Russia
https://www.news9live.com/opinion-blogs ... sia-202268
15 Oct 2022

By Sandeep Unnithan

The year is 2022, it’s not sensible to be bogged down by romanticised accounts of history and I don’t see this GoI as being one for that, they are particularly vocal about realpolitik. So where it suits india Russia will continue to be engaged but the costs are rapidly outweighing the pros.

Besides Russia/USSR is not the only game in town any longer the French would love to take their place and india is far more capable to stand on its own feet too

On the contrary, the India-US relationship is at best a one-night stand. It will run its course in less than a decade.

The US does not tolerate peers - whether its the Soviets during the cold war or China now. Guess who's next? Subnational subversion and balkanization are always on the menu

FYI - the Russians don't fund NYT, WaPo, BBC, The Wire, Scroll, The Quint, Al Jazeera, Freedom House, USCIRF, Amnesty, The Church of South India, etc. Guess who does?

The India-Russia relationship on the other hand has no inherent conflicts - no territorial disputes, no Ghazwa-e-Hind / Jihadi mindset on the part of either party, a natural resource powerhouse + low population on one hand & a population powerhouse + natural resource consumer on the other hand

In the long run, putting on a realpolitik lens...Islamist & Western subversion(s) are the key threats for India. India will eventually reach an accommodation with China in approx. 10 years once hard power parity is attained. It is inevitable that the India + Russia + China axis will form a strong block

[ks_sachin]

^^^With India first among equals...

[bala]

It is inevitable that the India + Russia + China axis will form a strong block

This is the nightmare scenario for the Anglo-Saxon breed of UK/US/Australia. They have tried their level best to instigate faultlines amongst India + Russia + China. China has the belief that they are equals if not better than the US. Ancient Rus was the land of Vedas (Sapthamahanagaram) and China's cultural backbone is Buddhism from India. Yes India could be the first among equals.

Coming back to Arihant, Russia is very strong on submarine and nuclear power. India is following the lead by Russia. When you get into partnerships, the help is further multiplied manifold. However, India needs to consolidate things and break free on innovation, there is so much talent available in India. We are very timid in utilization of our resources including manpower, dreaming bigger and greater things, breaking away from the mold set by the Industrial Revolution leaders is the new direction.

[nachiket]

A weak Russia will mean the Chinese will overrun Siberia and with it have full access to all its endless resources.

Let's not blow things out of proportion. A chinese attempt to take sovereign Russian land by force would trigger a nuclear response which the Chinese cannot survive. They can however strike very lucrative deals with the Russians for buying the said resources. Much easier and cheaper to do and with no threat of nuclear apocalypse.

[yensoy]

Absolutely, the takeover may not be by military means but a defacto takeover with treaties and agreements permitting (nearly) unrestricted use of resources and unrestricted movement of people. That is by itself enough. Just like the various Chinese takeovers in our area (Gwadar, Hambanthota) etc.