Indian nuclear submarines

[Super falcon]

The newest S4 Indian Nuclear Submarine which I believe soon will leave the dry dock; could somebody educate us as to what is power of the nuclear reactor in it? The Arihant has a 85MW reactor. Is the Arighat powered by the same reactor?

What about the higher power reactor needed for future planned nuclear submarines and attack submarines which probably require double the power to operate. Are these new nuclear reactors are ready and operating?

I'm not sure india will work for new nuke sub because they drain lot of funds in research due to their safety but if india has any plans than it will be numbers of attack subs will be lowered

 

[Indx TechStyle]

it will be numbers of attack subs will be lowered

Besides submarines being constructed, there are sanctioned plans of at least 18 attack submarines for India. 12 nos SSK (P75I & P76) and 6 nos SSN (P75A).
Given that Indian navy is running well below the official requirement of 24-30 submarines and many more are going to be retired, more & more subs will be there. Having their greater proportion as nuclear powered will have it's own advantages.

 

[Concard]

I'm not sure india will work for new nuke sub because they drain lot of funds in research due to their safety but if india has any plans than it will be numbers of attack subs will be lowered

Nope. India is working on S5 class submarines and work I believe is already started. This one is a bigger one at 13,500 tons displacement. And 3 of them are planned to be constructed. India will more likely have 8-10 SSBN's. With respect to Nuclear attack there is no clear time frame yet since it is not started. But I believe the 8-10 Nuclear attack submarines will be constructed. That number might be increased if economy can handle more of it to be made.

S5-class submarine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Hari Sud]

Nope. India is working on S5 class submarines and work I believe is already started. This one is a bigger one at 13,500 tons displacement. And 3 of them are planned to be constructed. India will more likely have 8-10 SSBN's. With respect to Nuclear attack there is no clear time frame yet since it is not started. But I believe the 8-10 Nuclear attack submarines will be constructed. That number might be increased if economy can handle more of it to be made.

S5-class submarine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

‘That needs a 190 MW reactor. That is far from being ready.

 

[jai jaganath]

‘That needs a 190 MW reactor. That is far from being ready.

The project is headed by pmo
U won't even get a little piece of hint about it

 

[Aniruddha Mulay]

‘That needs a 190 MW reactor. That is far from being ready.

Last time I checked, the 190MW reactor was under construction

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Nope. India is working on S5 class submarines and work I believe is already started. This one is a bigger one at 13,500 tons displacement. And 3 of them are planned to be constructed. India will more likely have 8-10 SSBN's. With respect to Nuclear attack there is no clear time frame yet since it is not started. But I believe the 8-10 Nuclear attack submarines will be constructed. That number might be increased if economy can handle more of it to be made.

S5-class submarine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Consider retiring all old submarines,

4 nos S4 & S4* (Arihant) class SSBN
3 nos S5 class SSBN
Total 7 nuclear ballistic missile submarines.

6 nos P75 (Kalvari) class SSK
6 nos P75I class SSK
6 nos P76 class SSK
6 nos P75A class SSN
Total 24 attack submarines.


Hence a force of 31 submarines India might have in 2035-40 (considering indigenous submarines only).
That's all only previous target being achieved which is tough in fit in current budget, India won't have 10 SSBN unless a massive boost in defence is introduced within next five years. Maybe 2024-25 if BJP wins and third stage of their political commitments begin?

 

[Lonewolf]

Last time I checked, the 190MW reactor was under construction

Checked where?

 

[AZTEC]

Consider retiring all old submarines,

4 nos S4 & S4* (Arihant) class SSBN
3 nos S5 class SSBN
Total 7 nuclear ballistic missile submarines.

6 nos P75 (Kalvari) class SSK
6 nos P75I class SSK
6 nos P76 class SSK
6 nos P75A class SSN
Total 24 attack submarines.


Hence a force of 31 submarines India might have in 2035-40 (considering indigenous submarines only).
That's all only previous target being achieved which is tough in fit in current budget, India won't have 10 SSBN unless a massive boost in defence is introduced within next five years. Maybe 2024-25 if BJP wins and third stage of their political commitments begin?

Bruh, you need like a 1000 nuclear warheads to justify 7 SSBNS. You need to manufacture additional fissile material for that. Plus there is no point loading the 20 kt fission bomb on SSBNs in such large numbers, especially when your 200 kt hydrogen bomb remain un-miniaturized and un-ruggedized due to lack of adequate live testing (don't talk to me about computer simulations or hydrodynamic testing etc, they only serve a design purpose - only actual tests establish credibility)

Plus we have the above top secret aspects, such as the existence of a plan to destroy all nuclear bombs worldwide in case of a global-scale launch to prevent apocalypse. (don't ask me who or how this will be done, you guys simply are not equipped to understand it)

I am not active in this forum, but since I am particularly jobless tonight, I am writing this post...... Cheers!!!!

 

[Aniruddha Mulay]

Consider retiring all old submarines,

4 nos S4 & S4* (Arihant) class SSBN
3 nos S5 class SSBN
Total 7 nuclear ballistic missile submarines.

6 nos P75 (Kalvari) class SSK
6 nos P75I class SSK
6 nos P76 class SSK
6 nos P75A class SSN
Total 24 attack submarines.


Hence a force of 31 submarines India might have in 2035-40 (considering indigenous submarines only).
That's all only previous target being achieved which is tough in fit in current budget, India won't have 10 SSBN unless a massive boost in defence is introduced within next five years. Maybe 2024-25 if BJP wins and third stage of their political commitments begin?

SSBNs are funed by the PMO, they have practically unlimited money

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Bruh, you need like a 1000 nuclear warheads to justify 7 SSBNS. You need to manufacture additional fissile material for that. Plus there is no point loading the 20 kt fission bomb on SSBNs in such large numbers, especially when your 200 kt hydrogen bomb remain un-miniaturized and un-ruggedized due to lack of adequate live testing (don't talk to me about computer simulations or hydrodynamic testing etc, they only serve a design purpose - only actual tests establish credibility)

Plus we have the above top secret aspects, such as the existence of a plan to destroy all nuclear bombs worldwide in case of a global-scale launch to prevent apocalypse. (don't ask me who or how this will be done, you guys simply are not equipped to understand it)

I am not active in this forum, but since I am particularly jobless tonight, I am writing this post...... Cheers!!!!

Not related to our discussion which is about future submarine strength.
Still replying, having 7 SSBN confirms having 50-70 naval nuclear warheads alone, apart from silo based MRBM/IRBM/ICBM based nukes + stored for lifting through bombers which pegs the deployable strength of Indian nuclear warheads = 150-200 nos which exactly is current estimated nuclear strength of India.
Not building capacity but service ability and delivery systems of nuclear weapons is what has kept P5 ahead of non NPT nuclear powers (and the gap which India has always been trying to fill with SSBN & SLBMs, silo based ICBMs and bombers).

SSBNs are funed by the PMO, they have practically unlimited money

PMO doesn't have unlimited money practically either. Extra budget anyway extended by PMO gets counted in defence.

Operating a fleet of total 20 nuclear submarines (if anything is introduced after S5 & P75A class) would require a separate new defense budget. That may be possible when India's defence spending crosses $150 billions in terms of today's prices.

 

[AZTEC]

Not related to our discussion which is about future submarine strength.
Still replying, having 7 SSBN confirms having 50-70 naval nuclear warheads alone, apart from silo based MRBM/IRBM/ICBM based nukes + stored for lifting through bombers which pegs the deployable strength of Indian nuclear warheads = 150-200 nos which exactly is current estimated nuclear strength of India.
Not building capacity but service ability and delivery systems of nuclear weapons is what has kept P5 ahead of non NPT nuclear powers (and the gap which India has always been trying to fill with SSBN & SLBMs, silo based ICBMs and bombers).

PMO doesn't have unlimited money practically either. Extra budget anyway extended by PMO gets counted in defence.

Operating a fleet of total 20 nuclear submarines (if anything is introduced after S5 & P75A class) would require a separate new defense budget. That may be possible when India's defence spending crosses $150 billions in terms of today's prices.

My man, 50-70 warheads on 7 SSBNs means no MIRV. You really want a $2 billion dollar submarine to carry just 1 warhead per silo?
SSBNs = mandatorily MIRV & hydrogen bomb

BUT

MIRV on 7 SSBNs = 1000 warheads (rough guesstimate)

MIRV with 200 kt city-buster hydrogen bomb = NOT possible in India due to aforementioned reasons (lack of testing)

Cheers!!!

 

[Indx TechStyle]

My man, 50-70 warheads on 7 SSBNs means no MIRV. You really want a $2 billion dollar submarine to carry just 1 warhead per silo?
SSBNs = mandatorily MIRV & hydrogen bomb

BUT

MIRV on 7 SSBNs = 1000 warheads (rough guesstimate

So, what made you assume that a submarine of size of Arihant can pick 10-12 heavy ICBMs with 10 MIRVs each?
That doesn't make sense.

MIRV with 200 kt city-buster hydrogen bomb = NOT possible in India due to aforementioned reasons (lack of testing)

Not in case of India which tested a scaled down version of 250 kT bomb in 1998 itself. Tests have been being simulated through supercomputers for long, improving overall reliability. Given where India's reactor tech and nuclear program has reached, 1 MT TN bomb is viable even if a 5 MT class TN is far away.

 

[NutCracker]

Checked where?

we are training our scientists and navy for 10+ years on Akula with same reactor.

 

[THESIS THORON]

My man, 50-70 warheads on 7 SSBNs means no MIRV. You really want a $2 billion dollar submarine to carry just 1 warhead per silo?
SSBNs = mandatorily MIRV & hydrogen bomb

BUT

MIRV on 7 SSBNs = 1000 warheads (rough guesstimate)

MIRV with 200 kt city-buster hydrogen bomb = NOT possible in India due to aforementioned reasons (lack of testing)

Cheers!!!

go to quoted post

we have our own sim software, it was made from the data gathered from our nuke tests.
rrcat is doing further research regarding this.


for reference

Spoiler

View attachment 167015

 

[karn]

Correct me if I'm wrong . But no nation has deployed MT class nuclear warheads on submarines or road mobile launchers either.
A hydrogen bomb literally needs to have a hydrogen gas tank next to a normal fission nuke making the warhead pretty bulky ..

 

[THESIS THORON]

IMO MT Class nuke warheads were needed when the cep of the missile was too much, nowadays precise mirv strike can do the thing.

but still MT class nukes is must to have in order to be in level of p5 nations

 

[AZTEC]

So, what made you assume that a submarine of size of Arihant can pick 10-12 heavy ICBMs with 10 MIRVs each?
That doesn't make sense.

Not in case of India which tested a scaled down version of 250 kT bomb in 1998 itself. Tests have been being simulated through supercomputers for long, improving overall reliability. Given where India's reactor tech and nuclear program has reached, 1 MT TN bomb is viable even if a 5 MT class TN is far away.

Well, of course Arihant cant carry ICBMs. I was talking about a future fleet.

I beg to differ. Yes, as I said earlier, surely we can design MT class bombs, but the ruggedization and miniaturization absolutely requires physical testing; plus nuclear deterrence is weakened if you haven't shown your enemies that your bomb works as finely as advertised.

Correct me if I'm wrong . But no nation has deployed MT class nuclear warheads on submarines or road mobile launchers either.
A hydrogen bomb literally needs to have a hydrogen gas tank next to a normal fission nuke making the warhead pretty bulky ..

No, there is no hydrogen gas tank bruh.
The secondary stage is lithium deuteride primarily as per the unclassified US designs.

 

[AZTEC]

go to quoted post

I know we have our own sim software.
You should probably read the following article to get a better understanding of what I mean:

Incomprehensible position on N-testing

In an interesting Meet on “Revising the N-doctrine”hosted by the Foundation for Integrated National Security headed by Lt Gen DB Shekatkar, former chairman, AEC, Anil Kakodkar, and SK S…

bharatkarnad.com

The author is the guy who literally wrote our official nuclear doctrine. He is as good as it gets on this issue.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Correct me if I'm wrong . But no nation has deployed MT class nuclear warheads on submarines or road mobile launchers either.
A hydrogen bomb literally needs to have a hydrogen gas tank next to a normal fission nuke making the warhead pretty bulky ..

IMO MT Class nuke warheads were needed when the cep of the missile was too much, nowadays precise mirv strike can do the thing.

but still MT class nukes is must to have in order to be in level of p5 nations

This has more to do with utility. Off course there is no use of vapourising a part of land to a higher depth. Destruction is absolute in a constant area regardless of blast yield of weapon (if yield exceeds 20kT).
So in case of wartime use, hydrogen bombs of 200-300 kT with high radius of damage to size ratio, become more efficient against MT class thermonuclear weapons.

Well, of course Arihant cant carry ICBMs. I was talking about a future fleet.

Then off course I said India doesn't have a 1000 naval nuclear warheads. Both future fleet and India having thousands of nuclear weapons, are at least 2-3 decades away things.

I beg to differ. Yes, as I said earlier, surely we can design MT class bombs, but the ruggedization and miniaturization absolutely requires physical testing;

AFAIK, it would be not an engineering problem if process and effects of both types of nuclear explosions have been tested as scaled up versions would be based upon them. No P5 countries have used actual tests either test ban, yet they have been improving it.

plus nuclear deterrence is weakened if you haven't shown your enemies that your bomb works as finely as advertised.

It is different in case of India where doubts on reliability of Indian TNWs by P5 (or probably P5's classified awareness about Indian nuclear capabilities), has earned India a good amount of respect in world unlike other non NPT nuclear powers which are treated as rough states.

You (and so is thought by P5) just simply can't compare India to other non NPT powers given India's missile, reactor, propulsion capabilities, contributions to ITER and most important, ability to outspend even P5 countries in this aspect. So until India actually emerges as an unchallenged force like US & USSR were during cold war and surpasses/matches P5's nuclear weapons, there would be no use of physical testing. Benefit of doubt will be there for India's untested city busters.