[ads11]

Handy little video clip explaining how the domestic AIP system would work on the Kalvari class:

https://youtu.be/SUHLhGFqniU

First time I've come across an explanation between the ethanol based MESMA system offered by Naval Group and the phosphoric acid based fuel cell that the home brew solution uses. Found it interesting. However the installation will only happen when the lead boat is due for refit next year so it'll be a while yet. All the more reason I can't see why 75I isn't quietly shelved and instead we just go ahead with a new order of B spec boats with the AIP module incorporated from the outset. What was the time that the yard took to build the last two boats? If the first refit isn't till next year and they have free capacity now, might as well utilise it surely?

[adi.mariner]

Saw a Submarine today in the Mumbai Anchorage. Experts might know more regarding the type etc. Apologies for the image quality.

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by adi.mariner

Saw a Submarine today in the Mumbai Anchorage. Experts might know more regarding the type etc. Apologies for the image quality.

Thank you for sharing this photo. That shark like silhouette is of a Kalvari class submarine i.e. the Scorpene class.

[locusjag]

There was a fun question in the internet on what could a Megalodon do to a modern navy destroyer at sea. A reply mentioned that all the destroyer will need to do is to switch to active Sonar and emit one ping at 235 dB. The Megalodon's internal organs would turn to jelly instantly from the energy burst.

I never did think of Sonar as a deadly thing! Interesting.

And in that same discussion, I came across a linked video that depicts some kind of a ship/sub emitting Sonar pings, as heard by some submerged divers. It's clearly audible in the video, albeit not at 235 dB obviously, or else they'd have died then and there.

https://youtu.be/F0VNqK7252o

[ads11]

Originally Posted by locusjag

There was a fun question in the internet on what could a Megalodon do to a modern navy destroyer at sea. A reply mentioned that all the destroyer will need to do is to switch to active Sonar and emit one ping at 235 dB. The Megalodon's internal organs would turn to jelly instantly from the energy burst.

Fun question that. I don't know about sonar turning the internal organs of the Megalodon to mush but (and this is more dragracer's wheelhouse so step in to correct me if I'm wrong buddy), sound is absolutely weaponised in the oceans. The loudest living organism is the sperm whale IIRC (I think they get as loud as the ping you've mentioned), and I think it and other cetaceans (eyes on orcas here given their reputation as the hoodlum of the seas), use strong sound pulses to stun prey.

I can speak of the offshore geophysical sector in that the sound sources used to generate the signal for seismic surveying (typically devices called air guns - they create large bubbles of air that then pop), have been known to be an irritant to marine wildlife at best and harmful at worst. It's why in places with robust regulations, there's a lot of environmental surveying required before going ahead with gathering a seismic sweep. Much as we'd like to gather the seismic data when the weather is nice, you need to factor in the migration of whales for eg into your operations.

As increasingly the prospect of turning to the subsurface offshore for minerals becomes a relevant proposition, you'll hear louder voices of concern in terms of the impact on wildlife, particularly the sound itself of any deep sea mining machinery. Lot's of work to be done.

Anyway, fun aside this. I bet someone has thought of some low rent movie where a Megalodon attacks a submarine. I doubt it's bite force would do much harm though. If it were me, I'd go back further in time to Dunkleosteus. I bet that'll poke a hole or two in a sub with it's can opener mouth.

[ads11]

Off topic: Reuters are reporting Australia will buy Virginia class boats

AUKUS was understandably a huge deal when it was inked with far reaching ramifications. No one has had any real answers to how exactly these future RAN nuclear boats will look but Reuters seem to be saying that Australia will buy American made Virginia class boats. I find this slightly perplexing though because recent reports have had multiple US Senators say that there are no slots in US yards for overseas customers. The article itself highlights how General Dynamics has a backlog of 17 USN orders it only expects to complete in the early 2030s. Short of the Americans suddenly unlocking the extra yard space they need (a generally pressing issue for their naval ops), not to mention getting Congressional clearance for ToT on a lot of key elements, I don't see how this is possible in the proposed timeline. Most observers seemed to think the RAN will adopt an Astute class hull with potentially a US powerplant and Australian subsystems. Makes much more sense to me that Australia could use the yard capacity of the Brits (who let's be honest are likely more desperate for orders in the long run).

The real issue for the RAN is they made a strategic choice with AUKUS but their partners yards are all backed up for the better part of this decade, and the RAN Collins class boats are already long in the tooth. Even buying an off the shelf design is going to set them back a decade from where they'd like to be, forget designing any hybrid or clean sheet design with any Australian components and building domestically. I'm always mindful of the anecdote V.Narayan shared about Indira Gandhi quipping we have no time to waste when it came to India's boomer programme, given the incredibly long lead times.

Side note: the authors seem to think only security council members have nuclear boats. Odd to see Reuters make a rookie mistake like that.

Oh and now the Guardian is reporting Rishi Sunak will purportedly announce a UK design will be selected. Twists and turns continue. Guess next week we'll find out.

Coming back to India, I still think there's low hanging fruit there in exploiting the fact that the French are still smarting at being left at the altar by the Aussies on the Barracuda class boats, which means they'll likely want any win to tout of their own. Why not just approve the follow on Kalvari order and have a win win for all parties involved.

One final interesting implication of the AUKUS deal is this will be the first instance of a military nuclear reactor being sold to another country. China is kicking up a stink about this violating NPT protocols. It'll be worth viewing the fall out from that. I'm just thinking out loud but what's to say then hypothetically the Chinese replicating an AUKUS type deal for Pakistan to act as a counterweight to India? (Granted this is hard to envision given the much more pressing issues facing Pakistan but it's just a thought). I think it's well worth thinking what the ramifications are from AUKUS because I can certainly see there being corollary effects of it in the subcontinental context too, not just in the South China Sea and Australian territorial waters.

[V.Narayan]

France offers 6 nuclear powered attack submarines to India

https://www.firstpost.com/world/afte...-12302902.html
https://idrw.org/france-offers-brazi...deal-to-india/

France, it is believed has offered India 6 nuclear powered conventionally armed attack submarines some of which to be built in India. The vessels will be based on the new Barracuda class SSNs the first of which is under construction for the French Navy. If this were to go through it would be the singular shot in the arm for the IN and give it a real capability to patrol {offensively in war time} the Chinese coast. China’s coast lies between 3000 to 4000 nautical miles from our Eastern Most port, Port Blair, that is 5500 to 7500 kms trip, one way, without even accounting for diversions needed through the Indonesian archipelago that submarine would need to circumvent detection. These distances for are, practical purposes, too vast for diesel electric boats after allowing time on station. Really only a nuclear powered boat can do that. A conventional boat sailing underwater would need 15 to 20 days merely to get to its station. Australia face a similar challenge of distance and hence their AUKUS deal. The Barracuda are 90 metre long, 5300 tonne submerged displacement vessels armed with SCALP cruise missiles, Exocet SM39 submarine launched anti-ship missiles, and a submarine fired MICA based long range anti-aircraft missiles in addition to the 533mm torpedoes and mines.

[ads11]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

France offers 6 nuclear powered attack submarines to India

https://www.firstpost.com/world/afte...-12302902.html
https://idrw.org/france-offers-brazi...deal-to-india/

France, it is believed has offered India 6 nuclear powered conventionally armed attack submarines some of which to be built in India. The vessels will be based on the new Barracuda class SSNs the first of which is under construction for the French Navy. If this were to go through it would be the singular shot in the arm for the IN and give it a real capability to patrol {offensively in war time} the Chinese coast. China’s coast lies between 3000 to 4000 nautical miles from our Eastern Most port, Port Blair, that is 5500 to 7500 kms trip, one way, without even accounting for diversions needed through the Indonesian archipelago that submarine would need to circumvent detection. These distances for are, practical purposes, too vast for diesel electric boats after allowing time on station. Really only a nuclear powered boat can do that. A conventional boat sailing underwater would need 15 to 20 days merely to get to its station. Australia face a similar challenge of distance and hence their AUKUS deal. The Barracuda are 90 metre long, 5300 tonne submerged displacement vessels armed with SCALP cruise missiles, Exocet SM39 submarine launched anti-ship missiles, and a submarine fired MICA based long range anti-aircraft missiles in addition to the 533mm torpedoes and mines.

Oh wow, when I said the wounded French would want a big win of their own and offer something to India, I was a bit sceptical it would be a full fat SSN. I guess with AUKUS the horse has bolted and now multinational nuclear boat deals are a reality. I mean France getting on board additional users in Brazil and India, using a common type is a win for them on so many levels (pretty much the same strategic, maintenance, and fiscal benefits the AUKUS partners derive).

A few questions:

• What happens to the domestic SSN programme? My thinking was that the logical progression from the Arihant class SSBNs was to have a home grown SSN variant. Does that project get folded in to this potential new Barracuda class derivative? How far along was that programme even?
  
• Precious little is obviously available in the public domain about the Arihant class boats but as a first generation effort, I imagine much like the PLAN Jin class, these boats aren't at the leading edge of subsurface combatants in terms of acoustic signature for one. The Barracuda class SSN would be a mature design from a vendor at close to the leading edge, so would that precipitate the obsolescence of the Arihant class boats, presuming the follow on SSBN class will integrate advances available in the IN Barracuda variant?
  
• Unlike AUKUS, is France getting around the NPT concerns by essentially offering Brazil and India the boats without any sealed reactor? Wonder what sort of complications will be there for French engineers to not only accommodate their own reactors but home grown solutions from both Brazil and India. Or I'm guessing the onus is on engineers from the latter two nations to shoehorn their designs into the existing French framework.
  
• What sort of timeline would there be to India fielding these boats? The RAN won't realistically get any homemade SSN AUKUS boats till the 2040s. I'm not sure what the French build schedule is like (backlog wise) and what sort of timeline the Brazilians have set for themselves but I'd imagine India would like such capability by the end of the decade ideally. I'm assuming the plan in India is for whatever yard built the Arihant class boats, to take on the eventual build of the later Indian Barracuda hulls?

If this goes ahead, would have some fascinating implications.
Definitely the IN would benefit from longer legged patrols able to venture deep into the IOR and beyond, presumably into the First Island Chain if adventurous. China will rapidly need to come up with their own SOSUS style network in the next decade if you start having USN, RN, RAN, Marine Nationale, IN, JMSDF and ROKN boats operating in those waters within the next 10-15 years.

French SSNs would be able to task in the Atlantic and Indian Ocean theatres much more if some form of maintenance was available through India and Brazil (will rotation deals be hashed out say between Delhi and Paris? We know India will never permit basing but replenishment and repair might be within the boathouse so to speak). The French always like to plough their own furrow on many matters. All the proclamations coming from French officials indicates they want to further strengthen Indian ties. Could the next 50 years be defined by France being the primary Indian defence partner the way Russia dominated the previous 50?

Moves and counter moves: I'm curious, and wary, what the Chinese response will be. There's bound to be a response. Going to be an interesting set of domino effects from AUKUS. Some are mooting that Japan might consider becoming an AUKUS partner and getting SSNs of their own. If an avowed non nuclear state like Australia can do it without too much international outrage, watch Tokyo closely in the coming years to see how it too navigates this issue. And if the Japanese do it, Seoul will follow suit shortly after.

The naval arms race has now kicked off its undersea aspect in earnest it would seem.

[Foxbat]

I was reading this book from my local public library and was surprised to see thats its written that the first INS Chakra in the Indian Navy from 1988 to 1991
sank two times in Soviet Service(known as K-429) and was raised twice and then transferred to India.





The book is written by Gary E. Weir and Walter J. Boyne who have written multiple books about the cold war and are renowned historians in their field as well as served extensively in the US military.

As per my research the first INS Chakra was the Soviet K-43 and it never sank and was returned into service by the Soviets after the lease and finally was scrapped.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_K-43


Seems to be a careless mistake or perhaps just some cold war propaganda ?

[ads11]

Very curious - I can't imagine the IN would've taken a boat that had sank not once but twice prior. I might be getting this wrong but aren't submariners a superstitious bunch the world over? Imagine knowing you're on a boat that's sunk twice, that must've been an easy staffing dilemma eh?

Paging V.Narayan and other members who might be able to put this to rest. Could just be a typo in the book?

Speaking of the first INS Chakra, interesting to hear that the boat was partially manned by Soviet crew throughout the lease, and that they didn't let IN staff access the missile or reactor rooms. There doesn't seem to be any word on a similar restriction on the second leased INS Chakra, anyone know if that's indeed the case?

Wonder if we'll ever see another leased boat by the IN again, especially a nuclear one. Don't think there's much need if the primary purpose of the two leases was to raise a cadre of operationally trained nuclear bubble heads. Guess that cohort will end up informing and instructing any subsequent IN SSN, SSGN and SSBN crews.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Foxbat

Seems to be a careless mistake or perhaps just some cold war propaganda ?

No idea, not proper research but if you google K429 you get a lot of stories of a sub that sunk twice!

https://www.rbth.com/history/330467-...ine-sunk-twice

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_K-429

https://nuke.fas.org/guide/russia/theater/670.htm

However, I did not see any mention of the K429 being leased to India?

Mix up of stories?

Jeroen

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by Foxbat

I was reading this book from my local public library and was surprised to see thats its written that the first INS Chakra in the Indian Navy from 1988 to 1991

Originally Posted by ads11

Paging V.Narayan and other members who might be able to put this to rest. Could just be a typo in the book?

Originally Posted by Jeroen

No idea, not proper research but if you google K429 you get a lot of stories of a sub that sunk twice!

Thank you for pointing me to this. It is way way past my bed time but I cannot let this go.

Facts as I know them:-

Where Chakra-I was concerned I know for sure that it was not K-429. Chakra was the very first Charlie class boat, a SSGN, commissioned in 1967/1968. Its USSR service number was K-43. As often happens with Tom Clancy style red neck US writers this is not just hyperbole but pure hogwash based on my knowledge, which of course is open to correction. Let's also keep in mind we were the Soviets only and most cherished non- satellite ally. They strived to bend over to help us unlike Western suppliers {in this case British} who in the 1970s wouldn't even allow us to test their sonars in tropical waters prior to ordering.

As far as the Wikipedia page on K-429 goes I have zero data on its authenticity and interestingly any one can write on Wikipedia. Given that that the site is dominated by the anglo-saxons this sort of thing gets accepted more often than it should. As a once contributor to Wikipedia I say that from my direct experience. Also, the page on K-429 has no annotations or references. Normally such pages are pulled down but this one has stayed.

As for Soviet crew on board Chakra-I - quite possible there were some. Rumours of the IN crew not being permitted into the reactor area I started hearing only after Google was invented and American views started circulating. A Soviet officer being on board is quite possible for techno-political reasons given that this was the very first time any nation had leased a nuclear vessel to another. Also, given what a submarine is and the risks it runs with every underwater dive you do not have a submarine commanders, in any Navy, going to sea if he can't control the engine room. In fact the first C.O. of Chakra-I went on to become the only officer in any Navy to have commanded both a nuclear submarine and an aircraft carrier. He wasn't exactly a wall flower. Soviet submariners were not fools*. Unfortunately, my father is no more or I could have asked him. He knew.

As for the Soviet submarine arm I of course have no direct experience. But my father had trained in the USSR more than once, as had my B-i-L and the IN's first Flag Officer Submarines was a very close family friend. So much so that I once stayed with him in my youth for over a year. He would regale me with his experiences as a submariner. He was one of the few in the IN who had completed the submarine training under both the Soviet and Royal Navies! He always spoke high praise for the submarine arms of both Navies. The nuclear submarine arm of the Soviets was the cream de la creme of not only their armed forces but also their wider society. It seems inconceivable that a nuclear submarine Captain would be treated in this manner. A nuclear sub in any Navy runs to a tight operational protocol. It is not a patrol gun boat or frigate which a Fleet Commander can unilaterally command, 'back to sea'. And the local fleet commander is not the only chain of command the Captain is answerable to. There would be the Soviet equivalent of Flag Officer Submarines who is the real boss of all submarines especially SSNs, SSGNs, SSKs, SSs. SSBNs would have a third chain to their Strategic Forces equivalent!!!

Amazing what drivel they write.

On a separate note, given how much the American's lied about their air-to-air combat losses in Vietnam and to some extent in Gulf War-I one has to take these novels with a big dose of salt. Member @Foxbat is a walking encyclopedia on this topic.

Hope this helps.

* The first 3 Soviet nuclear boat classes - November, Hotel and Yankee-I had design deficiencies; the first two had very serious shortfalls that led to several accidents and at least one leadership gaffe by the Soviet higher command. By the mid-1960s the Yankee-II, Charle and Victor were altogether of a more advanced design philosophy. These early accidents, of which there were many created the image of incompetence.

[V.Narayan]

There is a well made series on Amazon Prime on Indian Submarines - the training, how a boat gets ready for a mission along with live on board footage from S-61 INS Sindhukirti a EKM Kilo class boat. Just saw it. 4-part series. Screen shot of the show. Well worth it. I am not a movie type but one of my kids set up an Amazon Prime account for me to enable me watch it - my own attempt to open an account failed and I got blocked out, but that's just ignorant me.

Episode 3 on preparing the boat for its sailing depicts just what planning, preparation, dry testing is needed to get a boat out to sea. I'm mentioning this to put a lie to the book marked page in post #294 {thank you Foxbat} that claims a Soviet Admiral would/could simply order a 'back to sea, and be pronto' on a whim to a 5000 tonne nuclear boat. Western authors of the Tom Clancy genre write so much of horse manure but it is treated as gospel and allowed on Wikipedia. Rather a pity I'd say.

[ads11]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Said this before and I'll risk saying it again - an American blessed SSN {nuclear powered attack boat} project is our best bet to develop a real capable SSN. I think that will come one day in the near future.

For want of keeping it to the relevant thread, I thought I'd reply here. This really is some shout. If eyebrows were raised to hairline height by AUKUS, this would have jaws drop in the global diplomatic and military corps.

• What happens to the domestic SSN programme? My thinking was that the logical progression from the Arihant class SSBNs was to have a home grown SSN variant. Does that project get folded in to this potential new Barracuda class derivative? How far along was that programme even?
• Precious little is obviously available in the public domain about the Arihant class boats but as a first generation effort, I imagine much like the PLAN Jin class, these boats aren't at the leading edge of subsurface combatants in terms of acoustic signature for one. The Barracuda class SSN would be a mature design from a vendor at close to the leading edge, so would that precipitate the obsolescence of the Arihant class boats, presuming the follow on SSBN class will integrate advances available in the IN Barracuda variant?
• Unlike AUKUS, is France getting around the NPT concerns by essentially offering Brazil and India the boats without any sealed reactor? Wonder what sort of complications will be there for French engineers to not only accommodate their own reactors but home grown solutions from both Brazil and India. Or I'm guessing the onus is on engineers from the latter two nations to shoehorn their designs into the existing French framework.
• What sort of timeline would there be to India fielding these boats? The RAN won't realistically get any homemade SSN AUKUS boats till the 2040s. I'm not sure what the French build schedule is like (backlog wise) and what sort of timeline the Brazilians have set for themselves but I'd imagine India would like such capability by the end of the decade ideally. I'm assuming the plan in India is for whatever yard built the Arihant class boats, to take on the eventual build of the later Indian Barracuda hulls?

I'll ask the same question I asked earlier. I thought the current plan was for a home grown SSN to be a follow on derivative from the Arihant SSBN development. I guess the secrecy of that effort means it's like reading tea leaves for the rest of us. At the very least I'd reckon the IN could have an SSGN variant of the Arihant boats in that case if they went for a clean sheet SSN.

I'm still of the opinion should a foreign led SSN overture (leading to a concrete development programme) come, it would have France in pole position. Following this I'd reckon the Brits would be next up but I feel judging by some of the entrenched positions still in Washington and Congress (seen from reactions re India's position wrt the Russian invasion), that an American SSN design for the IN would be a bridge too far.

[Reinhard]

So during the recent visit of the German defense minister to India - an MOU was signed between TKMS & MDL India, for building of submarines in India, I presume for the P75I specs. Of course, just an MOU, and there may be more such MOUs with other vendors for the actual competition of the contract award.

Sample source news

I've always been curious about the general diversity in our submarine fleet. Previously (and that continues) - we have had the Russian Kilos (Sindhughosh) and HDW 209 (Shishumar) together in fleet. Now it has become Kilo-209-Scorpene (Kalvari). Out of that too - I believe the "full tech transfer" was not done for the Kilo class & they keep visiting Russian shipyards for refits and major maintenance works (I may be wrong). The Shishumars, were refitted here in India with transferred know-how.

Already 3 classes in service (agreed 2 of them will start getting retired sooner or later) - but we have signed an MOU for potentially another one from TKMS now. Doesn't it create a logistical / maintenance nightmare + inefficient cost associated with it? Everything starting from spare inventories, ground crew trainings etc, will consistently remain too diverse with associated costs.

I know I'm very naive about the big picture, but somehow wouldn't it have been more practicall to build on top of the existing Scorpene boats, that are fairly new & add a follow-on order to the same class OR from France with a more advanced version which is an evolution of the Scorpene, with AIP under P75I? Some more standardization would keep things more cost effective as well.