INS Arihant (ATV) News and Discussion -2

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Aug 2009 09:10

Gurudev the image you have posted is not of the Borei class ; the Borei class has diving planes on the hull and not on the sail (your pic has them on the sail) also the coning tower's leading surface is at a negative angle of inclination wrt horizontal.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 09:14

This is how a real borei looks like , all the pictures posted there are just fan boy models or yard construction pictures.

Borei

Borei Closeup

Borei Closeup Sail/VLS

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

are missile tubes made to use the outer hull diameter or inner hull?

Austin in your third pic below the missile hump one can make out a
shrouded row of ballast tank discharge outlet kind of things. looks far
neater and stealthier than the "row on windows" on the Jin class.

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

WW2 subs used to have such permanent window things.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 09:28

NRao wrote:Austinji,

My feel is that both nations had the same problem to solve: how do we put a tallish missile in a sub with limited diameter - without making the entire sub's diameter greater to accommodate the larger missile?

NRaoji

We never had a nuclear submarine , so both nation same problem is not a problem here.

And the problem of Hump was solved by Soviet with Typhoon , that was always suppose to be the frontline SSBN with Delta 4 being a less expensive backup option.

This evolutionary design could have come from anyone - I am in fact suggesting that it came from a group that was not brainwashed by 100 years of sub design.

Emm in Russia it is the GD of the submarine which does the design work along with the team , infact your suggestion is trying to belittle the work of such people , look at the Borei picture and you will realise how much of effort Rubin has put in there which looks like a very unique SSBN design after USN George Washington Class

In fact, I am more curious to see the design of the next two Arihant class subs - rumored to be larger than this one. I would not at all be surprised to see the first two to be closer to the Borei and perhaps if the next two are even larger, they just may be fairly close to it. BUT, I am fairly confident that the Indian subs would be Indian designs. The similarities would be just coincidental. Just a gut feel.

The next two will be the same as first , its only after 4th or 5th class that a large design will be adopted , the first design has to be validated in sea trials which has yet to start , some way to go.

The similarities is due to Rubin consulting work , it is very normal that these consultant have a good infulence over the design of Arihant , who them self have learnt from design experience of Delta , Typhoon and Borei.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 03 Aug 2009 09:33

This is a pumpjet, (although this is on the severodvinsk class sub).

The image I posted is the Borei with the pumpjet;

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 03 Aug 2009 09:35

For example:

= 0.914 x (98.11/10.77)
= 8.31 mts

Account for distortion due to angular view, approximate dia of inner hull would be = 9 Mts.

I am no expert... so someoneelse can do justice..
Dimension of barrel

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 03 Aug 2009 09:38

Both outer and inner hull might be pinched to form double thickness at the missile tube points.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 09:38

Singha wrote:are missile tubes made to use the outer hull diameter or inner hull?

Should be the outer hull

Austin in your third pic below the missile hump one can make out a
shrouded row of ballast tank discharge outlet kind of things. looks far
neater and stealthier than the "row on windows" on the Jin class.

Looks like , though not sure

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 03 Aug 2009 09:40

Talking about the Arihant II class vessels, check this out.

885 Severodvinsk class
Statistics:

K 329 SEVERODVINSK Pending

Granay-I. Also NATO "Severodvinsk class". Construction started on Dec 28, 1993, and the first was launched in 1995. Planned 6+. 12.2008 planned for 2010.
KAZAN' Pending

Granay-II. Also NATO "Severodvinsk class". Construction to be started on Jul 24, 2009

D. (tons): 5,800-7,700 surface
8,200-13,000 submerged
Operating depth: 1,475 feet Maximum Safe Depth
1,804 feet Never-Exceed Depth
2,160 feet Crush depth
Speed (kts): 20 knots surfaced
31-35 knots submerged
Dimensions (m): 111 meters long 12 meters beam 8.4 meters draft
(low magnteic steel)
M./Engine: One KPM type pressurised water reactor generating power capacity from the turbines of 43 000 hp, 200 MWt.
Man./Crew: 50 [24 officers / 26 enlisted]
Armament: 8x3 (total: 24) Oniks/Yakhont SS-NX-26 missiles
8 25.6 inch torpedo tubes
(24 torpedoes, mines or missiles)
RPK-7/SS-N-16 Veter/Stallion ASROC VA-111 Schval rocket torpedo
SAET-60M,Type 65-76,Type 65K torpedoes
Equipment: Irtysh-Amfora suite
MGK-500 Shark Gill LF active/passive
Mouse Roar passive array
Skat 3 towed array
Rim Hat ESM/ECM Snoop Pair Surface Search Radar
Myedvyeditsa-971 Radar Molniya-M
Armament (crossreference):
Torpedoes
SS-N-26 Yakhont/Oniks P-800

J.N. Kormilitsin, SKB-18. These submarines are being built in Severodvinsk. Construction started on December 28, 1993, and the first of this class was launched in 1995.

This new attack submarine design is a further derivative of the Project 971 Akula.
This submarine is even more silent running than those of the Project 971 - Akula class; American experts consider it to be the most advanced nuclear-powered submarine in the world. There are three Severodvinsk class submarines under construction, and four more are planned. The latter four have the classification Severodvinsk-I. It is not known how the two submarine projects differ from one another. Construction of this class of vessels will probably begin in 2002-2004 at the Severodvinsk shipbuilding yard, and they will then enter service from 2006-2008. These submarines will probably be fitted with both strategic and cruise missiles with multiple nuclear warheads.

It features a significant cruise missile capability with eight vertical launch tubes for RKB-500 aft of the sail. The hull is made of low magnetic steel, with a spherical bow sonar.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 09:41

Gagan wrote:This is a pumpjet, (although this is on the severodvinsk class sub).

That is a Kilo convert , Alrosa with pupmjet propulsion , perhaps the only operational conventional submarine with pumpjet , she is operational with Black Sea Fleet

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Aug 2009 09:42

GD most probably the outer hull too.

here Ohio's tubes Vl tubes

Typhoon's tubes Vl tubes

Going by the depth of the hatch it is safe to assume that tube almost extends upto the outer hull for the HATCH to fit snugly with the tube.

Yes that recessed section most probably is to pump out air when the ballast tank doors are opened to let in water.

Djinn class looks like some pre historic dinosaur .

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Aug 2009 09:47

Austin,

OK. U win.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 09:51

Gagan wrote:Talking about the Arihant II class vessels, check this out.

Check what about it and what it has to do with Arihant II ?

Malachite has no experience designing Ballistic Missile Submarine , they do the design work on fast attack submarine , Rubin is responsible for all design work on SSBN(Typhoon,Delta,Borei ) , SSGN (Oscar 2 ) and SSK ( Kilo/Amur )

Now Yasen is a change for Malachite since it includes SSN + SSGN capability built into one ( these will replace the Oscar eventually and not Akula )

Here is the real Yasen submarine Kaban , during the building ceremony recently , this is a modified Yasen , the first is a early 90's design to be commisioned next year.

Kaban

Yasen Drawing from Shipyard

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 09:59

NRao wrote:Austin,

OK. U win.

Sorry , but this is not about winning or loosing , its about informed discussion , I tried to put up things from my side after some reading done on the subject from authors like Norman Polmar who have visited these design bureau and interviewed these people , if you want to see the good work done by Russia and US on submarine , please read "Cold War Submarines" by Norman Polmar and KJ Moore.

But if some one tries to put up stuff like , Arihant has infulenced Borei then its a tall order claim and trying to belittle others work , Arihant will be unique design for its class.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 03 Aug 2009 10:05

Austin wrote:Check what about it and what it has to do with Arihant II ?

Only that the russians are deploying the Yakhont on the sub. This could also mean that the second line of subs that india builds will be able to fire a Brahmos along with the SLBMs. Don't know if the Arihant itself will be able to do so.

Perhaps Brahmos ltd's wait for a platform to test the sub launched brahmos might end with the Arihant.

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Aug 2009 10:27

^ Brahmos with its current dimensions as well as short range does not do justice to Arihant's capability ; moreover it is big for the torpedo tubes and too small to fit into the VL tubes (unless use a suitable adaptor) of Arihant.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 10:29

Gagan wrote:Only that the russians are deploying the Yakhont on the sub. This could also mean that the second line of subs that india builds will be able to fire a Brahmos along with the SLBMs. Don't know if the Arihant itself will be able to do so.

As of now there is no clear indication if Yakhont or some other missile will be deployed, Yakhont is too short on range , compare that with Ship wreck with a range of ~ 600 km , the Soviet/Russi had specified a minimum range of not less than 500 km to take on CBG .

As per Russia Chief it will have long range LACM with tactical nukes could very well be the pictures KH-555 ok KH-101 in LACM role

The second line of sub , you mean the SSN project , yes could very well be.

Arihant could well fire the Brahmos , although its very short tactical range its a loss for Arihant as a strategic asset.

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 03 Aug 2009 10:35

Looking at the 'half boat' picture at PRP, may we can do some guess work, but to get accurate dimensions, we need to approach CIA.

1. There are no pictures of human beings - deliberate.
2. The picture is shot from an angle.
3. The open cross section is that of the tapering part - so, we need to know the length of taper, which is difficult due to the angle of view.

What is shown is the aft inner hull section.

Assuming that the height of ceiling of the concrete bulding in front is 3 m, giving a correction to the angle of view, it would appear to meet at 1/3 height of the circular cross section. Hence the cut section at tapered section could be 9~10 metres.

Hence the Inner hull section could be 11 metres dia or more.

OOPs power supply is gone. More of it later.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 03 Aug 2009 10:47

why cant subs have missile tubes which are slant or horizontal like torpedoes?

we have seen brahmos and other CM able to control their orientation after release. How difficult will it be to reorient a missile after a horizontal release under water?

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 03 Aug 2009 11:23

can we assume the minimum dia to be power pack ( i.e reactor) Plus 1 meter at the bootom of reactor and plus 1.5 mtrs at the top clearence. This would be the smallest section of the tear or circular section. To this add the hump for the missile height requirements. Is this a fair assumption?

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 03 Aug 2009 11:29

Looking at cross section of a sub given in NDTV pic, could it be 4x2=8 tubes with capacity to store 8x3=25 K-15s. Also the fat missile being fired in very interesting.

Note:- Is that Arihant or some other representative sub?

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 03 Aug 2009 11:44

Looking at the 'half boat' picture at PRP, may we can do some guess work, but to get accurate dimensions, we need to approach CIA.

1. There are no pictures of human beings - deliberate.
2. The picture is shot from an angle.
3. The open cross section is that of the tapering part - so, we need to know the length of taper, which is difficult due to the angle of view.

Geeth Saar,

Do take a gander at the veedeeooo @ ndtv.com - @ 1:09, there is a human being standing near the top of the chamber (near the taper side), on a sort of stairway into the beast. It is also a side on image. My guess is about 4-5 such persons make up the height of the narrowest part of the chamber, i.e. ~ 25 feet, ahem about 8-9 meters would be my guess at the braodest section. If this is the "inner hull", this is a big enough boat

Resident experts could surely do better, esp. if the screenshot can be copied at decent resolution.

CM.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 11:47

Seems like BARC is on a PR overdrive on who made the PWR for Arihant and you know why

Rishi · Post by **Rishi** » 03 Aug 2009 11:53

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_th ... nt_1279286

"This is a full size replica of the nuclear reactor that will power the submarine, except that it doesn't have the outer hull. The research and development of this reactor was very crucial in developing the nuclear power pack for the submarine. This reactor will continue to work to help us generate data, conduct R&D and update the future nuke-powered submarines. This will also become the training centre for those who will work in the submarine," the scientists explained.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 03 Aug 2009 12:05

rakall wrote:
Arun_S wrote:What do you make of 1000MWe and 3,300MWth in the poster shown on the video?

People in the art will be able to read the 1000MWe and 3,300MWth in the video to belong to another power plant design and not the Arihant.

.

The slide shows 1000MWe and 3,300MWth in the video - obviously belonging to the mother power plant design..

And the next slide heading says "Miniaturization of the power plant" - under that it says 100MW(th)...

But through out the narrative PBagla keeps saying 80MW & Hindu report says 80MWe..

keep speculating...

On a side issue what is this 1000MW plant?

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 03 Aug 2009 12:48

>>>Do take a gander at the veedeeooo @ ndtv.com - @ 1:09, there

Unfortunately, I can't play the video.

Is the white cylider in front of the hull shape the reactor ?. if so, is it of 1:: scale?

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 03 Aug 2009 12:53

shankarosky has finished sipping vodka and singing and now taking another look at Arihant

- it has 80ME e reactor ( 190+MW t) same as akula 2
- 130 russian engineers were in BARC/IGCAR/VIZAG for consulting onlee
- 60 % of imported component and still not any thing Russian fully indian submarine
- it is a totally new class influenced by delta virginia sea wolf etc etc and not by akula 2 and Borei

point is when u have 130 engineers for submarine project is is difficult to call it consultancy . Sukhoi project did not have half as many at nasik atany time and still it is russian aircraft even if mkized
PM openly admits to Russian contribution

we called mig 27 bahadur or mig 29 baaz or mirage 2000 vajra - and became happy or sukhoi rambha
For the rst of the world it still remained flanker flogger mirage 2000

get the drift

speed is now approx 40 plus knots same as Akula 2
reactor output same as akula 2
displacement same as akula 2
length same as akula 2
diameter not confirmed but more than 11 meter for sure as from the photo and close to 13 meter same as akula 2
reactor performance same as vm5/ok 650 same as akula 2

The project have been implemented exactly same way as Su 30 project even the degree of indeginisation going up in stages so that by the 4th submarine we may have 90% local content

This is nothing but AKLA 2 MKI if that makes it sound better maybe better than russian akula 2 s also since the Borei upgrade factor like thin fibre optic cable based towed array sonar and possible ducted propeller

dont tell me we paid 700 million dollars for consultancy and not design

No technical consultancy design can be done in a vacuum and you cannot consult on things you dont know and you dont do trail and error with a 200 MW reactor that too inside a operating nuclear complex like kalpakam

the reactor sesign is out and out russian vm5/ok 650 core -let barc come out with the difference in fuel rod arrangement or even the number of fuel rods and thier dimensions if they have really done the design

Let IGCAR say exactly which component they made in the reactor

anyway the total of all these cannot be more than 40%

let indian navy say where they have the hydro dynamic test facility for such a large submarine

let HEC say whcih code they followed in designing the hull and the allowances they made while designing

you will never get this answer because simply it is not there just like we cannot say we designed the flanker and have to send to russia for brahmos upgrade

think -shankarosky (going for another vodka)

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 03 Aug 2009 13:04

what took him so long

.....Indian exercising his democratic right to dissent

Sinking billions into nuclear weapons

manish · Post by **manish** » 03 Aug 2009 13:29

^^^
The amount of 'khujli' it is causing Purefool is surely an auspicious sign

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 13:31

Shankar wrote: - it has 80ME e reactor ( 190+MW t) same as akula 2

The OK-650B has a Thermal Rating of 190 MW and 35 ~ 40 MW(e) , so where does this 80mw(e) comes from ?

80MW(e) is possible if this has twin OK-650 type, like rest of Russian SSBN have.

The reactor for Arihant is based on VM-5 with a slightly higher thermal rating , slightly more than 80MW(t)

the reactor sesign is out and out russian vm5/ok 650 core -let barc come out with the difference in fuel rod arrangement or even the number of fuel rods and thier dimensions if they have really done the design

Yes the design and technology for an "Indian" Light Water PWR came from Russia , These are the same bunch of people who can look straight into your eyes and say the TN bum was success.

AK and company who are now on a PR spree are political scientist. They will say what the politician want to hear and what the nation wants to see.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Aug 2009 13:33

I have been wanting to ask this - can someone explain the diff between MW, MWe and MWt ?

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 03 Aug 2009 13:40

Boss I need my Aristo Electra slide rule steam tables or Faber Castle Slide rule.

MWe is Megawatts Electrical
MWt Megawatts thermal

MW is MEgawatt mechanical units of power

When conversion is done energy losees need to be accounted for

If the prime mover is a Disel engine connected to a generator

Efficency = MWe/MW which will be less than 100%

All the thermal energy can not be converted because of heat exchanger and other losses.

narayana · Post by **narayana** » 03 Aug 2009 13:47

Russians helped with INS Arihant's heart: Kakodkar

I would also like to thank our Russian colleagues they have played a very important role as consultants, they have a lot of experience in this so their consultancy has been of great help so that so that I think we should acknowledge.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 Aug 2009 14:30

The Arihant is about half the size of an Akula-2.It cannot/does not as an SSBN need the size of the Akula's reactor and from most of quoted evidence and comparison of Russian nculear N-subs and their powerplants is what has been officially stated.The stated speed though might be tongue-in-cheek,for Arihant is a new class,with we presume,better hydrodynamic design,screw,etc.I would suggest that the top speed of the sub is a very respectable 30kts+,but for its role,the quieting is of far greater importance and we should be debating (exceptionally difficult to obtain,being the most highly classified detail of the sub),its acoustic signature in comparison with other contemporary subs.

Yes,3 sets of crews have gone to Russia to train to operate Akula-2s and other aspects of N-sub tech and wil form the core of our N-sub crews and what we can now see emerging,two classes of N-subs for the IN,SSBN (Arihant) and SSGN (Akula-2+s).

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 14:41

Philip , Yes now that is something I can agree with you

Silencing is the key factor for a boomer or mini boomer , speed is good to have while in transition but will not win the day for her or let her live the next day in a 3 dimensional ASW environment

The crucial combination of Silence , Sensors and Weapons will make this boat lethal.

AK statement of this sub being comparable to submarine of similar class could mean any thing , but if we can achieve silencing of 3rd Gen submarine a-la LA and Akula-1 that would be a great and significant achievement.

A lot will be known when the submarine gets tested , they may have some preliminary data but a sea trial will be a litmus factor to determine its Silence ,Sensor,Weapons and Speed

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 03 Aug 2009 14:52

Yes the design and technology for an "Indian" Light Water PWR came from Russia , These are the same bunch of people who can look straight into your eyes and say the TN bum was success.

AK and company who are now on a PR spree are political scientist. They will say what the politician want to hear and what the nation wants to see.

reasonably sure the active noise cancellation technology is used in Arihant too

i think Akula 2has just one reactor and generates 35-40 MW e for propulsion that should be Arihants rating too

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 15:00

Shankar from multiple sources these are based on VM-5 technology and not OK-650 , so the reactor is slightly more than ~ 80MT(t) so ~ 16 - 18 MW(e)

What makes you believe it is OK-650 based ?

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 03 Aug 2009 15:03

I have been wanting to ask this - can someone explain the diff between MW, MWe and MWt ?

MW is million watts the raw power generation capacity of any power plant

In case of a nuclear reactor MW t refers to heat generated in the reactor core and extracted by pressurized water in the primary heat extraction circuit

MW e is the the energy generated in the steam turbine which is supplied steam by the secondary steam generation circuit

For all practical purpose the MW e is of importance it decides the performance vis a vis displacement of a sub,marine

MW t to MW e ratio indicates the efficeancy of energy extraction from the reactor core in other words how good the heat exchangers and turbine s are

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

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 03 Aug 2009 15:14

As of now there's a lot of information on the outer view and a lot of misinformation on actual technical data. Let's try to sift it through.
Very much in the design of the boat depends on her role - attack sub, SSGN, SSBN. If we consider Arihant to be a boomer - maximum speed is not a critical asset, silencing is. If this is an attack sub with added value SSGN role (like Yasen), maximum speed is of importance. To have the speed AND silencing on par with at least Akula2 and still have the SSGN (or SRBM) capability calls for much larger boat that has been launched. Sea Wolf is not that big compared to Akula2, but it's a single hull boat. Arihant is a double hull though.
The pics are no doubt of the inner hull, similar to those of Akula 2 inner hull with stringers on the outside. If this is on a 1:1 scale, Arihant has inner scull diameter of 8-9 meters and outer hull 10-11. The videocap shows the hull to have quite high block coefficient. This is not good for speed but good for having space for silenced equipment and missiles.
My best guess is following.
We have a small boomer here, based on evolution of several Russian projects. Russian design bureaus have been designing small boomers even on Pr.705 hull, nothing impossible there. 12 SRBMs is not bad for the first of the class. You can put 8 MRBMs in the next hull with only a slight lengthening of the missile compartment. As a boomer Arihant will have submerged speed certainly below 30 knots but should have quite a lot of silencing, on par with Akula 2 which is going to be the guardian angel for Arihant. 80 MWt should be quite enough for this, allowing for smaller hull - allowing for smaller flow noise, all the best for a boomer. The sonar suite should be the same MGK-400EM which is coming on Akula2 (Pr.971 I). Do not expect highly sofisticated sonar suite on a boomer, Rubikon NG is quite ok. Other comms and electronics should be similar to Lada as well. Arihant does not have the UPV pod for towed sonar. Doesn't mean it hasn't one. Gepard, the last of Severodvinsk Akulas doesn't have the pod. Nerpa is having the pod just because she was too far advanced in structural building, the towed sonar is the same as on Gepard, Lada and Borei. There shouldn't be too many technological challenges in the first boat. Lada is on test for already 5 years. Seems that she has been acting as technology testbed for systems which are also used on Borei and Granay. And, hopefully, Arihant.

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 03 Aug 2009 15:18

The OK-650 reactor is the nuclear fission reactor used singly to power the Soviet Navy's Project 685 Плавник (Mike), Project 971 Щука-Б (Akula), and Project 945 Барракуда, Кондор, and Марс (Sierra) submarines, and in pairs to power the Project 941 Акула (Typhoon) and Project 949 Гранит and Антей (Oscar) third generation submarines. It is a pressurized water reactor (PWR), using 20-45% enriched uranium-235 fuel to produce 190 MWt of power. It also powers the new Project 955 Borei submarines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OK-650_reactor

Austin let analyse

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

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

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

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

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

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