INS Arihant (ATV) News and Discussion -2

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Jul 2009 19:46

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

I see not reason why Russia will object to Brahmos on Scorpene , its a joint development and not a russia only missile , if we can export to other countries why cant we have it on our own submarines ?

Trust me a customised Amur with all the ding dong that IN needs will be as expensive if not more than what a Scorpene cost.

I am not questioning the effectiveness of Amur as a platform , what I am questioning is the additional logistics burned to maintain a Western Type and Russian Type , its simply makes no sense to operate two type of conventional submarine with perhaps little to no tactical advantage.

Submarine technology is quite mature , so you buy from East or West its the same , there is no great divide.

We can involve Rubin as consultant when designing our own sub.

We should stream line on the types we operate not just subs but ships too to reduce the operating and maintenance cost.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 Jul 2009 19:54

KrishG wrote:there has been speculation that L&T could build the Amur subs if it is chosen.

Certainly, the Chennai facility that L&T is building will be capabale of building submarines, as L&T's annual report says.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 29 Jul 2009 20:03

Yet, while seeking to develop an SLBM-armed nuclear sub, India still does not have an ICBM project, even on the drawing board. India wants to go down in world history as the first nation to deploy an SSBN without having developed an ICBM. 'Incredible India' indeed. ………………

BC lost credibility during the New Clear Deal tamasha, purveying easily-disproved bogeymen, rather clearly driven by his party loyalties.

The present article is along the same vein - underlying his rant is the claim that India won't be able to develop ICBMs, since India is not going in for Megaton-level nuclear tests. So it's all still political rants against the New Clear Deal.

The fact is that the advent of Arihant and the impending arrival of the Akula class puncture the balloon about land-based ICBM's indispensability. It would have been plain stupid to spend the money and credibility on MT level tests, rather than build the quiet, survivable, second-strike capability, that can put SLCMs on nearly any target that India would conceivably want to hit. And instead of a completely useless ICBM, India now has a VERY useful nuclear submarine that can do many other things. *** landing those commandos in Balochistan, for example..****

Of course, arun can jump on my argument with his point that he (and BC) do not believe that India has "weaponized TN" capability (again, because India has refused to emulate Iran and North Korea ).

As I pointed out during the NewClearDeal tamasha, the ICBM is the modern equivalent of the Armored Battleship "Man Of War". Huge. Immensely Destructive. Indestructible. Like the Belgrano, the Prince of Wales, the Repulse, and the Bismarck. Guaranteed to be a total liability in any war because its location is known, its trajectory is predictable, and it can be knocked out at several stages.

OTOH, the SLCM or the Agni can morph in due course into other things that are far more difficult to counter.
I am glad the "opposition" did not win this election, if Indian security was going to be be in the hands of BC if they did.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 29 Jul 2009 20:11

More to the point, can Pakistan afford such a competition? Nuclear-powered submarines are expensive to purchase — though that is beside the point since none of the world’s producers currently seem inclined to sell them to us — while acquiring an indigenous production capability is staggeringly, break-the-bank expensive. The real danger India’s nuclear submarines pose to Pakistan, then, could well be their capacity to lure us into an arms race we simply cannot afford. Launching the INS Arihant on Kargil Vijay Diwas, the July 26 anniversary celebrating India’s retaking of military posts in Kargil in 1999, was clearly aimed at sending Pakistan a message. But we must not react to provocations, only genuine threats. And it’s not clear yet if the INS Arihant and its siblings will in fact pose a dangerous new threat.

Dawn Editorial
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... ines-hs-03

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Jul 2009 20:39

N3, I too firmly believe the future of deterrence for a nation like ours with a limited weaponisble uranium
stockpile (compared to khanate and czarland) lies in small.efficient.chankian platforms with max 6-12 tubes (vs 24), sub caliber tubes (for nirbhay SLCM/shourya...something the US only proposed for Ohio when it was realized oops 18 of them were way too much for global deterrence).....stealthy missiles that have massive range , sip fuel and descend to treetop level over land.

we are starting in the game with a platform kitted up for 12 SLCMs. the 'latest' Shang SSN around 25 yrs after the 1st Han does not have VL tubes.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 29 Jul 2009 20:43

SIngha , thanks but I got the answer so deleted the message.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Jul 2009 20:43

Shankarowsky seems to have hit "Denil mode"

while lesser mortals argue far below about whether reactor 80MW or 80.24MW, S1 flies high, far and fast
to deliver devastating blows with a 190MW beast.

I like it.

between S1, our sundry ddm, ;sources' .... hostile parties must be scratching their
heads whether its anything between a yankee to a borei.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 29 Jul 2009 21:00

Is it possible to outfit more Brahmos-1 and Brahmos-2 missiles instead of 12 K-15 number ?

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

narayanan wrote:OTOH, the SLCM or the Agni can morph in due course into other things that are far more difficult to counter.
I am glad the "opposition" did not win this election, if Indian security was going to be be in the hands of BC if they did.

Call it by any name, but we need to have capability to hit deep into china from IOR, for this we must have platforms with
1) needed range
2) sufficient destructive power
3) pronto

This is the message that Arun_S and BC are giving out time and again.

Also their argument is pretty simple, the lighter the warhead (for any given yield TNs are lighter) the more the range for any fuel sipping missile.

While it would be foolish to claim that the political views do not shape opposition, what they are saying would be a valid view irrespective of the posture.

And I dont see him being anti-sub solutions anyway.

caesar · Post by **caesar** » 29 Jul 2009 21:22

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

No information is currently available on the weaponry for the Indian nuclear-powered submarines. In the meantime, India's friends from Russia plan to armour their Severodvinsk-class with SS-N-15/16 missiles.
http://www.bellona.no/bellona.org/engli ... ssels/9518

Schematic diagram of Severodvinsk-class submarine
The hull and the missile tubes look pretty similar to the diagrams of INS ARIHANT as posted in the forums.

Picture

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 29 Jul 2009 21:23

Cross post from missile thread.

Arun_S wrote:
arun wrote: Bharat Karnad is discontented with the state of India’s missile armaments :
Oh yaaaa ....

He knows more about Indian missiles and strategic weapons than anyone this board including me. I say that with all seriousness.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 29 Jul 2009 21:52

No argument with the fact that for a given yield, the TN is probably lighter. But for most targets that I can imagine the IN needing to hit, a TN is waaaay too much of an escalation for it to be contemplated, so TN-equipped SLCMs are also the equivalent of the instruments that were called "Raman", "Sita" etc. that used to sit in corners of IIT research labs, totally unusable.

The Arihant launch is a very exciting development. As Singha pointed out, big boomers with many VL tubes, are mostly taking up dock space until they can be refitted with more useful things. One excellent use of large VL tubes is to launch capsules containing UAVs or even 2-person helicopters. There was a design contest for the latter not too long ago (maybe this year, I am suffering from Time Compression because so many things had to get done in the past year). A smaller sub is much more suited for the types of missions and operations that call for such.

Sankuji, far b it from me to re-start the nuke deal jollies - RayCji would ban me in a jiffy

esp. since I have sinned by dissing Dr. BC's article as politically motivated (and I stand by that..). The theme that in 2015 India should go down exactly the same path as the Cold War powers went in 1950, or that every Big Power should have Big Mijjiles does not impress me, sorry. The ICBM is a dinosaur. A certain political party's love for this Big Mijjile bears a lot of similarity to what I said (and was quoted by B. Raman): scares all the wrong people, and does nothing to impress those it seeks to impress.

Last year (can't be in 2009 because I have not read any novel since Jan 1 until last week) I read this trash book about WWIII - triggered by Rizald invading the whole duniya, having become the Dominant Superpower. Very interesting assumptions:
1. Rizald has huuuuuuge reserve of $$$$ and all other currencies
2. Rizald turned factories to mass-produce really top-tech military systems.
3. Conquered S. Korea and started mass production of aircraft carriers and other super-weapon ships.
4. Came zooming over the Himalayas. Indian PM hesitated way too long and refused out of Principle to use nukes. All Indian nukes were destroyed in their silos. Indian PM surrendered at Mumbai after the last evacuation ship left - and was promptly executed by the Rizald.
The kill ratio against Indians was said to be some 30:1.

The tale just rang way too true, with all due apologies to all those who believe India will use nukes against China under any circumstances - or will have the opportunity to do so. Mass production of conventional, precision missiles, aircraft and naval craft is the only way, according to me.

The one thing that the author missed was the role of Indian nuclear submarines. At least the INC President could have escaped in one. But seriously, Indian subs with SLCMS could ruin any such plans of the Chinese by precision-targeting the production facilities, long before the war escalates to contemplate nukes, T or S.

OK, outta here b4 ramana locks this thread bemoaning the arrival of the thread-ruiners.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 29 Jul 2009 22:00

Arun_S wrote:
arun wrote: Bharat Karnad is discontented with the state of India’s missile armaments :
Oh yaaaa ....

He knows more about Indian missiles and strategic weapons than anyone this board including me. I say that with all seriousness.

Greetings! I been brought to notice by the very same board memebrs that this board is visited by RC & others. Nothing there to talk much about BK but it is not prudence to lump every board member in one lot. And is it not Bk the one who advised to go for megaton yield.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 29 Jul 2009 22:15

Gagan wrote:That is indeed the Amur 950 with 10 VLS Brahmos. But the drawings of Sandeep Unnithan resembles this sub except that there is the sail mounted divine pane.

The Arihant has evolved from a borei lookalike to an amur lookalike.

Hi, the aspect ratio suggestive from media is around 10:1. From naked eye, your drawing looks to have aspect ratio of around 8:1. You may like to check. Further, gradient as seen from BBC clipping is continous.

gogna · Post by **gogna** » 29 Jul 2009 22:31

can someone please post the bbc link of launch video.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 29 Jul 2009 22:33

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

Ok let it be..What about the reliability of reactor ? How mcuh you give it in the scale of 10? Is it not Akula-2 employs 2 of it. Indian Navy is very concerned about reliability. Even if we accept it as you claimed, there is a possiblity that our people could have downgraded/modified it for the sake of reliability.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 29 Jul 2009 22:39

lies in small.efficient.chankian platforms with max 6-12 tubes (vs 24), sub caliber tubes (for nirbhay SLCM/shourya...something the US only proposed for Ohio when it was realized oops 18 of them were way too much for global deterrence).....

I guess, Virginia is going in that route.

gogna · Post by **gogna** » 29 Jul 2009 22:42

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 29 Jul 2009 23:00

Kanson wrote:
Arun_S wrote:He knows more about Indian missiles and strategic weapons than anyone this board including me. I say that with all seriousness.
Greetings! I been brought to notice by the very same board memebrs that this board is visited by RC & others. Nothing there to talk much about BK but it is not prudence to lump every board member in one lot. And is it not Bk the one who advised to go for megaton yield.

Does R.Chidambrum on this board knows missiles and strategic deterrence with the same mastery, as does his Chidambrum vintage fizzle fusion bum that scales upto 200 kT and fails to plan for a backup high yield FBF when India gets that rare shot to go for the big one? Speaks a lot about his strategic thinking IMVHO.

BTW "anyone on this board" means those who participates and we can hear their postings on this board v.s non-discript stealth browsers like Condi Rice who is also known to brows this forum before she took a position in Bush administration.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 29 Jul 2009 23:18

narayanan wrote:
OK, outta here b4 ramana locks this thread bemoaning the arrival of the thread-ruiners.

Good idea, but I will still cross swords with you on this, let me look for the right thread, on Nuke thread shall we? Choose your weapons and your seconds.

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

kit wrote:Arihant is supposedly underpowered but faster than 'many' american nuclear submarines ;

It still uses VHF communications which is decades old tech.

Are these statements true and to what extent ?

Power to be use VLF using airborn antenna that is many miles long carried on transport plane (in a pod); teh aircraft moves in tight circle to allow the antenna to drop on vertical axis and do the VLF transmission. I have seen those aircrafts in Tel-Aviv as well in USA.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 29 Jul 2009 23:47

Arun_S wrote:
Arun_S wrote:He knows more about Indian missiles and strategic weapons than anyone this board including me. I say that with all seriousness.
Does R.Chidambrum on this board knows missiles and strategic deterrence with the same mastery, as does his Chidambrum vintage fizzle fusion bum that scales upto 200 kT and fails to plan for a backup high yield FBF when India gets that rare shot to go for the big one? Speaks a lot about his strategic thinking IMVHO.

You mean plan to failure ?

You seem confused, Startegic thinking, Strategic deterrence or Strategic weapon ?; which one you want to go after ? There is a reason why it is called Chidambaram Rakasya; it is not for every joe out there.

BTW "anyone on this board" means those who participates and we can hear their postings on this board v.s non-discript stealth browsers like Condi Rice who is also known to brows this forum before she took a position in Bush administration.

Sir, what is the point ? Do you know every member who participate out here personally ? Or you know the one hiding behind their nickname/registered name ?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 30 Jul 2009 00:45

We already know the stated positions of all those arguing here. Please do not rehash the arguements and add to thread clutter. And N^3 thanks for your synopsis of the pot boiler. Again all those can go into the newbie thread.

Meanwhile Nightwatch 27 july 2009

India: On Sunday, Prime Minister Singh’s wife christened and launched India’s first indigenously-built nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine 'INS Arihant' for sea trials. Arihant is Sanskrit for “Destroyer of Enemies.” The launch on 26 July coincided with the 10th anniversary celebrations of India's victory over Pakistan at Kargil.

The Indian dignitaries acknowledged Russia's significant contribution to the program. All who spoke at the launch ceremony thanked the Russians present, who included the entire Russian design team and the Russian Ambassador to India, V I Trubnikov.

INS Arihant will undergo two years of sea trials before being cleared for operational duty. The boat will be fitted with indigenous K-15 ballistic missiles that can be launched from under water. The K-15 missiles, which are already under production, can carry both conventional and nuclear warheads. They have a range of 700 km, about ten percent of the range of Chinese submarine launched ballistic missiles. India has a 3,500 km submarine launched ballistic missile under development.

The government has approved funding for two more Arihant-class SSBNs, one of which is already under construction. Later this year India also will take delivery of a 12,000-ton Akula-II class nuclear-powered attack submarine on a 10-year lease from Russia.

The Times of India assessed that “with INS Arihant, India has taken a big leap forward towards developing the all-important third leg of its nuclear triad -- the ability to fire nukes from the land, air and sea. The first two legs, in the shape of fighters like Mirage-2000s jury-rigged to deliver nuclear warheads and the Agni series of rail and road mobile missiles, are already in place.”

Note: This is an example of a missed strategic opportunity. Few are so clear. The US had a chance to influence, if not assist, Indian naval SSBN development to help India build better submarines and weapons. All that was required was a mature foreign policy and a slightly more enlightened insight into future time. Russia has little interest in the Indian Ocean except to sell weapons to riparian states that bother the US.

The Indian Navy would be a natural maritime partner of the US in this century, in the NightWatch view, but for short sighted policies. Any US policy to influence or shape China’s rise as a great power later this century must include India. The US Navy seems to understand this, to its credit. Others are stuck in the 1960’s South Asia balance of power mindset.

India-Pakistan: Pakistani press reported, “India's new nuclear submarine will destabilize the region and could launch a nuclear arms race, a Pakistani Naval spokesman said today, according to Aaj TV reported. The spokesman also said the Pakistani government will decide whether to build a nuclear submarine in response as the Pakistani Navy is capable of manufacturing one.”

The Paks have it right: the Indian submarine is a destabilizing development, or more accurately, a restabilizing development. The notion of an India-Pakistan military balance is as outmoded as black-and-white television. In South Asia, there is only a military imbalance that favors India.

{What he is saying is the Arihant restores the imbalance in India's favor as it will have nukes out of reach of TSP's first strike.}

Pakistan’s only option for survival during a military crisis is its nuclear deterrent and Indian restraint. These conditions make every South Asian military confrontation potentially a nuclear war.

The last statement means the US has to rush to secure TSP nukes at first sign of crisis to prevent escalatory ladder.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 30 Jul 2009 02:01

Arihant concept:

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 30 Jul 2009 02:05

ramana wrote:
The Paks have it right: the Indian submarine is a destabilizing development, or more accurately, a restabilizing development. The notion of an India-Pakistan military balance is as outmoded as black-and-white television. In South Asia, there is only a military imbalance that favors India.

{What he is saying is the Arihant restores the imbalance in India's favor as it will have nukes out of reach of TSP's first strike.}

Further, I interpret this to mean that the author recognizes the fact that the only time 'South Asia' has been stable, with no looming threat of war between India and Pakistan, is when India has had an overwhelming military superiority over Pakistan.

Think about the time between the end of 1971 (Pakistan defeated and dismembered) and 1979 (before the US started rearming Pak in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan). That was the most peaceful/ stable decade in the last 60+ years IMHO.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 30 Jul 2009 02:11

ramana wrote: The last statement means the US has to rush to secure TSP nukes at first sign of crisis to prevent escalatory ladder.

And, a much easier and less costly option is to ask India to react with restraint and take the high road, which has worked so often.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 30 Jul 2009 02:12

Now, although India has overwhelming military superiority of the kind that never existed in the past, there is still not peace for India.

That dynamic has been changed artificially because of pakistan using terrorism as a low cost tool, and it having been allowed to acquire nuclear weapons to use as an umbrella to deter punishment from India.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 30 Jul 2009 03:11

narayanan wrote:No argument with the fact that for a given yield, the TN is probably lighter. But for most targets that I can imagine the IN needing to hit, a TN is waaaay too much of an escalation for it to be contemplated, so TN-equipped SLCMs are also the equivalent of the instruments that were called "Raman", "Sita" etc. that used to sit in corners of IIT research labs, totally unusable.

Narayanan-saar: When any nuclear weapons gets used deterrence is already broken and one is past escalatory chain. How does TN result in escalation? And what difference it makes to chicken-fried Chinese comrade whose is fried by high yield Boosted weapon or TN weapon of same yield? OTOH it imposes huge cost to India to build bigger and more submarines and missiles to carry a given nuclear destruction to bear on the challenger if India does not field credible TN warheads.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 30 Jul 2009 05:12

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

...............

member found to be same as somnathmukherjee and permanently banned.
duplicate ID is strictly against forum rules.
if you want you can come back after your 1 month ban period is over with the somnathmukherjee ID.
Rahul.

JaiS · Post by **JaiS** » 30 Jul 2009 05:16

Premvir Das: INS Arihant - A watershed moment

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 30 Jul 2009 07:51

very nice drawing Gagan. you might want to add a bulge along the side below the waterline to indicate
a flank array sonar. even low end SSK also have it these days.

the small step on upper tailfin might mean they will add a small towed sonar pod (as per latest
Ru design) there later. there wont be the massive akula2 stype pod for sure.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 30 Jul 2009 07:58

JaiS wrote:Premvir Das: INS Arihant - A watershed moment

From the above,

So, there is much to be proud of and little to moan about the delay as the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) can be expected to do.

kit · Post by **kit** » 30 Jul 2009 08:28

Arun_S wrote:
narayanan wrote:No argument with the fact that for a given yield, the TN is probably lighter. But for most targets that I can imagine the IN needing to hit, a TN is waaaay too much of an escalation for it to be contemplated, so TN-equipped SLCMs are also the equivalent of the instruments that were called "Raman", "Sita" etc. that used to sit in corners of IIT research labs, totally unusable.
Narayanan-saar: When any nuclear weapons gets used deterrence is already broken and one is past escalatory chain. How does TN result in escalation? And what difference it makes to chicken-fried Chinese comrade whose is fried by high yield Boosted weapon or TN weapon of same yield? OTOH it imposes huge cost to India to build bigger and more submarines and missiles to carry a given nuclear destruction to bear on the challenger if India does not field credible TN warheads.

Impeccable logic.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 30 Jul 2009 12:26

When any nuclear weapons gets used deterrence is already broken and one is past escalatory chain.

Precisely. Thanks, Arun, for beautifully encapsulating what is wrong with that graph showing TN yields.

This is why arming most of the missiles on an Arihant class with TN warheads is a recipe for disaster - it makes them totally useless for the operations which PREVENT things getting out of hand. That is the point of my "trashy novel" story. If there is a massive invasion rather than a terrorist attack, and all coming behind CONVENTIONAL air and artillery bombardment, India will sit and twiddle the GOI's hajaar thumbs with yada yada yada about "NFU" and "Insaniyat" until the invader knocks out the land missile silos - again ONLY USING CONVENTIONAL weapons. And then it is all over. India will not use nukes except after Indian cities have been laid waste using nuclear weapons, because to do otherwise is to invite 100 million deaths anyway. A serious Chinese attack on India will use a MASSIVE number of troops and weapons, quite unlike anything that India has ever had to face, and, I am afraid, quite unlike anything for which India is preparing even in the north.

A nuclear submarine buys long range and operation time for the submarine, so that it can be quietly sitting in the right place to take out a lot of assets of the enemy, and degrade their capabilities, without having to press the nuclear button. IOW, the missiles on Arihant should be ones that can be used, not ones that are just there saying "In case of mass suicide, break glass and hit red button".

The other thing wrong about the TN argument is that SLCMs are intended for precision strikes. So if you want to take out one big building, you can use an SLCM, instead of having to raze the whole town with a TN.

Arihant can end a coup by savages in, say, Fiji by putting an SLCM through the bathroom window of the Presidential Palace. It can end piracy out of Somalia by putting SLCMs through the Pirates' HQ without ever revealing who did it (OK, write "Made in China" on the missiles). And it can actually enable a response to the next "26/11" by reducing the Fauji Foundation's Karachi Waterfront buildings to rubble. If things get really bad, it can reduce the fuel storage at the PRC base at the tip of Myanmar. Or at Gwadar.

So this is a really potent weapon that can truly deter. If Arihant had TN tips on all its missiles, it would be quite useless. Instead of firing missiles, the GOI would fire "missives" explaining Ahimsa and Restraint to the Pakis and the Fijian savages and the Somali Pirates and the Rizalds.

Look at it this way - if the US had TN tips on all its SLCMs, Saddam would still be ruling Eyerak and Mullah Omar wouldn't be hiding at Paki Army HQ.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 30 Jul 2009 12:41

Nice drg. Gagan,Sandeep's sketches indicate that the torpedo tubes are above the bow sonar,as in most Russian subs.The sub will have less tubes than an Akula though.If there are both sizes of tubes as in the Akulas,then the sub will be able to carry the full range of Russian sub-tube launched missiles like Stallion and the Shkval torpedo too.The sail depicted in the sketches seem to be the standard Russian sail design for their boomers,with less sloping features than those on the attack subs,indicating that their speed is probably less,quieting being more important,especially for SSBNs.

The Amur 950 is featured here.It does not have a VLS missile section for Brahmos,which is a modified larger version meant for India.There are several versions upto 1850t.Here is a Janes' note on the design,interesting to note that the "950" can fire a salvo of 10 Klub missiles within one minute.

Development
The Central Design Bureau Marine Engineering (Rubin) developed the Amur class for export as a gradual replacement for the Kilo class. There are six designs based on different surface displacements (550, 750, 950, 1450, 1650 and 1850). Of these, the Amur (Project 1650) probably has the most export potential and it was possibly in anticipation of an order from India and China that work began on such a submarine in 1997. Work was temporarily suspended in 1998, and the hull may have been subsumed in the Lada (Project 677) class construction programme, which was the version of the design developed for use by the Russian Federation Navy following initiation of the project in 1989. Construction started on the first of the Lada class in St Petersburg in 1997 and the second and third of class are also under construction.Rubin has developed the Amur 950 design with a 10-tube multipurpose VLS for any type of Novator Klub SS-N-27 'Sizzler' cruise missile. The submarine will be capable of firing a 10 missile salvo with intervals of five to six seconds between launches.

Amur 950.
http://army.russiansabroad.com/detail.a ... il=amur950

PS:Russia will not integrate the Brahmos with the Scorpene for two reasons.First,it's far easier done on a Russian sub design,rather than on an existing French design which will require a large amount of redesign and by whom?Russia will not want to give France its sub tech as it is a rival!Secondly,like any country,it wants to sell the capability for its own sub industry,which some say would be a potential of upto 40 subs for export to developing nations.A new design is always preferable.In anticipation of some export orders of the missile,Rubin has proposed a joint new design with Italy,also offered to India.Details here.

It has been suggested that the second main production line could be a version of the Russian Amur-class; six to eight Amur-1650s are on the Indian Navy's list of prospective acquisitions as part of its 30-year submarine procurement plan.[14] In 2005, Italy's Fincantieri entered a joint venture with Russia's Rubin Naval Design Bureau to develop a new diesel-electric submarine, the S1000, using AIP technology. The Russian partner has indicated they would make available certain design aspects of the Amur class.[18] India was the first country to receive a briefing on the new submarine and is reportedly considering an Italian offer to build six boats for $3.5 billion.

http://www.nuclearthreatinitiative.org/ ... index.html

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 30 Jul 2009 12:43

well said N3. if judgement day occurs I agree that Arun sir is right about needing a compact TN stick, but in this "war by 1000 cuts" we are fighting, we need all the useable dal-roti tools we can get.

imagine what a full salvo of 12 SLCMs each with a 300kg warhead could do the
PN naval dockyard and petroleum facilities ?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 30 Jul 2009 12:45

Ummm, no N, massive TNs on Arihant are not for the purpose you outline at all ---

1) They are for an adversary to fear what will an Indian response be if attacked by overwhelming non-conventional force.

2) Which does not mean that it obviates the need for massive conventional superiority.

Meanwhile, since we are talking trash novels, I refer to exhibit one A Humphery Hawsely's Dragonfire, where India was winning a conventional defensive war in the Himalaya's (most people agree that despite everything Chinese will not be able to run over Arunachal this time) and the resulting frustation ends up in Nuclear strike on India, since they know that Indians wont/cant respond with equal ferocity.

The Chinese need to be very sure, that if a single city in India is touched, they will see retribution which is unmatched.

Arihant is for revenge, pure and simple and too put the fear of revenge in minds of enemies.

If you think we cant handle revenge any which way, the game is lost anyway, but why are we discussing that on this thread.

aliasgar · Post by **aliasgar** » 30 Jul 2009 12:50

Did anyone see this news article:
http://www.merinews.com/article/reactor ... 7333.shtml

The author sounds like one of those people who can find no joy in whatever the country does to progress.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 30 Jul 2009 13:09

imagine what a full salvo of 12 SLCMs each with a 300kg warhead could do the
PN naval dockyard and petroleum facilities ?

U mean, all fired by a "suspected US drone", of course!

Sanku:

Arihant is for revenge

Nope. The Akula Class is for revenge. The other side of the argument, OT for this thread, is that I don't agree that India does not have weaponized TNs, enough for SLCM applications to take out an air base or a buried weapons facility. IOW, I believe that the 5/1998 tests were adequate for that, all the noise to the contrary notwithstanding. But there is no need to advertise or make business cases for Arihant-class subs using that argument.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 30 Jul 2009 13:15

narayanan wrote:
imagine what a full salvo of 12 SLCMs each with a 300kg warhead could do the
PN naval dockyard and petroleum facilities ?
U mean, all fired by a "suspected US drone", of course!

We dont need Arihant for that though right. It can be easily done by Scorpene's or Upgraded Kilo's (Klubs)