INS Arihant (ATV) News and Discussion -2

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Aug 2009 20:34

I believe it would help if we take into account the constraints on indigenous compact PWR due to the time required for our enrichment facility in Rattehalli to come up and produce enough HEU for ATV prototype,ATV and even POK-II; and mind you HEU is not something which even RU would have supplied us under watchful eye of Unkil and NSG cartel.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 03 Aug 2009 20:38

negi wrote:What's this bit about "firing from under the icecap"?
Actually this tactics was employed during the cold war as flight time for missiles from north pole into US or even RU is drastically reduced also a submarine is virtually invulnerable from surface ASW ships and even airborne ASW platforms as it can fire its missiles and hide below the polar ice cap .

But how would firing from beneath the polar icecap save missile flight time for hitting China?

China's wolfpack will be larger than even the US fleet, based on current projections. So I assume their Hans and Jins will be swimming up everybody's wazoo in the not too distant future. They intend to dominate their half of the Pacific, at least.

I don't know what the poor Australians are going to do.

Drevin · Post by **Drevin** » 03 Aug 2009 20:48

austin, you must accept .... one thing we managed to extract from you during your charitable moods .... Arihant doesnot have a standard towed array sonar. twisted:

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 03 Aug 2009 20:58

don't fret overmuch about the han, the boats are more dangerous to the crew than people outside. its the newer shangs we need to keep an eye on.

btw, the jinns will almost definitely be deployed in a bastion strategy.

bart · Post by **bart** » 03 Aug 2009 21:03

Dumb question:

Assuming a 30 SSN/BN fleet, do we have enough fuel to cover their life-cycle or do we have to depend on fickle minded Uncles and Aunties?

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Aug 2009 21:03

But how would firing from beneath the polar icecap save missile flight time for hitting China?

DDM lapped it up because RU and US subs employ that tactic; infact they even showed clips of some US sub during the video (iirc OHIO class SSBN). Given present range estimates for K-xx series it is not even an option as of now. However in future with larger SLBM's with longer range such a tactic might fit into our scheme of things.

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Aug 2009 21:08

bart wrote: Assuming a 30 SSN/BN fleet, do we have enough fuel to cover their life-cycle or do we have to depend of fickle minded Uncles and Aunties?

There was a recent report where Dr. Kakodhar mentioned about ramping up of U mining in India (jharkhand,Ka,AP and even Meghalaya) so future seems promising. All HEU needed for strategic assets has to be indeginously produced as according to the deal all imported fuel is for safeguarded facilities only , iow only for civilian purposes.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Aug 2009 21:09

Rahul M wrote:don't fret overmuch about the han, the boats are more dangerous to the crew than people outside. its the newer shangs we need to keep an eye on.

Dont underrate HAN , even if they get two of those , it will bring a great amount of uncertainty at NHQ planning strategy. Thats the beauty of Nuclear submarine.

PN has nothing to loose , we will be put on defensive and those Chinese will die

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 03 Aug 2009 21:21

China could easily checkmate India because of the yindoo rate of military development via arming one pakistan with an = = amount of chinese built mil hardware.
Now that it seems India is tearing away, they have set up a Burma to complicate matters for us. When we develop further, we will find Bangladesh suddenly going nuclear, hosting the chinese in Chittagong etc.
Raja Menon's article is spot on. We have to ramp up indigenous military production. For example, say if china wants to go in for a border skirmish in Arunachal this winter, are we going to go to war with 400 odd 155mm howitzers, 50 odd MRLS pieces against china?
ATV-2 and 3 and need to be built soon and deployed soon.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 03 Aug 2009 21:22

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

.

Pls tell which 1000MWe PWR is made by India from which this sub reactor has evolved?

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 03 Aug 2009 21:27

What are the challenges in developing/acquiring the pumpjet propulsion technology?
Does India have any plans to develop or acquire this tech? Is any work being done there?

What are the advantages in having it? I was reading that the new Borei class sub is much quieter and faster than anything else in the sea.

Are there any disadvantages/weaknesses in it?

Who is else is planning to move towards pumpjets? US? China? UK? France? Germany? Israel?
What are their timelines?

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 03 Aug 2009 21:44

Furthermore, would Pak Navy go in for leasing any Chinese boomer, and would China supply it? Would Uncle tolerate such a development, since it could lead to a Pak nuclear triad? What would India do?

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Aug 2009 21:55

Pls tell which 1000MWe PWR is made by India from which this sub reactor has evolved?

India does not have a LWR/PWR in that power rating as on date ; the only LWR of 1000Mwe is the VVER-1000 being installed in Kudankulam by RU. It is my impression that India did incorporate the acquired IP from setting up of these reactors into the PWR construction, and that is what slides were depicting.

here from HINDU on PWR

To a question, the AEC Chairman said, “Yes, we miniaturised the reactor [on our own]. The basic complexity is that you have to make it into a compact power system to fit into a submarine.”

Srikumar Banerjee, BARC Director, also stressed that “the event marks the beginning of PWR technology in India.” The BARC made many design features to make this reactor compact. “There are novelties not only in the reactor’s design but in its manufacturing,” he said. For instance, the steam generator which drove the turbine to generate electricity, was compacted in a novel manner. The heart of the reactor is the steam generator.

Dr. Banerjee said: “A boat of this type is a major technology in itself. Its steam generator is yet another technology. The whole platform is a very complex combination of various technologies. That is why we are happy it has reached fruition.

“We have so far developed reactors built on the shore [on firm ground]. But a submarine is a moving platform. It is rolling and pitching, and undergoes other kinds of motion. Against these, we have designed and developed this compact reactor. This is a major achievement.”

Asked whether the Russians helped the BARC in miniaturising the reactor, Dr. Banerjee said, “No, no. They were consultants…Consultancy was done for the whole submarine, not for the power part alone.”

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 03 Aug 2009 21:56

Actually, two first generations of PWRs for boats were designated VM: VM-A, VM-4, VM-4-2. The respective steam production plants (APPU in Russian) were designated OK-300, OK-350, OK-700. The third generation was designated simply by APPU (thus OK-650), because the reactor and steam production plant are designed as a complex. This means that APPU is kind of "hanging" on the reactor itself. This organization is responsible for design and production: http://www.okbm.nnov.ru/index.php?optio ... 5&Itemid=8.
The steam produced by APPU is utilized by steam turbines. For boats they are produced by this organization:
http://www.ktz.kaluga.ru/english/default.htm.
Then there is a long list of other Russian organizations dealing with equipment for security monitoring and controling of powerplant, control of other boats systems - like this:
http://www.avrorasystems.com/197/009/2/
There are organizations producing specific alloys and other materials (sorry, this one in Russian only):
http://www.crism-prometey.ru/Rus/Commer ... rtComm.htm

Powertrain of a nuclear boat is a very specific and complex equipment, there's much more to achieve besides simply scaling down a regular land based PWR. Does anybody volunteer, for instance, to design a scram system for boat reactor which should operate fail-proof even when the boat is far from staying on even keel?

There is no need to re-invent the wheel and be "indigenous" in everything. There is no doubt that Russian expertise was put to good use

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 03 Aug 2009 22:12

Firstly this is an Indian reactor, there are no two ways about it. It could be inspired by whatever else there is in the universe, but that does not matter as long as it is Indian design and make and it works. It is also foolish to say that for any military product to be of Indian make it has to have no external consultants (like Germans in US missile and space programs) all nuts and blots and parts should be made in India. No other country adhers/adopts to that definition, except the gullible WKK.

As an aside do the apostles of truth like Northrop-Grumman and the US Pentagon admit that Northrop's REVOLUTIONARY stealth design of the blended wing (as in B-2) was actually lifted from the Horten 229 built in Nazi Germany? (At least the British admitted that in their Avro-Vulcan)

vina wrote:For all the VM -XX or OK-YY from Russians, perish that thought. They could not sell a reactor to India or nuclear materials, especially for military purposes. They are an NPT signatory and would be in breach if they did.

Vina this one I disagree with this hypothetical question. Please quote me the section of NPT that prohibits it; I am sure you will find none.

Kakodkar sounds credible. The Russians would have been giving "consulting" advice and "knowledge transfer". All the engineering, fabrication and basic design would have been indigenous.

Correct. Again as an aside just because Indian Hi tech workers work for foriegn startups, US banks, Investment funds, Microsoft, Oracle, doesnt make the companies claim it is an Indian design and Indian product.

One must give credit to the Indian engineers and reactor designers. Even assuming that designs of the reactor and boat were available and Russian consultants were at hand, making the necessary modifications and achieving the precise manufacturing standards required to attain a low noise level was left to the Indians who apparently succeeded magnificently.

In any case, the Charlie-I/II copy theory has been laid to rest by the new images. This boat is not of 1960-70 vintage by any stretch of imagination. Also, the level of secrecy is so non-Indian and that is heartening.

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

bart wrote:Assuming a 30 SSN/BN fleet, do we have enough fuel to cover their life-cycle or do we have to depend on fickle minded Uncles and Aunties?

There is no question of auntie and uncle proving any HEU for an unsafeguarded SSBN reactor.
Every gram will have to be produced and enriched in India, in non-safeguarded facilities.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 03 Aug 2009 22:25

Couple of pages ago I listed a whole bunch of PSUs that are capable of producing, the equipment ranging from hull, power plant (steam generators, heat exchangers), control systems, instrumentation etc. Those entities were initially set up with SU/East Europian help and follow GOST standards which the "consultants" are familiar with.

I am convinced that this sub is uniquely Indian with finite amount of Russian -ve feed back loop to fix oversee the project.

pkudva · Post by **pkudva** » 03 Aug 2009 22:28

my friends now are coming to know hoe lethal she is.

let me tell u guys she is really a beast and she is a beauty and pls put to rest on the charlie/akula/borei design basically its an customised indian sub made by indians and she is lethal.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 03 Aug 2009 22:32

pkudva wrote:my friends now are coming to know hoe lethal she is.

let me tell u guys she is really a beast and she is a beauty and pls put to rest on the charlie/akula/borei design basically its an customised indian sub made by indians and she is lethal.

Source?

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 03 Aug 2009 22:35

Source?

Someone who got badly hurt, when they opened their mouth and gaped at her

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Aug 2009 23:10

basically its an customised indian sub made by indians

The assumption mill is all over the spectrum - 70% this and 40% that. But all is speculation - inferential.

However, "customised" - based on what is the issue.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 03 Aug 2009 23:43

AGAIN, will somebody answer my question please?

What is the likelihood of Pak trying to lease a Chinese boomer, like India leased a Charlie-class (and now Akula-class) as Chakra?

Would China be favorable towards this, or would they instead wish to safeguard their tech? Would the US tolerate it, or would they see it as an unacceptable crossing of a threshold by Pak? We already saw what shenanigans AQ Khan engaged in, with the N-tech Pak already has, with its attendant consequences on the world's security.

Would such leasing be prohibited under nuclear/weapons control regimes?

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 03 Aug 2009 23:51

China would love it. For that said boomer to have a paki captain who goes top side to saloot the paki flag everyday, and paki submariners who haul in the ropes to park that thing in the harbour, will be the only pakistani contribution to this sub.
Otherwise the sub will get to be based in Karachi, snoop on india, and be able to protect china's sea lanes if there's a border skirmish.
What's china got to lose anyways?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 03 Aug 2009 23:52

very low. the only boat PLAN can spare is the xia. they will certainly not give the SLBMs that go with it. yes I do know about the M-11 and M-9 but even PRC will baulk at an exchange without even a thin veneer of denial.
that the xia itself may not be capable of a journey from china to pak is quite another matter !

secondly pak won't get a SSBN, they can ask for a han ssn. for that too chances are low IMHO.

ramdas · Post by **ramdas** » 04 Aug 2009 00:06

Arunji,

A report in the telegraph says that the half boat at kalpakkam is 42mtrs long and 8 mtrs in dia.. what does that say abt INS Arihant's dia ? Abt 12 mtrs with the hump or less ?

kit · Post by **kit** » 04 Aug 2009 00:07

Well that is , assuming Chinese nuclear subs are and have been doing port visits at karachi ! Why should anyone assume that since Arihant has made some appearance chinese are doing something about it ? I think their nuclear subs have been patrolling the IO area for some time . Why do you think IN specifically asked for the MADs to be retained in the P8I s

A Sharma · Post by **A Sharma** » 04 Aug 2009 00:11

Russians helped with INS Arihant's heart: Kakodkar

India unveiled the compact atomic reactor, the very heart of the supine beauty the INS Arihant, the country's very own nuclear submarine.

Made in complete secrecy, it was talked about in hushed whispers. Now in an exclusive interview to NDTV's Science Editor Pallava Bagla, the chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, Dr Anil Kakodkar reveals that Russians did help and that it really is a very quiet vessel that adds to India's strategic depth.

Here are some excerpts from this exclusive interview recorded right inside the top secret facility in Kalpakkam on the coast of the Bay of Bengal.

Q: Was this completely made in India?

A: Yes.

Q: Designed, fabricated and executed in India?

A: Yes, that's right, by Indian industries.

Q: And by Indian scientists?

A: Yes

Q: At Vizag, the Prime Minister went out of the way and thanked the Russians, and the Russian ambassador was also present. What was the role of the Russians? India had leased a Russian nuclear submarine?

A: 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.

Q: Consultancy for what?

A: For various things, as you go along when you are doing things for the first time with a consultant by your side you can do it more confidently and these are difficult time consuming challenges so you have to do this without too much of iterative steps and this helped in that.

Q: So this is not a Russian design?

A: It is an Indian design.

Q: Indian design, made in India, by Indians?

A: Yes, that's right.

Q: Is the noise level comparable to other submarines of this class, since that is a way of detecting submarines?

A: Yes, I think so. You have seen the inside and tell me if you felt some sound there?

Q: Compared to a power reactor the sound was minimal.

A: Compared to machinery running in any other places, did you hear much sound? I think this is very quiet system.

India is inching closer to becoming a world power. You can watch the full interview where details about INS Arihant's nuclear reactor are gently unveiled by India's nuclear chief Dr. Anil Kakodkar, later this week only on NDTV.

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 04 Aug 2009 00:17

Rahul M wrote:very low. the only boat PLAN can spare is the xia. secondly pak won't get a SSBN, they can ask for a han ssn. for that too chances are low IMHO.

We need to worry about not just what PLAN can spare but also what Pak can pay for in barter or cash. PRC never gave Pak anything for free, everything was paid for. Pak has no cash. The real question then is what is that Pak barter to get nuclear tech. Is it U-214, Swedish AWACS, F-16 and BVRAAM, or may be it isn't technology but say control of Gawdar port?

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 04 Aug 2009 00:23

Why is Shree Kakodkar being questioned, nay interrogated by a private TV channel with limited viewership? I can understand Doordarshan doing this to disseminate or dispel doubts of any Indian citizen. That interview is in bad taste to put it mildly. It sounds more like a BBC "I think you are lying, injun" type one than an Indian channel's quest for information.

Will they ask the same question of say, Charles Bolden, if he visits India? "What about the russian engines y'all use?"

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 04 Aug 2009 00:35

So whats the fracas all about? It is quite clear that there is quite a bit of originality in the various components of the boat. No wonder its hard to place as a derivative - call it charlie based, akula based, borei based, yasen based, virginia based whatever. But the fact that it can't be pigeonholed clearly highlights the purely indian make. india seems to have gathered a lot of expertise in combining a variety of sources (roosi and western) and it shows in its original designs.

At the same time, it is equally clear that the russkis played a vital role in this project. Could india have done it on its own? Probably, but not in the time frame. The point is, russkis are the only ones willing to take cooperation so far and that is definitely praiseworthy. Ya ya, india gave tons of $$$$s (no doubt), but then how comes the frenchies, amrikis or israelis etc were not roped in?

Like the man says, lets give credit where it is due.

CM.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 04 Aug 2009 00:40

hnair wrote:Why is Shree Kakodkar being questioned, nay interrogated by a private TV channel with limited viewership? I can understand Doordarshan doing this to disseminate or dispel doubts of any Indian citizen. That interview is in bad taste to put it mildly. It sounds more like a BBC "I think you are lying, injun" type one than an Indian channel's quest for information.

Will they ask the same question of say, Charles Bolden, if he visits India? "What about the russian engines y'all use?"

Good point this. The cajones these ddmites have when it comes to questioning indians are truly made of top grade steel. If it were a phorener type interviewee, you could've bet the guy wouldn't have insisted upon that line of questioning, "but but is it an indian design?"

IOWs, "i think it is a russian copy paste and you bugger can't do anything right".

CM

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 04 Aug 2009 00:59

kit wrote: I think their nuclear subs have been patrolling the IO area for some time

IOR?
Try the yellow sea then back again to port. The PLAN is still basically a brown water force.

Chinese Submarine Patrols Doubled in 2008

Chinese attack submarines sailed on more patrols in 2008 than ever before, according to information obtained by Federation of American Scientists from U.S. naval intelligence.

The information, which was declassified by U.S. naval intelligence in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from the Federation of American Scientists, shows that China’s fleet of more than 50 attack submarines conducted 12 patrols in 2008, twice the number of patrols conducted in 2007.

China’s strategic ballistic missile submarines have never conducted a deterrent patrol.

Few of the details for assessing the implications of the increased patrol rate are known, nor is it known precisely what constitutes a patrol in order for U.S. naval intelligence to count it. A request for the definition has been denied. It is assumed that a patrol in this case involves an extended voyage far enough from the submarine’s base to be different from a brief training exercise.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 04 Aug 2009 01:15

Could india have done it on its own? Probably, but not in the time frame.

Exactly. And the first generation would probably have had operational constraints (noise emissions etc). The British, who had been building state of the art warships for centuries, and submarines for decades, sent Lord Mountbatten to obtain the US third generation reactor, entire machinery system, hull and combat systems for their first nuclear submarine.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 04 Aug 2009 01:16

The chinese are still not confident enough of their nuclear submarine fleet? They fear that should an accident ever occur while in patrol, chinese technology will be seen in very poor light. They are also very paranoid about their sub's secrets falling in the hands of the US or India.

Rahul M-ji is I think correct when he says that the chances of the chinese ever deploying a nuclear sub in the IOR are small, or giving a sub in the hands of the nascent bungling pakistan navy even slimmer.

Consider this, the pakistan beh'riya has inducted its FIRST EVER NEWLY built warship with the F-22 frigates (Which the paks will call a destroyer or a battleship

). About now Zardari saab is trying to get his 10% from the french or the germans over the U-212 sub deal.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 04 Aug 2009 01:41

Cain Marko wrote:
hnair wrote:Why is Shree Kakodkar being questioned, nay interrogated by a private TV channel with limited viewership?
Good point this. The cajones these ddmites have when it comes to questioning indians are truly made of top grade steel.

We can also perhaps consider the possibility that some one at BARC etc itself taught the reporter on what to ask? The programs script did not appear to be what the DDM could come up with on its own.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 04 Aug 2009 02:23

I for one think that asking those questions was good because it clears any doubts that people had, on whether they got the reactor itself from Russia, or got designs from Russian and fabricated it here or co-developed it with Russia etc. There were lots of such questions in this thread itself. Dr Kakodkar's interview was timely because it does clear up some questions. Irrespective of motivations for the interviewer in asking those questions, the answers should clarify the doubts some of us had.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Aug 2009 02:41

Bagla writes for Science. He might have NPA tutoring on what to ask.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 04 Aug 2009 03:25

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

mandrake: Who is Maj. Philip Rajkumar? Major Faux pas !
Peace be upon you.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 04 Aug 2009 03:44

Gagan wrote:China would love it. .....What's china got to lose anyways?

Just as US technology is leaked to the Lizard, Lizard tech will leak to the US. The Khan Spooks in Karachi will have a field day. Did Pukes ever have any Imaan? They always sold themselves to the highest bidder, as long as the bidder was anti-Indian.
Gautam

Sandipan · Post by **Sandipan** » 04 Aug 2009 03:48

Shankarovsky had us almost convinced that Arihant reactor is a 190 MW russian akula reactor and Arihant is nothing but a modified Akula. Now with this interview with Anil Kakodkar saying that, Arihant has indigenous reactor and Russians were just providing consultancy, I dont know what he has to say now. Arihant reactor from the latest news we have looks to be a 80MW reactor which was initially published in media and not 190MW what S'sky had us believe