Search results

Folks it is usually not a submarine Vs submarine battle we see but submarine Vs anti submarine warfare. ASW counter measures are the biggest threat for a submarine such as P-8I INS Vikrant to put China at sea | idrw.org

:truestory: Google Image Result for http://cfs10.blog.daum.net/image/24/blog/2007/11/15/22/09/473c44e3b7e47%26filename%3DSHIP_SSGN_USS_Ohio_During_Conversion_lg.jpg

^^ This is not the Arihant is it?

That might be the Plutonium Recyling Project, a land based prototype of the Pressurised Water Reactor.

Conceptual drawings of INS Arihant image courtesy: Gagan11111 wikipedia

Maybe their is a power plant inside which has not gone critical or the sub is not sealed at all. not many source says that the dock was flooded which usually is perform in a launch ceremony.

no sarcasm mate please don't take the argument otherwise, what is your point?

I do agree I don't have the precise information:wink: but how can u contest that there is a reactor inside????

This is a report by IANS. India's nuclear sub doesn't have working reactor yet - AOL India News even if you negate the first quote, contest for the second quote, Mr. Nataraja Sarma had clearly stated that it would be more convenient to check the seaworthiness without the reactor critical...

Thanks for the suggestion.

Both.......

Whats the point xixihaha?

Launching a vessel need not be complemented by a complete system.

Sorry xixihaha but the level of secrecy maintained in the ATV project bars us from any valid information to share with you. But I believe that the model in the inauguration ceremony was without any reactor due to precautionary measures.

From the article: The missile system illustrated in the picture doesn't match the description.

Nuclear propulsion vessels itself are not permitted to dock every where and Honorable PM addressing nearby a prototype reactor isn't feasible either, I thought that particular boomer was a mock up but a real prototype without a core is also possible, A full fledged sub is the least probability.

15 to 20 percent enrichment Uranium I doubt, anyways reactor not going critical inside the sub have some logic behind and should not be a big deal to make it get going, the scientist is right to state that certain critical components and systems need to be tested before taking a forward leap...

Does it need a new thread? all discussions are already going on in the ATV thread.

same feeling here as risking a nuke sub close to enemy shore won't be a good idea than attacking an enemy with a longer range BM, it would be always be costly option to risk an sub. so 750 km should be a test bench for a longer range BMs such as Agni III derivatives.

A SLBM should be qualify for at least two requirement, one It should be water tight seal at the weapon bay lid so that water cannot entered into the compartment, second after the weapon bay lid is open their should be enough water tightness between the missile and the tube to form a gas escape...