Search results

I never said Russia didn't help. I only said that India put most of the efforts while Russians gave consultancy. There is a difference between consultancy and technology transfer. I am not going to argue with you about ethics. I am only talking of capabilities. Don't change topic. India just...

Are you sure? How long did it take for the first country to develop PWR? Now considering India already had PHWR,how long will it take to miniaturise? Arihant started in 1998. It launched in 2016. Is this short? Don't exaggerate. Are you saying India can't reverse engineer Kilo class hull and...

What is the point of buying Akula class submarine? Explain the rationale behind buying Chakra in 2022.

Buying of nuclear submarines will be objected by NSG as it is considered a weapon powered by nuclear power. Selling of even reactors to a country which does not adhere to NPT is not allowed. NPT will be strictly enforced and technical personnel of the country supplying the reactors will be...

It has to be returned to Russia and can't be damaged beyond repair by India. So, it can't be used in war. The idea of giving the submarine is to provide India with required experience with submarines of nuclear type. The intent is to give technology rather than warfighting ability. I don't see a...

Pakistani Hashmat class submarine was bought in 1979 and is quite old now. It is due for retirement soon. Moreover, that submarine i considered to be extremely noisy. So, they are just present for the time being.

The point here is that India is suffering everyday and wants war to end the problems permanently rather than avoid war. Wars are avoided only when the side is in a dominant position and has everything in the way he wants, not when the side has lot of problems and regular irritation.

The problem with leased submarines is that they can't be used in war but only patrolling. There is no point leasing more submarines from Russia when India can make its own and also has gained enough experience in Russian submarines already

India does not want to create a situation of deterrence by fear. India wants permanent results by action. Defence is not about pride but about necessity

If I am right, it was for confusing enemies that the submarine in the docks was old one and not a newly built one.

This was 2013 test, first ever submarine based BM test. Hence they are tom tomming it. It is a 5 year old news which these people had hidden from public till now. This was the first technology demonstrator based on which longer range missiles will be developed. This just goes to show that...

India has 3 submarines - 2 Arihant class submarine and 1 Akula Class submarines. Unless one can say why the third nuclear submarine is Indian and not Akula, I won't be convinced

For the low weight of 6000tons, the Arihant reactor is just powerful enough. The SSN like Sea Wolf class of USA is quite good and has similar weight as Arihant. The reactor is 45MW instead of Arihant's 83MW in shaft power. The SSBN also needs large size to accommodate ICBMs in large numbers...

Why can't the Arihant submarine be used as SSN? Isn't Arihant class also weighing 6000tonnes and based upon Akula submarine in design? Akula is a SSN, not SSBN submarine. The SSBN submarines of USA, UK, France and Russia weigh 14-18 kilotonnes. The Arihant weighing just 6 kilotonnes is much...

Is it just that the two submarines are similar in length but one is more submerged than the other and hence appear shorter?

None gives nuclear reactor technology to India. Most parts are indigenous with minor import for generic goods. So, it is possible to hide

China recognises India as a nuclear power. Everyone does. Even North Korea is recognised as nuclear power. What is needed is nuclear testing. One can't choose to deny the reality. China had acknowledged India's nuclear test in 1998 and thus recognised India as a nuclear power

Arihant was launched in 2009 but not commissioned. Also, 1 submarine per year can be made if there is political will. If there was political will, India would have had better technology than China by now instead of lagging behind by 10 years

The refit to that extent is like remaking the entire submarine. It is simply better to build another submarine instead of doing this. It takes 1 year to make a new submarine. It is simply better to make the new submarine directly instead of this. Changing propellers, quietening the noise...

The way this news was suddenly printed on the front page without any signs of online presence the even in the last night, it appears to be some agenda. Since the accident was 10 months old, why print on front page? Also, how come they didn't print in online version of breaking news the...