New Indian-Russian nuclear and military agreements, Canadian uranium soon.

Now that India's de facto weapons status has been accepted through lifting of Nuclear Supplier Group (NSG) sanctions India is working quickly to access uranium and nuclear technology. One nuclear and three military agreements were concluded with Russia this week. Another nuclear agreement, with Canada, is scheduled for signature in June 2010.

The simultaneous signing of nuclear and military agreements suggest "joint development of weapons systems and platforms" will continue Russia's assistance with India's submarine reactor (first deployed in the Arihant - see "Development" section here). As the reactor has only been at sea in the Arihant for several months, has not yet been operated at sea, it is highly likely that significant development and modification of the reactor will be required over the next two years.
The expected June 2010 agreement with Canada, in part providing for export of uranium to India, may also reduce India's interest in Australian uranium. Indian bitterness however, over Australia's uranium embargo, will still remain.

Agreement with Russia - Business Standard, December 8, 2009:

"India today signed a path-breaking civil nuclear agreement with Russia that will guarantee uninterrupted uranium fuel supplies for its atomic reactors and transfer of technology and also inked three military pacts.

The agreements were signed after talks between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev at the Kremlin here, during which the two leaders spoke of the need for “pinpointed” strategies to deal with terrorism emanating from Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The defence agreements, aimed at moving away from a buyer-seller relationship, provide for joint development of weapons systems and platforms over a 10-year period up to 2020 and vital after-sales support for Russian equipment supplied to India to end ad hocism in this critical area. -
ITAR-TASS news agency reported that the two countries have finalised the Admiral Gorshkov aircraft carrier deal, an irritant in the bilateral relations.

Singh described the Inter-Governmental framework agreement for civil nuclear cooperation as a “major step” forward and said India was “very satisfied” at the development of bilateral atomic cooperation.

The deal is seen as going much more beneficial for India than the historic 123 atomic agreement with the US, which does not guarantee fuel supplies without any break."

Fute agreement with Canada - IBN Live, November 29, 2009:

"India and Canada have agreed on a civil nuclear deal that will enable New Delhi to access Canadian nuclear technology and uranium after a gap of 34 years. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said the development "augurs extremely well" for the ties between the nations.

The deal is likely to be signed when Manmohan Singh goes to Canada to attend the G20 summit in June next year. The breakthrough was announced on Saturday after Manmohan Singh held talks with his Canadian counterpart Stephen Harper on the sidelines of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) at this Trinidad and Tobago capital."
-
Pete

India's Nuclear Submarine Status

Useful diagram of Arihant and future weapons fit. Click to enlarge.

-

The following article mostly appears to be a Press Release from the Indian Ministry of Defence with little critical analysis. Omissions seem to be:

- no comment that the Nerpa was to have been in Indian hands by late 2009 - this has now slipped to early 2010, and

- if Arihant is a "technology demonstrator" due to be inducted after two more years, where does this leave the advertised simultaneous construction of the second and third Arihants. The claim in August 2009 Second indigenous Indian nuclear submarine to be launched "soon"" therefore seems unfounded and unlikely to happen for at least three years. It would be folly to launch a second Arihant when the first is still under development.

-

This Times of India article, December 3, 2009, reports.
-
"NEW DELHI: India's first-ever indigenous nuclear submarine, aptly named INS Arihant (annihilator of enemies), should be ready for induction into Navy in another two years or so. With progress finally being made in fulfilling India's long-standing aim to have a credible `nuclear triad', or the ability to fire nukes from land, air and sea, the Navy now wants a well-balanced underwater strategic arm. This will include three SSBNs (nuclear-powered submarines with long-range strategic missiles) and six SSNs (nuclear-powered attack submarines) in the long-term. But much before all this, Navy will begin operating a nuclear submarine by early next year.

-

That is when, after several glitches, India will finally get the 12,000-tonne `K-152 Nerpa' Akula-II class submarine from Russia on a 10-year lease. Nerpa, of course, will not come armed with long-range missiles due to international treaties like the Missile Technology Control Regime. But apart from being a potent hunter of enemy submarines, Nerpa will also help train Indian sailors in the complex art of operating, maintaining and deploying nuclear submarines like INS Arihant and its already-approved two follow-on vessels....

-

The over 6,000-tonne INS Arihant will be more of `a technology demonstrator', rather than a fully-operational SSBN, for the subsequent follow-on nuclear submarines to follow. At present, the government has sanctioned well over Rs 30,000 crore for the ATV project to construct three submarines, with the third being of a much larger size. The `launch' of the 111-metre long INS Arihant by flooding the dry dock at the Shipbuilding Centre at Visakhapatnam on July 26 this year, in the presence of PM Manmohan Singh, marked India's entry into the select group of five nations -- US, UK, Russia, France and China -- capable of building nuclear submarines. But there is still a long way to go. It's only after its miniature 83 MW pressurised light-water reactor is `fired' sometime next year will INS Arihant begin its extensive sea-acceptance trials.

-

Then only will the testing of 700-km range K-15 SLBMs (submarine-launched ballistic missiles) developed by DRDO to arm the submarine, which has four silos on its hump, come into play. K-15, of course, falls way short of the over 5,000-km range missiles of US, Russia and China. The last, for instance, has a huge fleet of 62 submarines, with at least 10 of them nuclear-powered, and is also ready with its new JL-2 SLBM, which has a strike range of over 7,200 km."

-

Pete

Controversy Over SLBMs for India's Arihant Submarine (ATV)

Arihant and its proposed K-15 (Sagarika) and the Agni IIISL missiles. (click to enlarge) Diagram  drawn from a very comprehensive Arihant article at http://weapons.technology.youngester.com/2009/08/ins-arihant-in-news-and-photos.html
-
My previous post has drawn an interesting raft (or submersible) of queries and comments. They'll take a while to answer or at least to generate more questions. I'll respond in red in the next 2-3 days:

"A" said, Tuesday, February 01, 2011 1:01:00 AM

"Hi Pete, i think it is quite premature to assume that k-15 will be the mainstay SLBM fielded by indian submarines for next 20 years because already the indian media has reported the existence and launch of K-4 SLBM early last year.This SLBM is reported to have a range of 3500 kms and another missile of range 5000 kms+ is also under development.Another test of this missile is planned early this yaer.These are believed to be operationalised by 2017-2020."

Hi "A"

You're right that its premature to be certain that the K-15 (aka Sagarika and B-05) will be India's standard SLBM for 2 decades. Alternate developments are even less probable. The K-15 has been tested in a semi-submersible environment (from a pontoon) and has had a number of land launches where range and accuracy were tested.

Apparently the K-4 had a limited pontoon "cold" launch test after all (allegedly tested in January 2010 according to the Government sources telling India Today associate editor Sandeep Unnithan. The K-4 apparently "breached the surface" meaning its rocket motors (if installed) were not tested, no flight occured, hence no range claims could be tested see - http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/11/mag-report-indias-secret-k-missile.html  Significantly the K-4 is reported to be 10 metres long/tall (oddly the same length/height as the K-15) and 1.3 metres diametre while Agni III is reported to be 17 metres long/tall and 2 metres in diameter. These are two measurable indicators of how fundamentally different the K-4 and Agni III apparently are. http://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2008/01/indian-ki15-agni-3-missiles-in-atv.html of January 2008 on the K-15 launch. Meanwhile the variously labelled Agni III SL/K-X/K-4 has only been flight tested from land. The gulf between testing and developing a land based missile and an SLBM is very wide. Its like saying a successful test of a Minuteman IV indicates progress with a Trident II. The US never made the connection. Dimensions and the technical requirements of a submerged "cold" launch mean there is a great difference between land missiles and SLBMs.

It is also notable that the Arihant will only carry 4 Agni III SLs according to information in August 2008 when Arihant was launched - see http://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2009/08/arihant-indias-first-homebuilt-nuclear.html. Even then the armament expectations for Arihant were murky  - it was first to be armed with BrahMos, then K-15, then Agni III SLs.

Four Agni IIIs does not constitute an adequate war load compared to India's competitors, which vary from 12 (likely MIRVed) SLBMs on Chinese SSBNs, 16 for UK and France and 24 on US subs. This is also in the absence of any evidence that India has developed a MIRV (multiple warheads on each missile) capability. China has a decent chance of shooting down 4 Agni III warheads but not 240 (24 x 10 MIRVed) warheads from one US SSBN. This makes Arihant an unviable SSBN.

This also means India will need to develop a whole new class of nuclear submarine to fill the SSBN niche. New submarine classes often take 2 decades to develop. Although India could perhaps retrofit a 16 missile "plug" onto an Arihant style base.

In addition I think there is insufficient evidence, thus far, that Arihant's reactor is even operating. The Indian PMs speech in August 2008 indicated considerable Indian reliance on Russia for assistance in building Arihant (particularly the reactor http://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2009/08/arihant-indias-first-homebuilt-nuclear.html ). If India is also placing some reliance on Russia for developing and launching the theoretical Agni III SL from a submerged submarine India may have the kind of setbacks Russia is experiencing with the RSM-56 Bulava missile http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSM-56_Bulava#Troubles.  5 test failures out of 11.

Russia may prove of limited assistance and reliability (remembering ongoing Gorshkov delay and delays with Nerpa). Assuming India will not build a completely homegrown SLBM when mature technology is out there some intended or unintended (espionage) gathering from the US or UK may be in order. Alternatively with France's "record" (highly suspected testing and joint development of Israel's nuclear deterrent) help from France may be more explicit - especially if rolled in with the sale of 6 more Scorpenes (a current tender?) to India.

Naturally much of the above is speculation, but it may throw up likelihoods :) All this is not to disparage India - noting that Australia's homebuilt experience consists of 6 below average Collins SSKs.

Regards

Pete

--------------------------

PointSingularity86 said on February 01, 2011 4:26:00 AM
...
"Information sharing may well occur amongst those countries that see China as a potential threat"

Did u basically mean all countries? :P No not all countries. Information sharing might quietly occur between those countries that trust each other and/or they see the others' information on (say) Chinese SSN movements, as valuable. Sharing countries might also have a sound relationship with India. For example Russia would be an information sharing ally with India (but not directly with ther US) because Russia sees China as a threat and Russia has the facilities to track Chinese SSN's and then pass on the interlligence to India :P. 
In contrast North Korea (NK) is distrusted by all and is unlikely to have adequate tracking intelligence facilities about Chinese SSNs. NK would see China as an ally sometimes but also a potential threat. NK would be out of the intel sharing loop.   :P

One observation, the Nicobar islands (well I almost forget they're ours ;) are close to Malacca straits. Actually, I suppose there's no way a ship can pass Malacca strait and bypass Nicobar islands! If India monitors Great Nicobar seas and perhaps Andaman Island seas as well. , it will detect everything that moves thru Malacca!
So nuke subs can watch the open Indian Ocean south of Malacca. The Nicobar's certainly occur to the the terrestrial (island) eye view. There may also be sound reasons why particular undersea geographical formations or water conditions might also be concentrated on by India's undersea sensor arrays. The arrays may not need to connect with closest landfalls/islands - power/optical fibre signals might connedct directly with the Naval Base at Vishakhapatnam. Also the fairly fixed paths of India's spy satellites may influence surveillance choices. Further, the patrol areas asigned to allies would affect India's own surveillance efforts. 

.... Or maybe say hello to Oz and beg for Uranium more frequently (u knw, Mr. Krishna can't do daily begging down under)
or maybe steal some from Oz without saying hello... lol
God this uranium begging business has gone a bit too far! :P Amen to that PS86! The uranium embargo is a needless irritant to good Australian relations with India! :P

btw, I was thinking, a nuke sub's constrained only by supplies onboard (food more precisely) . In wartime (the last patrol...) food availability might be the only limitation. However in peace - for the US anyway, a voyage might be just 4-5 months (less than food stocks) because the Blue or Gold crews need to return due to: a degree of physical and mental exhaustion and sleep debt (less sleep than desirable), the need to see loved ones, need to perform maintenance or repairs for about a month on the SSN or SSBN (eg software and hardware updates might be needed for the computerised combat systems). Some nuclear missiles and torpedoes might need to be reconditioned or swapped due to chemical changes always going on in the nuclear warheads. Crews need to train and relax. Much training cannot be done on an operational sub, simulators or training subs might be used - see this http://www.pigboats.com/bg/bluegold.html for more info. P

. do u hav any idea why don't they just do some underwater fishing to solve that? ;)"

Since the mid nineteenth century foraging (living off the land or even sea) by the military has become quite rare due to the availability of compact rations, particularly in tins. Logistic systems can now cope. Modern militaary also use a division of labour to maximise the effctiveness of the minority (about 10%) on the front line. :P

Subs are about the least likely unit to forage due to the need to remain submerged - need to remain stealthy, and the stringent manpower availability. Fishing is also labor  time intensive and only preduces protein. Would take about half the crew to suspend all activity to catch, scale, clean and can the fish...P

----------------------------------

Invalid said February 01, 2011 6:40:00 PM
...
Hi Pete

Thanks for the clarification. Unless the sensors density is too high, they may not be able to distinctly identify submarines from the container traffic. I think computer software and hardware would filter out commercial ship sounds The Hunt for the Red October is reputedly realistic in parts - such as the sonarman equipment and capabilities.

Does China / India have any ally around the Malacca Straits ? None of them have to an extent we can say that India had Singapore as an ally. Due to effective diplomacy of India, Singapore is not seeing India as an enemy and not as an ally too. Intelligence alliances can occur between strategic and economic competitors. Much happens quietly with the public unaware. I mention Singapore due to intuition that it and India (and Israel for that matter) all are threated be actual or pential Muslim threats, all have able, high tech submarine services to track "enemy" submarines and ships. Singapore also participated in MALABAR 2007 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MALABAR_Naval_Exercise This exercise was hosted by India and it was a thinly disguised containment of China activity. :P

I always wonder why can't submarines propeller blade change its shapes slightly some might change or the cylinder shroud may change position (with lose in efficiency ofcourse) so that its broadband noise & cavitation noise signature can vary. The propellers are frequently kept from public view because photography may reveal alot including likely acoustic characteristics (including excess cavitation noise likelihood). Even the way propellers are made "milled" is often secret. :P

Invalid said Hi PointSingularity86,

You don't have to go near Nicobar Islands after you exit from Malacca strait. Ships can hug coastlines of Malaysia, Thailand & Burma. After they reach Burma, they can move into Bay of Bengal and then to Indian Ocean."

Nerpa Nuclear Submarine Almost, Nearly, in Indian hands

-
-
Strategypage December 30, 2009, has written a well rounded report on India's new Nerpa/Chakra (Akula II) submarine. "Chakra" can be translated as "spinning wheel like weapon" or "force centre" :
-
"Cursed Boat Heading For India - December 30, 2009: The Russian Akula II SSN (nuclear attack submarine) Nerpa, built for India, has finally completed its sea trials and was accepted into Russian service. But this will be temporary, as India is supposed to take possession in five months.
-
The Indian crew for the sub has been ready for over a year now, Most of the delay arose 13 months ago, when, while undergoing sea trials, there was an accidental activation of the fire extinguisher system. This killed twenty sailors and civilians, and injured more than twenty. There were 208 people aboard the sub at the time, most of them navy and shipyard personnel there to closely monitor all aspects of the sub as it made its first dives and other maneuvers. The source of the fatal accident was poor design and construction of the safety systems on the sub. This accident led to sailors and shipyard technicians being fearful of going to sea on the boat. So the sea trials were delayed, even after repairs were made. -
Once in Indian service, the Nerpa will be called the INS Chakra (the same name used by the Charlie class Russian sub India leased from 1988-91). The post-accident modifications on the Nerpa cost $65 million. The lease arrangement has India paying $178,000 a day, for ten years, for use of the sub.
-
The 7,000 ton Akula IIs requires a crew of 51 highly trained sailors. It was Indian money that enabled Russia to complete construction on at least two Akulas. These boats were less than half finished at the end of the Cold War. This was another aftereffect of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Several major shipbuilding projects were basically put on hold (which still cost a lot of money), in the hopes that something would turn up. In this case, it was Indians with lots of cash. The Indian crew was, apparently, to take possession of the INS Chakra last Summer [July 2009], and take it back to India. But this won't happen until May.

Traditionally, when a new ship losses lots of people during sea trials, it is regarded as "cursed" and unlucky. Sailors can be a superstitious, especially when there are dead bodies involved. It's not known if India will have any problems with this."
-
Comment
-
Not only will Nerpa/Chakra be a new addition to the Indian Navy and training platform it will also provide an opportunity to transfer technology and operational lessons to India's indigenous Arihant submarine project. The Arihant was launched in 2009. As reported in this blog, four more submarines (perhaps two more SSNs and two larger SSBNs) in the Arihant Class (or having some commonlaity with the Arihant) may be launched by 2020.
-
The extreme expense that India has gone to in financing completion of two Russian Akula IIs (Nerpa and another) followed by the high expected daily lease cost for a 10 year period reinforces the technology transfer expectation of this project.
-
Pete

India's Chronic Submarine Upgrade Problems

1st Published January 19, 2009 

An Indian Navy Kilo class diesel electric submarine under repair at Mazagon Docks, Mumbai.
-

Most countries bordering the Indian Ocean remain fairly silent about their submarine services, but, as indicated by the following India has openly described ongoing deficiencies:

India's IBNLive reported on January 4, 2009 http://ibnlive.in.com/news/navys-submarine-repair-costs-india-losses/82616-3.html :

"New Delhi: Over-emphasis on indigenous work is hurting India's readiness for war.
As India's vital submarine arm struggles with dangerously low numbers, a top-end submarine has been taken out of the fleet for a repair programme.

The shocking part is that the repair schedule will last 10 years. Such upgrades have previously been done overseas in two years. One could compare this to a submarine being laid comatose, at least in the case of the INS Sindhukirti, a frontline Kilo class attack submarine of the Indian Navy.

It's been in dry dock at Vizag for a refit programme for close to five years now. It seems that Hindustan Shipyards, the government-owned contractor with little experience in submarine upgrades, will take at least another five years before the submarine can be put to water again.

Unavailable to the submarine-starved Navy for 10 of the 30 years of its useful life, the Sindhukirti is as good as a write off.

"How viable is a surgery which requires a healthy patient to be in a hospital bed for one-third of his life? That is the approximate analogy for the mid-life upgrade for this submarine INS Sindhukirti, the Dry Dock Queen. Four submarines are stuck in such protracted upgrades. Not surprisingly, just nobody is accountable," said our defence correspondent.

Russia took just two years each to upgrade six similar Kilo class submarines for the Indian Navy.
The government insists that it is now building national capability with inhouse upgrades.

"That kind of expertise did not exist in India before and this is for the first time that we are trying it out here. Instead of sending them to Russia all the way, this one is being offloaded to Hindustan Shipyards. There are some problems in their procurement procedures. It takes a little longer than is expected," said Chief of Naval Staff, Admiral Suresh Mehta.

What this trade-off on time does to India's military readiness is anybody's guess. It took a recent [ Comptroller and Auditor General of India] CAG report to blow the lid of the Indian Navy's worst kept secret: that the vital submarine arm faces a crisis of numbers.

The shocking revelations of the report were:

- Only seven of India's 16 submarines are available for combat at any time.

- 10 of these 16 ageing submarines will be due for phase-out by 2012.

- To maintain current numbers, one submarine needs to be inducted every two years but there's been no addition since 2001.

- India's only submarine-making facility in Mumbai was kept idle for 12 years.

- The gaping hole in India's naval capability is showing."
-
Pete

Nerpa Accident Sets Back Indian Submarine Program

Monday, November 10, 2008

 

Possible location of the accident in the Nerpa's bow.

-

-

Late Breaking News - It was reported Nov 21, 2008 that the Nerpa would now not be leased to India but would join the Russian Navy. The tragic accident aboard the Russian Akula II submarine Nerpa is a further problem in weapon acquisition relations between India and Russia.

-

The Nerpa's construction was partly financed by India in preperation for a long lease to India (10 years) together with a Russian training program on how to operate and maintain Akulas.

-

It is likely that the 3 nuclear subs under construction in India (Advanced Technology Vessels (ATVs)) are a development of the Akula - therefore India needs the Nerpa/Chakra as a training vessel. The accident is sure to delay availabilty of the Nerpa/Chakra.

-

India has found Russia to be a difficult supplier in the area of tanks, jet fighters, over an aircraft carrier and submarines (including the conventional Kilo subs and now with the Nerpa/Chakra) . This is not to say that other suppliers (like the US) aren't unreliable at times.

-

Apparently no Indian sailors were killed or injured - nothing about Indian technicians/observers yet.

-

Nerpa/Chakra was covered in my post Indian Submarines Chakra & the ATVs Make Progress of August 27, 2008.

-

The Times of India, November 9, 2008 reports:

-

NEW DELHI: India's already-delayed project to lease a nuclear-powered submarine for a 10-year period from Russia, under a secret deal signed in January 2004 for an initial $650 million, seems to have taken a further hit.

-

The new Russian Akula-II class attack submarine called ‘K-152 Nerpa', which met with an accident during sea trials in the Sea of Japan off Vladivostok on Saturday, killing at least 20 people and injuring another 21, is apparently the same vessel which was to be transferred to India in July-August 2009, sources said. "But no official confirmation from Russia has reached here till now.

Russian video report (in English) - with footage of Akulas

-

Yes, Indian sailors have been training in Russia, in batches, for nuclear submarine operations but none of them were on board this one," said a source.

-

While reports held that Nerpa's nuclear reactor was not damaged and there was no radiation leakage during the accident, which occurred due to "unsanctioned activation" of fire-fighting systems, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has ordered a thorough investigation into the incident.

-

The Russian sailors and workers from Komsomolsk-on-Amur shipyard who died were apparently in the sections near the submarine's bow, where the fire-extinguishing systems malfunctioned, and were suffocated by fumes from Freon and other coolants. The injured, with different degrees of poisoning, were evacuated to Russian Pacific Fleet hospital at Vladivostok for treatment, even as the 8,140-tonne Nerpa with 165 other personnel later limped its way back to its operating base in the Primorye region.

-

...The sea trials of Nerpa, christened INS Chakra by India, had been launched only last month. Though its construction at Amur Shipyard had begun way back in 1991, it was halted midway after Russia was hit by a financial crisis. It was only after India pumped in money that Nerpa's construction had resumed, with the understanding that India would get the submarine on a 10-year lease.

-

Interestingly, in January 2004, India had also signed the $1.5billion package deal with Russia for refit of decommissioned aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov and 16 MiG-29K fighters. But with the package deal now being renegotiated, India might well have to pay another $2billion to get Gorshkov by 2012, with some indications that a part of huge cost escalation could be linked to Russia demanding more for Nerpa over the initial $650million.

-

The delivery schedule of the nuclear-powered submarine [Nerpa] from Russia has already been revised a couple of times due to technical hitches. Now, after the accident, it looks that even the commissioning date set for August 15 next year might not be possible."