Indian nuclear submarines
- Thread starter nitesh
- Start date
Just One Shark In The Deep Blue Ocean
The making of a nuclear reactor to power a submarine started under Raja Ramanna in the late ’70s. But the project to build the nuclear submarine in parallel with dry-running the reactor at Kalpakkam began as the Advanced Technology Vehicle programme in the mid-’80s. Until then, it was not at all clear whether India’s first nuclear submarine would be a missile-firing one and, least of all, whether nuclear-tipped missiles were on the horizon.
The soviet navy had similar battle space management issues. they built a navy to win just one battle. china is now in the same fix. will indians blindly follow?
The order from Rajiv Gandhi to weaponise the 1974 nuclear device still lay ahead. But every strategist knew that a nuclear submarine of any kind was the final arbiter of power. Ramanna inducted Vice Admiral M.K. Roy, an aviator admiral and an old college buddy of his, to start the now famous Advanced Technology (ATV) programme to build a nuclear submarine. Again, rumour has it that the then navy chief, the much-admired Admiral Ronnie Pereira, felt that nuclear submarines were premature—that we should learn to walk before running. So, instead of the navy, the project took off under the DRDO and got off to a magnificent financial start as all their projects do. With an immense amount of money—not always accounted for under a visible public head—and with the ‘secret classification’, the project had complete autonomy. Later on, this secretiveness may have been the cause of the huge time overrun—as Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat accused in 1998, only to lose his post in the scandalous manner of his sacking.
The technical heart of this undoubtedly massive achievement was laid with the German HDW project. The overseas part of the project included three big ideas. One team representing Mazagon Dock would learn how to actually construct the body of the submarine—once it had been designed—and to commercially order the 21,000 parts that went into it. Another would oversee the building in Germany, to learn overseeing as well as to form the backbone of the construction team in the years to come. The third group would learn how to design submarines from ikl Lubeck, the German group that quickly recovered the war-time submarine building technology of the Germans. The submarine project, meanwhile, ran into heavy weather with the Deutschmark escalating from four rupees to fifteen. Naval headquarters lost its strategic vision and simply allowed the Mazagon Dock facilities to die. Grade A welders emigrated to Dubai, engineers retired, and eventually all that was left were designers and the knowledge passed on to industry, particularly dynamic companies like Larsen & Toubro, which actually built the hull of INS Arihant. Some of the young naval commanders of the overseeing team eventually became flag officers in charge of putting together the hull sections built by L&T in the Visakhapatnam Yard (incidentally a yard that was also designed by the same officers).
The naval hierarchy was overjoyed that a nuclear submarine was being built—less happy that it was a missile-firing one. Like navies the world over, it knew only its maritime strategy well, but ignored its nuclear strategy. Let it be said also that like all navies, it desperately needed N-subs, while the nation needed a missile-firing one. There is no acrimony here actually; because eventually nuclear subs earn their keep every day of the year. Ballistic missile submarines save nations on that one fateful day, when the enemy’s political leaders look at our SLBMS and stay their hand on the button. Living in a nuclearised neighbourhood, India, unlike all other nuclear submarine-armed countries, built a missile-firing submarine first, and will build a killer submarine later. Unusual, but not erroneous.
What is the strategic significance of this submarine? India’s nuclear doctrine is a no-first-use (NFU) doctrine. This is not so much a strategic choice, but a cultural one. It actually bridges the gap between India’s nuclear tests at Pokhran in 1998, and the Indian government’s long-held declaratory position against nuclear weapons, nuclear tests, the arms race and a nuclear winter. India, the government feels, has been compelled to go nuclear. But it seeks an ethical and moralistic path through the deterrence jungle. One way is to confine itself to an unshakable second strike offered only by ballistic missile submarines. So why didn’t it try getting there earlier? Because like all major strategic decisions in South Asia, certainly in India, the politician understands nothing, the bureaucracy puts its clumsy foot in frequently, and the military—still out of the nuclear decision-making process—is sulking. For the few genuine nuclear strategists in India, there is enough literature and mathematics to show that it will not be the cheapest from the point of view of funding—but it will be the cheapest surviving second strike arsenal, after a first strike.
So when can India hope to have this credible deterrence? The Arihant will probably go to sea operationally in early 2012. Submarines of the Arihant class can be commissioned only at intervals of 30 months, although two years is what is being claimed. So the currently sanctioned force of three will be operational by 2017. Long before that, the K-X—the successor to the 700-km K-15 missile, with a range of 3,000 km—will be ready. This force, with either type of missile, will be adequate for an anti-Pakistan second strike. Against China, the submarine will have to be moved closer to the targets and that will involve tactical and diplomatic challenges. These challenges are recognised by the navy and referred to as ‘battle space management’ problems. The Soviet navy had similar battle space management problems arising due to different reasons, but built their entire navy to win just that one battle. The Chinese have followed this catastrophic example by putting their new SLBMS into a cave. Will the Indians blindly follow? That depends on who will steer India clear of that mess, or the other quagmires still ahead of us—like ‘separating ownership from control’ of nuclear weapons in a submarine already on patrol.
These problems bring us to the calamitous news that India does not have a ‘nuclear staff’. It has a strategic force commander (SFC) with his own strong staff, but the PM, the NSA, and the chairman COSC have no nuclear staff. This is because New Delhi is one of the few capitals of the world where turf battles don’t just end in bloodshed but in the annihilation of an entire group—the military, the only people with operational staff knowledge, annihilated by the victors, the N-physicists, bureaucrats, intelligence-wallahs and DRDO scientists.
The Arihant has a diameter of about 10 metres. Submarine diameters are the key dimension. The US, which has the best rocket technology, is able to put its 8,000-mile ICBM within a 12.8 metre hull. The Russians were unable to confine an ICBM within a 12-metre hull and so their missile tubes protruded two metres outside the pressure hull. The future of India’s nuclear submarine project is entirely in the hands of the rocket scientists. Even if they get 5,000-km (3,000-mile) missiles inside a 10-metre hull, it would be an ‘adequate’ success. In terms of diving depth, submarines built in India are not inferior to the average submarines being built abroad. So although the Arihant has captured the imagination of India as a missile-firing submarine, professionals everywhere in the world will want to know what India’s industrial achievements are in this project. Little noticed may be the fact that the Arihant will have an entirely Indian-designed sonar. Will the Chinese Jin class also have a Chinese sonar, or a reconstituted French one? Since India began building the ATV, submarine reactor design has leapfrogged. The British Astute class and the upgraded Los Angeles will all carry lifetime reactors, unlike the Arihant’s 10-year lifecycle power pack.
The media has enquired whether the Arihant will qualify India for the Security Council. A nuclear navy and an slbm second strike force will undoubtedly take us there, but we aren’t there yet. For a start, we now need to declassify the nuclear submarine project and either build a bigger yard to reduce the interval between boats or build on the west coast too. An slbm force can’t be less than six. Killer submarines cannot number less than eight for a country of India’s size. To build 14 subs from 2010 onwards at the current rate of accretion would take till 2038, by which time Arihant would be due for pension. This isn’t the path to the Council.
The government needs to write a white paper on India’s Nuclear Submarine Force, deploying for it a panel of strategists, industrialists and nuclear engineers, preferably with bipartisan political support. A number of issues need to be addressed, including the indigenisation of high-quality steel, advanced reactors, financial support, management structure, diplomatic cover for overseas deployment, the navy’s hrd and safety issues in Indian and foreign ports.
Only the professionals remember that the outstanding achievement of the US navy’s submarine fleet came from path- breaking management of the N-reactor, submarine construction and the missile programme. The heads of these programmes went on to become international figures, having pioneered many techniques used today in industrial management. Our expat community is being hired worldwide for their competence. So we surely don’t lack talent. Why can’t we hire the best Indians to manage a national project?
www.outlookindia.com | Just One Shark In The Deep Blue Ocean
The making of a nuclear reactor to power a submarine started under Raja Ramanna in the late ’70s. But the project to build the nuclear submarine in parallel with dry-running the reactor at Kalpakkam began as the Advanced Technology Vehicle programme in the mid-’80s. Until then, it was not at all clear whether India’s first nuclear submarine would be a missile-firing one and, least of all, whether nuclear-tipped missiles were on the horizon.
The soviet navy had similar battle space management issues. they built a navy to win just one battle. china is now in the same fix. will indians blindly follow?
The order from Rajiv Gandhi to weaponise the 1974 nuclear device still lay ahead. But every strategist knew that a nuclear submarine of any kind was the final arbiter of power. Ramanna inducted Vice Admiral M.K. Roy, an aviator admiral and an old college buddy of his, to start the now famous Advanced Technology (ATV) programme to build a nuclear submarine. Again, rumour has it that the then navy chief, the much-admired Admiral Ronnie Pereira, felt that nuclear submarines were premature—that we should learn to walk before running. So, instead of the navy, the project took off under the DRDO and got off to a magnificent financial start as all their projects do. With an immense amount of money—not always accounted for under a visible public head—and with the ‘secret classification’, the project had complete autonomy. Later on, this secretiveness may have been the cause of the huge time overrun—as Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat accused in 1998, only to lose his post in the scandalous manner of his sacking.
The technical heart of this undoubtedly massive achievement was laid with the German HDW project. The overseas part of the project included three big ideas. One team representing Mazagon Dock would learn how to actually construct the body of the submarine—once it had been designed—and to commercially order the 21,000 parts that went into it. Another would oversee the building in Germany, to learn overseeing as well as to form the backbone of the construction team in the years to come. The third group would learn how to design submarines from ikl Lubeck, the German group that quickly recovered the war-time submarine building technology of the Germans. The submarine project, meanwhile, ran into heavy weather with the Deutschmark escalating from four rupees to fifteen. Naval headquarters lost its strategic vision and simply allowed the Mazagon Dock facilities to die. Grade A welders emigrated to Dubai, engineers retired, and eventually all that was left were designers and the knowledge passed on to industry, particularly dynamic companies like Larsen & Toubro, which actually built the hull of INS Arihant. Some of the young naval commanders of the overseeing team eventually became flag officers in charge of putting together the hull sections built by L&T in the Visakhapatnam Yard (incidentally a yard that was also designed by the same officers).
The naval hierarchy was overjoyed that a nuclear submarine was being built—less happy that it was a missile-firing one. Like navies the world over, it knew only its maritime strategy well, but ignored its nuclear strategy. Let it be said also that like all navies, it desperately needed N-subs, while the nation needed a missile-firing one. There is no acrimony here actually; because eventually nuclear subs earn their keep every day of the year. Ballistic missile submarines save nations on that one fateful day, when the enemy’s political leaders look at our SLBMS and stay their hand on the button. Living in a nuclearised neighbourhood, India, unlike all other nuclear submarine-armed countries, built a missile-firing submarine first, and will build a killer submarine later. Unusual, but not erroneous.
What is the strategic significance of this submarine? India’s nuclear doctrine is a no-first-use (NFU) doctrine. This is not so much a strategic choice, but a cultural one. It actually bridges the gap between India’s nuclear tests at Pokhran in 1998, and the Indian government’s long-held declaratory position against nuclear weapons, nuclear tests, the arms race and a nuclear winter. India, the government feels, has been compelled to go nuclear. But it seeks an ethical and moralistic path through the deterrence jungle. One way is to confine itself to an unshakable second strike offered only by ballistic missile submarines. So why didn’t it try getting there earlier? Because like all major strategic decisions in South Asia, certainly in India, the politician understands nothing, the bureaucracy puts its clumsy foot in frequently, and the military—still out of the nuclear decision-making process—is sulking. For the few genuine nuclear strategists in India, there is enough literature and mathematics to show that it will not be the cheapest from the point of view of funding—but it will be the cheapest surviving second strike arsenal, after a first strike.
So when can India hope to have this credible deterrence? The Arihant will probably go to sea operationally in early 2012. Submarines of the Arihant class can be commissioned only at intervals of 30 months, although two years is what is being claimed. So the currently sanctioned force of three will be operational by 2017. Long before that, the K-X—the successor to the 700-km K-15 missile, with a range of 3,000 km—will be ready. This force, with either type of missile, will be adequate for an anti-Pakistan second strike. Against China, the submarine will have to be moved closer to the targets and that will involve tactical and diplomatic challenges. These challenges are recognised by the navy and referred to as ‘battle space management’ problems. The Soviet navy had similar battle space management problems arising due to different reasons, but built their entire navy to win just that one battle. The Chinese have followed this catastrophic example by putting their new SLBMS into a cave. Will the Indians blindly follow? That depends on who will steer India clear of that mess, or the other quagmires still ahead of us—like ‘separating ownership from control’ of nuclear weapons in a submarine already on patrol.
These problems bring us to the calamitous news that India does not have a ‘nuclear staff’. It has a strategic force commander (SFC) with his own strong staff, but the PM, the NSA, and the chairman COSC have no nuclear staff. This is because New Delhi is one of the few capitals of the world where turf battles don’t just end in bloodshed but in the annihilation of an entire group—the military, the only people with operational staff knowledge, annihilated by the victors, the N-physicists, bureaucrats, intelligence-wallahs and DRDO scientists.
The Arihant has a diameter of about 10 metres. Submarine diameters are the key dimension. The US, which has the best rocket technology, is able to put its 8,000-mile ICBM within a 12.8 metre hull. The Russians were unable to confine an ICBM within a 12-metre hull and so their missile tubes protruded two metres outside the pressure hull. The future of India’s nuclear submarine project is entirely in the hands of the rocket scientists. Even if they get 5,000-km (3,000-mile) missiles inside a 10-metre hull, it would be an ‘adequate’ success. In terms of diving depth, submarines built in India are not inferior to the average submarines being built abroad. So although the Arihant has captured the imagination of India as a missile-firing submarine, professionals everywhere in the world will want to know what India’s industrial achievements are in this project. Little noticed may be the fact that the Arihant will have an entirely Indian-designed sonar. Will the Chinese Jin class also have a Chinese sonar, or a reconstituted French one? Since India began building the ATV, submarine reactor design has leapfrogged. The British Astute class and the upgraded Los Angeles will all carry lifetime reactors, unlike the Arihant’s 10-year lifecycle power pack.
The media has enquired whether the Arihant will qualify India for the Security Council. A nuclear navy and an slbm second strike force will undoubtedly take us there, but we aren’t there yet. For a start, we now need to declassify the nuclear submarine project and either build a bigger yard to reduce the interval between boats or build on the west coast too. An slbm force can’t be less than six. Killer submarines cannot number less than eight for a country of India’s size. To build 14 subs from 2010 onwards at the current rate of accretion would take till 2038, by which time Arihant would be due for pension. This isn’t the path to the Council.
The government needs to write a white paper on India’s Nuclear Submarine Force, deploying for it a panel of strategists, industrialists and nuclear engineers, preferably with bipartisan political support. A number of issues need to be addressed, including the indigenisation of high-quality steel, advanced reactors, financial support, management structure, diplomatic cover for overseas deployment, the navy’s hrd and safety issues in Indian and foreign ports.
Only the professionals remember that the outstanding achievement of the US navy’s submarine fleet came from path- breaking management of the N-reactor, submarine construction and the missile programme. The heads of these programmes went on to become international figures, having pioneered many techniques used today in industrial management. Our expat community is being hired worldwide for their competence. So we surely don’t lack talent. Why can’t we hire the best Indians to manage a national project?
www.outlookindia.com | Just One Shark In The Deep Blue Ocean
Adux
Senior Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2009
- Messages
- 4,022
- Likes
- 1,707
Why should they? As you know the Government will not back down on the name, Heck it is ill-luck according to naval traditions
Pintu
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2009
- Messages
- 12,082
- Likes
- 348
The Week
Deep rising
Photo of INS CHAKRA/ Imaging: Jince Baby
DEFENCE
The nuclear-powered submarine INS Arihant will put India in a different league
By Syed Nazakat
A complex at Visakhapatnam’s Naval Dockyard is home to one of the newest and potentially the most lethal weapons in the Navy’s arsenal. If everything goes according to plan, the floodgates of the dockyard will be opened on July 26 for the INS Arihant, a homemade nuclear-powered submarine designed to launch nuclear-armed ballistic missiles, and India will become the sixth country in the world to possess a nuclear sub. Only the US, Russia, Britain, China and France have produced such vessels.
“This is a historic and big step forward,” said Dr P.K. Iyengar, former chairman, Atomic Energy Commi-ssion, who was involved in the early stages of the Advanced Technology Vehicle project to develop the INS Arihant. “Nuclear submarines are far better than the conventional diesel-electric submarines which spend most of their time on the surface,” he said. According to him, the new submarine’s engine needs no air and can operate at full power underwater.
The INS Arihant is built by the scientists of the Navy, the Defence Research and Development Organi-sation (DRDO) and the Department of Atomic Energy, and it took more than three decades and $2.9 billion to complete the project. The submarine uses a pressurised water reactor, is 124 metres long and is said to have a 9,400 tonne displacement when submerged. The highly enriched uranium fuel for the reactor was supplied by the Rare Materials Project, Mysore, and the hull of the vessel was built by Larsen & Toubro at its Hazira dockyard facility in Gujarat. The submarine will undergo trials for two years before its induction into the Navy.
The INS Arihant is expected to carry the short-range ballistic missile Sagarika and fulfil New Delhi’s goal of possessing the nuclear triad: air-, land-, and sea-based nuclear weapon systems.
Nuclear submarines are very effective in counter attacks, and are quiet thanks to the special propellers and sound-insulated engines. “It is a super and surprise weapon,” said a Naval officer. “It is hard to track down nuclear submarines.” Though India had operated a submarine fleet, it was the acquisition of INS Chakra, a Soviet-made Charlie class nuclear-powered submarine, on lease in 1988 that put Indian naval programmes into the limelight. It was interpreted as a major change in India’s capabilities and evidence of its intention to develop naval superiority in the Indian ocean.
Though the Navy is yet to divulge any details, sources at the DRDO said that the Arihant was faster than many US submarines when submerged and the top-speed was in the range of 40 knots. “Facing a nuclear submarine is a nightmare; it has unlimited endurance and mobility and there’s no place for a surface ship to hide,” said Debi Mohanty, naval analyst at the Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi. “It will put the Indian Navy in a different league.”
Submarines surface for two purposes—to recharge batteries and to send and receive messages. Diesel submarines surface at least once a day to recharge batteries and as often as they want to send and receive messages. The Arihant can remain submerged more than 100 days, as nuclear submarines do not have to recharge batteries. Does it have to surface to send and receive messages? “No,” said a Naval officer. “The Arihant can remain underwater and receive and send communications,” thanks to the very low frequency (VLF) technology developed by Indian scientists 15 years ago. Only five countries in the world have this technology.
The Arihant will give India a “colossal advantage” over its neighbours, said a DRDO scientist. “You need submarine-based arsenals to retain a second strike capability, since all land-based arsenals can be detected through satellite surveillance,” said Uday Bhaskar, director of the Delhi-based National Maritime Foundation and a military analyst. “If they’ve been detected, you have to assume that they can be targeted.”
Bhaskar said New Delhi was seeking to attain a sea-denial capability in the Indian Ocean. In its vision document, Maritime Doctrine, the Navy also underlines the massive strides taken by China, the only Asian country with submarine-launched ballistic missiles, to strengthen its navy. “The mission of the armed forces is not only to be prepared to fight wars,” said Bhaskar, “but also to deter or prevent their outbreak.” Interestingly, the Navy considers Pakistan navy a mere “irritant”. Said a Naval officer, “The mission is to watch China.”
Deep rising
Photo of INS CHAKRA/ Imaging: Jince Baby
DEFENCE
The nuclear-powered submarine INS Arihant will put India in a different league
By Syed Nazakat
A complex at Visakhapatnam’s Naval Dockyard is home to one of the newest and potentially the most lethal weapons in the Navy’s arsenal. If everything goes according to plan, the floodgates of the dockyard will be opened on July 26 for the INS Arihant, a homemade nuclear-powered submarine designed to launch nuclear-armed ballistic missiles, and India will become the sixth country in the world to possess a nuclear sub. Only the US, Russia, Britain, China and France have produced such vessels.
“This is a historic and big step forward,” said Dr P.K. Iyengar, former chairman, Atomic Energy Commi-ssion, who was involved in the early stages of the Advanced Technology Vehicle project to develop the INS Arihant. “Nuclear submarines are far better than the conventional diesel-electric submarines which spend most of their time on the surface,” he said. According to him, the new submarine’s engine needs no air and can operate at full power underwater.
The INS Arihant is built by the scientists of the Navy, the Defence Research and Development Organi-sation (DRDO) and the Department of Atomic Energy, and it took more than three decades and $2.9 billion to complete the project. The submarine uses a pressurised water reactor, is 124 metres long and is said to have a 9,400 tonne displacement when submerged. The highly enriched uranium fuel for the reactor was supplied by the Rare Materials Project, Mysore, and the hull of the vessel was built by Larsen & Toubro at its Hazira dockyard facility in Gujarat. The submarine will undergo trials for two years before its induction into the Navy.
The INS Arihant is expected to carry the short-range ballistic missile Sagarika and fulfil New Delhi’s goal of possessing the nuclear triad: air-, land-, and sea-based nuclear weapon systems.
Nuclear submarines are very effective in counter attacks, and are quiet thanks to the special propellers and sound-insulated engines. “It is a super and surprise weapon,” said a Naval officer. “It is hard to track down nuclear submarines.” Though India had operated a submarine fleet, it was the acquisition of INS Chakra, a Soviet-made Charlie class nuclear-powered submarine, on lease in 1988 that put Indian naval programmes into the limelight. It was interpreted as a major change in India’s capabilities and evidence of its intention to develop naval superiority in the Indian ocean.
Though the Navy is yet to divulge any details, sources at the DRDO said that the Arihant was faster than many US submarines when submerged and the top-speed was in the range of 40 knots. “Facing a nuclear submarine is a nightmare; it has unlimited endurance and mobility and there’s no place for a surface ship to hide,” said Debi Mohanty, naval analyst at the Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi. “It will put the Indian Navy in a different league.”
Submarines surface for two purposes—to recharge batteries and to send and receive messages. Diesel submarines surface at least once a day to recharge batteries and as often as they want to send and receive messages. The Arihant can remain submerged more than 100 days, as nuclear submarines do not have to recharge batteries. Does it have to surface to send and receive messages? “No,” said a Naval officer. “The Arihant can remain underwater and receive and send communications,” thanks to the very low frequency (VLF) technology developed by Indian scientists 15 years ago. Only five countries in the world have this technology.
The Arihant will give India a “colossal advantage” over its neighbours, said a DRDO scientist. “You need submarine-based arsenals to retain a second strike capability, since all land-based arsenals can be detected through satellite surveillance,” said Uday Bhaskar, director of the Delhi-based National Maritime Foundation and a military analyst. “If they’ve been detected, you have to assume that they can be targeted.”
Bhaskar said New Delhi was seeking to attain a sea-denial capability in the Indian Ocean. In its vision document, Maritime Doctrine, the Navy also underlines the massive strides taken by China, the only Asian country with submarine-launched ballistic missiles, to strengthen its navy. “The mission of the armed forces is not only to be prepared to fight wars,” said Bhaskar, “but also to deter or prevent their outbreak.” Interestingly, the Navy considers Pakistan navy a mere “irritant”. Said a Naval officer, “The mission is to watch China.”
Pintu
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2009
- Messages
- 12,082
- Likes
- 348
Gulf Daily News » News Details » Comments
A colder ocean...
Posted on » Saturday, August 01, 2009
Pakistan's denunciation of India's first nuclear submarine was predictable. Islamabad called the vessel, now about to begin two years of sea trials, "detrimental to regional peace" and a matter of serious concern for all littoral states of the Indian Ocean.
Seen from Pakistan, the Arihant - "Destroyer of Enemies" - certainly looks threatening.
Armed with torpedoes and ballistic missiles, the submarine is the first of five that will be powered by an 85MW nuclear reactor and will patrol the Indian Ocean shipping lanes. Its launch makes India only the sixth country in the world to deploy nuclear submarines and is a signal of Delhi's determination to play a greater global military role commensurate with its growing economic and political strength.
But for all the historic animosity and renewed tensions on the subcontinent, Pakistan's fears are misplaced. The presumed target of the formidable weapons Arihant will carry is not Pakistan but China.
In recent years India has grown increasingly alarmed at China's military expansion around the Indian Ocean. The Chinese have long had an important naval base on the Burmese coast. They have given massive aid to other Indian Ocean states, signing friendship pacts, building ports in Pakistan and Bangladesh and reportedly setting up a listening post on one of Burma's islands.
Now they are engaged in the most visible projection of their power, transforming the small port of Hambantota on the south coast of Sri Lanka into a large deep-water hub for trans-shipping containers between Europe and Asia. It will also be a forward naval base to control the sea lanes between the Gulf and the Far East, through which most of the world's oil supplies pass.
India is not the only country suspicious of China's cultivation of a "string of pearls" - the Pentagon's phrase - around the India Ocean. The US and Japan share the worries voiced by Admiral Sureesh Mehta, head of the Indian Navy, that China wants to "take control over the world energy jugular."
Sri Lanka made Hambantota port available in return for China's massive weapons supply to enable the Sri Lankan Army to win a victory over the Tamil Tigers. The Pentagon is sceptical of Chinese claims that this is purely a commercial move, and has encouraged India to build up its navy as a counterweight.
Both countries are now engaged in an arms race. The Indian defence budget in 2007 rose by 7.8 per cent over the previous year, and China announced that its military budget for last year would amount to $59 million (BD22m), an increase of 17.6pc over 2007. Both countries are investing heavily in their naval forces. For both, the area of strategic competition is the Indian Ocean.
Ironically, this rivalry comes at a time when relations between Delhi and Beijing are at their closest since their brief border war in 1962. Bilateral trade is running at around $40 billion a year, and the two armies have conducted their first joint military exercise. But China was shaken by India's conclusion last year of a nuclear deal with America, correctly seeing this as a decisive tilt westwards in India's foreign policy. As a result, a once peaceful ocean is in danger of becoming the arena where Asia's emerging powers are determined to prove themselves. The Arihant may enter service in three years. A warm ocean is rapidly growing colder.
A colder ocean...
Posted on » Saturday, August 01, 2009
Pakistan's denunciation of India's first nuclear submarine was predictable. Islamabad called the vessel, now about to begin two years of sea trials, "detrimental to regional peace" and a matter of serious concern for all littoral states of the Indian Ocean.
Seen from Pakistan, the Arihant - "Destroyer of Enemies" - certainly looks threatening.
Armed with torpedoes and ballistic missiles, the submarine is the first of five that will be powered by an 85MW nuclear reactor and will patrol the Indian Ocean shipping lanes. Its launch makes India only the sixth country in the world to deploy nuclear submarines and is a signal of Delhi's determination to play a greater global military role commensurate with its growing economic and political strength.
But for all the historic animosity and renewed tensions on the subcontinent, Pakistan's fears are misplaced. The presumed target of the formidable weapons Arihant will carry is not Pakistan but China.
In recent years India has grown increasingly alarmed at China's military expansion around the Indian Ocean. The Chinese have long had an important naval base on the Burmese coast. They have given massive aid to other Indian Ocean states, signing friendship pacts, building ports in Pakistan and Bangladesh and reportedly setting up a listening post on one of Burma's islands.
Now they are engaged in the most visible projection of their power, transforming the small port of Hambantota on the south coast of Sri Lanka into a large deep-water hub for trans-shipping containers between Europe and Asia. It will also be a forward naval base to control the sea lanes between the Gulf and the Far East, through which most of the world's oil supplies pass.
India is not the only country suspicious of China's cultivation of a "string of pearls" - the Pentagon's phrase - around the India Ocean. The US and Japan share the worries voiced by Admiral Sureesh Mehta, head of the Indian Navy, that China wants to "take control over the world energy jugular."
Sri Lanka made Hambantota port available in return for China's massive weapons supply to enable the Sri Lankan Army to win a victory over the Tamil Tigers. The Pentagon is sceptical of Chinese claims that this is purely a commercial move, and has encouraged India to build up its navy as a counterweight.
Both countries are now engaged in an arms race. The Indian defence budget in 2007 rose by 7.8 per cent over the previous year, and China announced that its military budget for last year would amount to $59 million (BD22m), an increase of 17.6pc over 2007. Both countries are investing heavily in their naval forces. For both, the area of strategic competition is the Indian Ocean.
Ironically, this rivalry comes at a time when relations between Delhi and Beijing are at their closest since their brief border war in 1962. Bilateral trade is running at around $40 billion a year, and the two armies have conducted their first joint military exercise. But China was shaken by India's conclusion last year of a nuclear deal with America, correctly seeing this as a decisive tilt westwards in India's foreign policy. As a result, a once peaceful ocean is in danger of becoming the arena where Asia's emerging powers are determined to prove themselves. The Arihant may enter service in three years. A warm ocean is rapidly growing colder.
StarScreen
Regular Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2009
- Messages
- 38
- Likes
- 0
I just hope that the sea trial go smoothly. Nobody wants any hiccups like the ones we faced in the LCA program.
p2prada
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2009
- Messages
- 10,234
- Likes
- 4,015
The Govt will not back down since it is the Jains who are moaning. They don't form a significant votebank.
p2prada
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2009
- Messages
- 10,234
- Likes
- 4,015
ROFL.
'Nuke-sub with missiles offer best 2nd strike chance'
Updated on Sunday, August 02, 2009, 21:58 IST
Kalpakkam (Tamil Nadu): Nuclear-powered submarines with capacity to launch ballistic missiles offer the best second-strike capability for a nation, an Indian naval officer said here on Sunday.
"It is the only system that offers safe second-strike capability. The normal range of submarine-launched ballistic missiles will be 8,000 km. Compared to land-based missile launch pads, submarines are difficult to detect," Rear Admiral Michael Moraes, Flag Officer (submarines), told reporters at Kalpakkam, around 45 km from Chennai.
He was participating in the fifth year celebrations held by the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre's (BARC) PRP unit here.
For the first time in its history, the BARC threw open the PRP Centre that developed the nuclear reactor powering India's first indigenously developed nuclear submarine INS Arihant, launched last week.
India launched its first indigenously developed SSBN INS Arihant last Sunday.
Moraes said the Indian Navy needs around 13 more submarines to beef up its fleet.
"We may need four SSBNs and nine SSNs. Our current submarine fleet strength is 16."
SSBN denotes submersible ship, with ballistic missile launch capacity and nuclear powered, whereas SSN implies submersible ship, nuclear powered.
The government has already approved the building of four SSBNs.
According to the officer, the commissioning of SSBN INS Arihant will take around two more years as all the systems have to be checked.
He said the nuclear submarine will be manned by a 100-member crew.
"The noise levels in the nuclear submarine are fine and the hull life is around 25 years."
Queried about the reactor life, he added: "Normally the hull and reactor life would coincide. The reactor will not be dismantled and fitted in another submarine."
IANS
`Nuke-sub with missiles offer best 2nd strike chance`
Updated on Sunday, August 02, 2009, 21:58 IST
Kalpakkam (Tamil Nadu): Nuclear-powered submarines with capacity to launch ballistic missiles offer the best second-strike capability for a nation, an Indian naval officer said here on Sunday.
"It is the only system that offers safe second-strike capability. The normal range of submarine-launched ballistic missiles will be 8,000 km. Compared to land-based missile launch pads, submarines are difficult to detect," Rear Admiral Michael Moraes, Flag Officer (submarines), told reporters at Kalpakkam, around 45 km from Chennai.
He was participating in the fifth year celebrations held by the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre's (BARC) PRP unit here.
For the first time in its history, the BARC threw open the PRP Centre that developed the nuclear reactor powering India's first indigenously developed nuclear submarine INS Arihant, launched last week.
India launched its first indigenously developed SSBN INS Arihant last Sunday.
Moraes said the Indian Navy needs around 13 more submarines to beef up its fleet.
"We may need four SSBNs and nine SSNs. Our current submarine fleet strength is 16."
SSBN denotes submersible ship, with ballistic missile launch capacity and nuclear powered, whereas SSN implies submersible ship, nuclear powered.
The government has already approved the building of four SSBNs.
According to the officer, the commissioning of SSBN INS Arihant will take around two more years as all the systems have to be checked.
He said the nuclear submarine will be manned by a 100-member crew.
"The noise levels in the nuclear submarine are fine and the hull life is around 25 years."
Queried about the reactor life, he added: "Normally the hull and reactor life would coincide. The reactor will not be dismantled and fitted in another submarine."
IANS
`Nuke-sub with missiles offer best 2nd strike chance`
For the first time, NDTV brings out details about the nuclear reactor that powers INS Arihant.
Watch Video
Monday, Aug 03, 2009
CHENNAI: India building an 80 MWe Pressurised Water Reactor (PWR) at Kalpakkam near here “marks the beginning of its indigenous PWR capability,” Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Chairman Anil Kakodkar said on Sunday.
An identical PWR of the same capacity would propel the indigenous nuclear-powered submarine INS Arihant that was launched on July 26. The two PWRs were built by the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC). Enriched uranium would fuel them, and light water was both coolant and moderator. The Rare Materials Project at Ratnahalli, near Mysore, produced the enriched uranium. “For nuclear power generation also, the PWR technology is most popular worldwide,” Dr. Kakodkar said.
On Sunday, reporters were shown the PWR built on a beachhead at Kalpakkam. The reactor, built under a highly secretive project called Plutonium Recyling Project (PRP), has been operating from September 2006. The non-descript PRP building has the display of a sculpture of a dolphin outside.
The PWR, housed in a huge hall, has a massive pressure hull, a shielding tank with water and reactor inside, a reactor pressure vessel made of special steel, a control room and an auxiliary control room.
“The reactor is running now. All the safety related parameters are monitored in the auxiliary control room,” said A. Moorthi, scientific officer, BARC, who showed reporters round the reactor. The land-based reactor and the PWR that has been packed into Arihant’s hull are on a 1:1 scale.
Dr. Kakodkar said the PWR at Kalpakkam was an addition to the nation’s family of reactors. The Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors (PHWRs), which use natural uranium as fuel, “are world class.” “Our Fast Breeder Reactors (FBRs) are globally advanced. Our Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR) is globally unique,” he added.
The FBRs would use plutonium-uranium oxide as fuel. The AHWR, to be built, would have thorium as fuel.
Srikumar Banerjee, Director, BARC, called the introduction of indigenous PWR technology in the country “a major step” in the activities of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE). The BARC was mandated to develop a land-based prototype PWR and also a compact nuclear pack for submarine applications.
“The complexity increases manifold in a submarine due to the miniaturisation of the already complex systems,” Dr. Banerjee said. Besides, power should rise fast from 25 per cent to 100 per in a few minutes in the reactor of a nuclear-powered submarine. It should reach full speed in a few minutes. So, special attention had to be paid to the design of the reactor.
S. Basu, Director of BARC Facilities at Kalpakkam, said the successful operation of the PWR at Kalpakkam for the past three years generated data for the submarine version.
Arihant was a joint project of the DAE, the Navy and the DRDO.
The Hindu : Front Page : PWR building shows indigenous capability, says Kakodkar
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
British nuclear submarine crew boiled to death in indian ocean | Naval Warfare | 2 | |
|
The Great Indian Nuclear Submarine Saga | Indian Navy | 1 | |
|
Indian Navy accelerates Nuclear Submarine programme | Indian Navy | 0 | |
|
Indian Nuclear Forces of the Future...? | Strategic Forces | 21 |
