Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Arihant Class SSBN - India's Domestic Nuclear Submarine

Discussion in 'Indian Navy' started by SpArK, Aug 7, 2012.

  1. lca-fan

    lca-fan Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2015
    Messages:
    2,388
    Likes Received:
    4,777
    Country Flag:
    India
    Commissioning Aridhaman & Carriers
    Published September 18, 2017 SOURCE: Bharatkarnad


    Around a fortnight from today, the fueled up INS Aridhaman, the second nuclear-powered ballistic missile-firing submarine will be officially commissioned into the Indian Navy. It will be the pleasant duty of the new Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman to actually break a coconut — not a champagne bottle — on the hull of the SSBN. The Aridhaman too is an Arihant-class boat but with more onboard firepower — 8 vertical launch tubes for the 1,500 km range K-15 and 2,500km range K-4 Mk-1 (seaborne Agni-III) missiles — with the 5,000km range K-5 Mk-II (seaborne Agni-V) missile under development but coming up fast. The weapon mix will of course be determined by the aim of the nuclear counter-strike mission. In comparison, Arihant carries, besides the K-15, also the K-4 — but has available only 4 missile silos aft of the conning tower. In fact, the Indian Arihant-class SSBN seems far larger and more powerful than advertised by the government or the navy. It looks like the Arihant displaces some 8,000 tonnes as against its publicized tonnage of 6,000 tonnes. The follow-on sub — Aridhaman and the two other SSBNs in this class are larger still. Naturally, this sort of tonnage cannot be pushed by a relatively puny 90MW miniaturized light water reactor. Matching the displacement with the power plant would put the latter at anywhere between 120MW-150MW for the Arihant, and nearer to 200MW for the Aridhaman. The SSBN would not have been possible — it must be gratefully admitted, without seminal help and assistance from Russia, which has been surprisingly forthcoming in parting with strategic technologies. Those in the Indian military enamoured of Western tech and imports, should sit down and enumerate what technologies the three armed services have actually received from the US and France before they begin yapping incessantly about the so-called mil high-tech Western countries supply and are prepared to part with in the future. If anybody in the GOI/MOD/armed services are even a little honest they will realize that the sole aim of Western govts and arms industries is to sell gullible 2nd rate states 2nd rate equipment dressed up with lots of bells and whistles to impress the yokels. And then the most critical tech will NOT be offered other than as “black box” technologies (even for the antiquated F-16!) . If it is anywhere near cutting edge hardware, such as the electro-magnetic aircraft launch system for carriers, it is made accessible to India only because their own services are finding it hard to absorb, cost-wise, and the govts and companies need a foreign buyer to amortize their R&D investments and to reduce the unit cost for their own militaries. The EMALS on the USS Gerald Ford nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, for instance, costs the American Navy $3 billion. General Dynamics wants upwards of $5-$6 billion for each EMALS unit sold to, yea, the sucker primero — India. This while Washington has made it plain that the deal for it will not come with the nuclear reactor (required to generate the enormous power to needed to drive the EMALS) the Indian naval brass desperately desired. The alternative — EMALS with several GE LM 2500 gas turbine power packs, makes little sense. As it is, aircraft carriers are dead in the water with supersonic cruise missiles such as the Brahmos. With hypersonic weapons coming soon large ships will become all the more vulnerable and, by and by, extinct. Not that any of this will deter the naval aviation types — most of them not surprisingly graduates of the US Naval War College. Except the US Navy with a ship strength of 370 bottoms and rising deploys as escort flotilla a minimum of 5-7 frigates/missile destroyers and 1-2 submarines pulling picket duty for each of its 11 carriers. Translate that into IN terms, and most of the capital ships will be not out there asserting presence, showing flag, doing sea control but protecting the carriers. Should MOD/GOI approve 3 aircraft carriers, it will mean 15-21 surface combatants and 3 or more subs pulling police duty for the carriers out of a strength of some 50 odd fighting ships and 20 submersibles (by 2025). It will be a bit like the hordes of police and NSG protecting our VVIP netas even as there are no police to spare for their main role — of keeping criminals off our streets and our throats. Moreover, carriers are impressive in peace time; in war they are, what, sitting ducks?

    http://idrw.org/commissioning-aridhaman-carriers/#more-148243 .
     
  2. surya kiran

    surya kiran 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2011
    Messages:
    339
    Likes Received:
    466
    Country Flag:
    India
    Problem arises in thinking. If you continue thinking like a sparrow, you will always be a sparrow.

    These guys have spent their life times studying cold war strategy and pursuing a policy of middle path. The entire concept of enforcing your will, militarily, is an unknown quantity to them. Not their mistake, that's how they have always thought and been taught.

    With an increasingly strong economy and a growing one at that, the need to extend reach and enforce our writ, if required to protect our interests is necessary and requires a different mindset.

    Our foreign policy has always been bound by the Himalayas. It is time to free ourselves using the Indian Ocean and reclaim areas of interest of the Pandyan and Chola Empires. It is time to break free from the boundaries of the Northern Indian Empires and embrace the footprints of Southern Indian Empires to expand our horizons.

    p.s :that last para is an original thought. Am so proud of it.
     
    Bloom 17, Golden_Rule, kaykay and 2 others like this.
  3. Hellfire

    Hellfire Devil's Advocate THINKER

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2017
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    4,902
    Country Flag:
    India
    How do you differentiate the leadership? Leadership comes to fore when the times test the resolve. It is here, this ambiguity, that needs to be fairly certain before deciding on who is amenable and who is a fair game.

    LB Shastri is an example. A mild mannered gentleman, who was a lion when poked.
     
    surya kiran and nair like this.
  4. Hellfire

    Hellfire Devil's Advocate THINKER

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2017
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    4,902
    Country Flag:
    India
    Oh you are misinterpreting what I have stated earlier. I am all for targeting the citizenry of a hostile nation. Let me be blunt. The war dictates unmitigated destruction of enemy nation's resources has to be brought about. Every aspect of what constitutes that resources, has to do with it's citizenry.

    Let us take the example of World War 2 Germany itself. The destruction brought about of the German industrial units, their cities and the psychological effect of mass bombing raids aimed at not only degrading the infrastructure, but also the capacity and capability, both in terms of industrial-scientific and human, resulted in a significant degradation and, in one field of Atomic Weapons, reversal of the German capability to not only wage war, but also to sustain, and even force a draw as a result. There is no mistaking the effects that the targeting of the Civil population had on the psyche of the German War Machine. After all, what can demoralise a retreating enemy than the fact that neither is he/she and his/her comrade at arms are safe on the front lines, nor his/her family and loved ones in the hinterland. That breaks the resolve of the combatants faster than any high calibre or heavy weapon can.

    I am for maintaining the belligerent leadership in power, so that the costs for them to sustain a war is incrementally high. I am for using the above response to force them to create a situation wherein they have to sue for peace, to save their own skin from their own people.

    As for the Communism aspect of your post, I will have a discussion on that at a much latter date, am running busy at this time, sorry. But let us just say that the ideals are for an ideal human being, who does not exist. Great thoughts, of an enlightened mind, but impractical. But then, that was the lofty idea which most hoped to pursue but few could adhere to
     
  5. Hellfire

    Hellfire Devil's Advocate THINKER

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2017
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    4,902
    Country Flag:
    India
    Oh you are misinterpreting what I have stated earlier. I am all for targeting the citizenry of a hostile nation. Let me be blunt. The war dictates unmitigated destruction of enemy nation's resources has to be brought about. Every aspect of what constitutes that resources, has to do with it's citizenry.

    Let us take the example of World War 2 Germany itself. The destruction brought about of the German industrial units, their cities and the psychological effect of mass bombing raids aimed at not only degrading the infrastructure, but also the capacity and capability, both in terms of industrial-scientific and human, resulted in a significant degradation and, in one field of Atomic Weapons, reversal of the German capability to not only wage war, but also to sustain, and even force a draw as a result. There is no mistaking the effects that the targeting of the Civil population had on the psyche of the German War Machine. After all, what can demoralise a retreating enemy than the fact that neither is he/she and his/her comrade at arms are safe on the front lines, nor his/her family and loved ones in the hinterland. That breaks the resolve of the combatants faster than any high calibre or heavy weapon can.

    I am for maintaining the belligerent leadership in power, so that the costs for them to sustain a war is incrementally high. I am for using the above response to force them to create a situation wherein they have to sue for peace, to save their own skin from their own people.

    As for the Communism aspect of your post, I will have a discussion on that at a much latter date, am running busy at this time, sorry. But let us just say that the ideals are for an ideal human being, who does not exist. Great thoughts, of an enlightened mind, but impractical. But then, that was the lofty idea which most hoped to pursue but few could adhere to
     
    ni8mare, Bloom 17 and Golden_Rule like this.

Share This Page