Following India's 6 Future Alpha SSNs - SSBN Protectors of April 7, 2021 came the blessing of a veritable avalanche of good comments from Anonymous, GhalibKabir, Gessler and Arpit Kanodia. Rather than attempt to summarise each comment (obscuring meaning and context). Or try to respond point by point (which would fill 10 pages/5 articles) I'll republish the comments. I'll also add some lengthened weapon designations, comments in [...] brackets and extra links.
I'll start combining GhalibKabir’s comments of Apr 8, 2021:
“Pete, I think we discussed this way back in 2019, similar to the Chinese Type 091 (NATO (Chinese Dynasty) reporting name "Han" class) SSN. The future Indian Project 75 Alpha SSN will likely (initially) use a slightly uprated Arihant 40% HEU PWR (uprated from 83 MWt to 100 MWt) implying electrical power uprates to 16.7 MWe from a maximum of 13.8 MW presently) (the rule of 1/6 for naval reactors vs 1/3 for land based).
Peter Lobner got it right with his 100 MWt prediction I think. [See Peter Lobner "Marine Nuclear Power 1939-2018: Part 5, China, India, Japan & other nations" (July, 2018) page 159 (Table) and page 163 at https://lynceans.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Marine-Nuclear-Power-1939-2018_Part-5_China-India-Japan-Others.pdf about 50 MB, 294 pages]
The S-5 class future full size Indian SSBN could see a single Soviet/Russian OK-650 reactor [which India may have designated the CLWR-B2 Compact LWR - see right sidebar] derivative as the bigger SSBN will need 25 MWe or more capacity to be available implying a 160-170 MWt OK-650 [even 190 MW and see also ] class reactor.
However, SSN reactor dynamics are likely to be different as the rapid 'power up power down' variation demand on the SSN reactor for 'sprint chases' will be much higher than an SSBN. The Arihant class' or even the S-5's likely speed requirements could stay between 22-24 knots while the Alpha SSN will need burst speed capability of 35 knots and the ability to do 28-30 knots frequently and consistently... (like China's current Type 093 Shang class SSN for instance).
Also I think INS Chakra II elements with Arihant base is the most likely in SSN Alpha and not Barracuda or the Alvero Alberto [aka "SN-BR"] Brazilian Scorpene SSN (though some learnings will cross over in welding, silencing, reduction gear design etc.) [Also the future Chakra III might influence the Alpha SSN. "India and Russia, March 7, 2019, signed $3Billion deal to lease another Akula SSN, dubbed Chakra III, should be delivered to Indian Navy 2025].
I do hope India is able to leverage [France's] Thales and [Israel's] Rafael under water suites expertise to equip the SSN with good sonar suites and combat capabilities."
[The Russia-India lease deal means] INS Chakra II cannot be used in offensive war. It cannot be armed with any missile ranging > 290 km i.e. original MTCR restrictions apply (unless I am gravely mistaken)...it can help in case of open war, but will be limited to defending with torpedoes and such short range missiles as to be of very limited utility indeed....plus the sonars and combat suites are very old as well....
I think a vertical launch system (VLS) [on the Alpha SSN? Within a 6,000 tonne (submeged) displacement limit?] combo with Horizontal launch capability could be better... 24 Tri-packed Nirbhay sub-sonic SLCMs in 8 VLS with 20+ combination of Varunastra Torpedoes and BrahMos SLCMs are the most likely combos..
Also while a propulsor pumpjet is desirable and is being tried, I think a conventional 7 blade screw is likely for the first 2 Alpha SSNs at least. Like the Chinese Typo 091 SSN in 1975, the focus first should be to get a couple of Alphas out and test them. Then we can see and make real progress, instead of an unhealthy obsession with 'perfect profile' product launches.
The Type 091 used a 60 MWt inefficient PWR that delivered 8 MWe and was very radiation leak prone. The key difference being the PWR was a LEU (thanks to the Soviets screwing the Chinese over [Soviets were worried Mao was prepared to risk dragging the Soviets into nuclear war against US and Taiwan]. China was left with minimal uranium supplies and also a loss of nuclear and submarine expertise after China's Cultural Revolution). India has been a HEU navy.
Good that [India's Chief of Defence Staff, General] Bipin Rawat, Doval and co were able to prevail on the SSNs after 3 years of wrangle at North Block" [ie. wrangling at the Ministry of Finance, New Delhi].
Interesting comments on the future SSN programme. Infact I cant understand the hullabaloo when the CCS had approved six SSNS way back in February 2015. Infact the expected approval likely to be for three with three to follow.
ReplyDeleteSo it has nothing to do with Gen Rawat whose limited understanding of the maritime domain had led him to suggest that submarines are preferable over an aircraft carrier without understanding that naval capability is full spectrum and not a zero sum game. As for the type of SSN, whether it will have Russian design characteristics or French ones will be watched closely.
Where the Govt will find money is another issue but if India believes it will be a USD 10 Trln economy by 2032, then it could perhaps find the money because it will take at least 15 years from now if not ore for the first boat to be commissioned.
@subdriver
ReplyDeleteConsidering that no Acceptance of Necessity (AoN) was sought for the SSNs yet (recent reports in media indicate that the Navy will do that soon), the previous CCS approvals aren't likely to have transpired into deals in of themselves - unless aggressively followed up on a priority basis by IN top brass + MoD. Without such AoNs, the SSNs would at best have joined the ranks of various procurements like P-75I and Multi-Role Support Vessel (MRSV) that on paper look like they have all the approvals needed but really go nowhere - because the Navy would not consider them a priority to be tackled in that financial year.
And keep in mind, that to the best of my knowledge, approvals like those of Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) and Defence Acquisitions Council (DAC) have a strict built-in lapse period. If not seen through to fruition within that budgeted year, they become invalid.
Even an approved AoN would expire if not followed through with a Request for Proposal (RFP) with relevant vendors (in case of foreign deals) or sub-contractors (in case of domestic ones).
Note that I'm not by any means an expert with regard to the machinations of the Indian MoD - and I certainly do not envy anyone who has to study & understand said machinations, especially with the ever-changing Defence Procurement Procedures (DPPs). So be sure to conduct your own research and correct me if I'm found wrong.
Thanks Gessler
ReplyDeleteI aim to do an article today, on some of your, last week's, comments.
Cheers
Pete
Hi subdriver
ReplyDeleteIn addition to Gessler's comment I add that the highest priority task of India's indigenous Alpha SSNs will be to protect the most formidable leg of India's triad (the SSBNs-SLBMs).
The threat and effect of the Arihant's and, in time, the S5's SLBMs is very much a tri-service (land/army, destroys air bases, destroys ports and surface navy ships) and military-civilian matter (threatens and can destroy Pak's and China's industry and populations).
So SSN advocacy is legitimately a matter for India's Chief of Defence Staff, General Rawat, as well as the Minister of Defence, Minister of Finance, ther coordinating officials/politicians and, of course, Modi.
Regards
Pete
@Pete at 7:59 AM on April 15
ReplyDeleteLooking forward to it!
In the meantime, two articles in the sphere of having something to do with sub-surface warfare for your general perusal - nothing specific, but interesting 5-minute reads all the same:
On acoustic stealth of submarines, and an overview of the Indian Naval Materials Research Laboratory (NMRL) developments regarding the same:
https://alphadefense.in/acoustic-stealth-indian-navy/
And, on the construction of a new testing/research ship for the Naval Physical & Oceanographic Laboratory (NPOL) - the nodal agency responsible for developing & integrating the various sonar suites of Indian-built ships & submarines:
https://alphadefense.in/new-clandestine-ship/
The ship would include large moon pools for conducting at-sea testing of new examples of sonar/hydrophone technology.
Hi @Pete
ReplyDeleteIt is now a matter of CDS & MoD, as it becomes a Navy project now. It wasn't before, even the DND wasn't involved before.
https://www.indiannavy.nic.in/content/directorate-naval-design-submarine-design-group
The lead designers were DAE & DRDO (NSTL Vizag). Even NSTL is the lead designer for S5.
https://www.drdo.gov.in/labs-and-establishments/naval-science-technological-laboratory-nstl
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Science_and_Technological_Laboratory
https://dae.gov.in/
For budgeting, most analysts assume, India only spending 1.5% of GDP on defense. IMO, that is totally untrue, they never mention budgets of SFC (which is huge btw).
The ATV project costed around $3 billion dollars, and subsequent boats around $1.5 billion, the budgets were never cleared from Ministry of Finance or MoD. So, where that money came from?
Only now, after the CDS vs Navy hullabaloo, this project is shifted to navy, and now we start to see more openness. Also as this is a Navy project now, AoN was required, now it's a proper military acquisition instead of SFC one.
Also, it makes more sense that the Navy acquires it directly, instead of deputing people to SFC. But good thing for people like us is we see more openess for this project.
Hi Gessler
ReplyDeleteWill republish your 2nd comment tomorrow, April 17, all great stuff, thanks.
So much has been happening this week: 2 visits to the dentist - Ouch! lots of drilling and expense. Much (non-submarine) correspondence about Prince Philip passing.
Regards
Pete
Hi Arpit Kanodia
ReplyDeleteThanks for your Apr 15, 2021, 7:16:00 PM comments above.
Clearly India's MoD/Navy acquisitions system is as complex and available money dependent as Australia's and the US system.
Regards
Pete