What's new

Arihant propels India to elite club

nair

BANNED
Joined
Jul 27, 2012
Messages
11,623
Reaction score
10
Country
India
Location
India
Earlier this year, India’s first indigenously built nuclear submarine quietly pushed out of its base for sea trials, its 6,000-tonne, 111-metre bulk powered by an 83-megawatt uranium reactor. The submarine is capable of lurking effectively undetectable at depth almost indefinitely, as long as there is food for its 110-man crew. In early 2015, if all goes well, INS Arihant will get the nuclear missiles it is designed to carry.

India will join a club of just six nations with nuclear submarines carrying ballistic missiles — and a doctrinal headache. For more than a decade now, India has kept warheads separate from the missiles that carry them, in an effort to prevent accidents. In times of crisis — like the 2001-02 standoff with Pakistan — delivery platforms and warheads have been brought together, but by some accounts, even then, they were not mated or joined together for delivery.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi was briefed on classified reports calling for a full-time four-star General to take charge of India’s nuclear arsenal — and the case of Arihant explains why.

Nuclear challenge

Last week, Mr. Modi received the most secret briefing he would get — on his role as head of the Nuclear Command Authority, which is empowered to order the nuclear missiles on the Arihant , along with other weapons in the strategic arsenal, to be fired. Mr. Modi, government sources say, was briefed on progress in the submarine tests, as well as the status of the missiles that will arm it.


Arihant propels India to elite club

In March, the Defence Research and Development Organisation conducted the first test of the K-4 missile —capable of delivering a two-tonne nuclear warhead on targets up to 3,000 kilometres away.

Fitted four apiece on to the three nuclear submarines India plans to operate, K-4 will ensure that the country has what experts call an assured second-strike capability — the capacity to ensure retaliation even if the rest of the arsenal is wiped out in a surprise first-strike.

India’s nuclear arsenal, as that of Pakistan, has been physically separated from the delivery platforms — the missiles controlled by the Army, and soon the Navy, as well as the Air Force’s combat jets. The logic is simple: keeping warheads and missiles apart reduces the risks of accidents or unauthorised use.

“For obvious reasons,” says Arun Vishwanathan, a leading nuclear-weapons expert at the National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore, “a nuclear submarine is going to have to carry warheads as well as missiles. This raises significant issues of control, which need to be worked out.”

In addition, nuclear submarines can lose contact with their bases — and officers must decide if this has happened because of technical problems, or because their nation has been obliterated.

In 1961, the Soviet submarine B-59, believing that war had broken out, almost fired a 10-kilotonne warhead at the U.S. Flotilla; sub-commander Vasili Arkhipov, one of three officers who had to consent to the decision, alone demurred — averting a nuclear apocalypse.

Arihant propels India to elite club - The Hindu
 
. .
lets see how long it takes the mighty blue ocean indian navy to collide this "elite club certificate" with some fishing trawler or sink it in the harbour
 
. .
qnXXEN9.jpg
 
.
Building a nuclear ballistic missile submarine is no easy feat, and building a reliable SLBM is even harder.

But SLBM's are one of the most essential parts of any country's nuclear arsenal. Secondary strike capability is essential to any kind of nuclear deterrence.

This was the most tricky part of that article....

In addition, nuclear submarines can lose contact with their bases — and officers must decide if this has happened because of technical problems, or because their nation has been obliterated.

In 1961, the Soviet submarine B-59, believing that war had broken out, almost fired a 10-kilotonne warhead at the U.S. Flotilla; sub-commander Vasili Arkhipov, one of three officers who had to consent to the decision, alone demurred — averting a nuclear apocalypse
 
.
This was the most tricky part of that article....

Yes that is a very challenging situation. But the "theoretical attacking nation" will be considering this point as well, in fact it may add to the deterrence capability if they think the submarines may still fire their arsenals, and act as a deterrent not only to the attacking nation, but to others as well.

What I don't get though, is why India is always limiting the range of their own missiles? To avoid ruffling feathers in America?

Even if we did not have any problems with America, we would still want our missiles to be able to cover the globe if necessary. That's the point of deterrence.
 
.
Yes that is a very challenging situation. But the "theoretical attacking nation" will be considering this point as well, in fact it may add to the deterrence capability if they think the submarines may still fire their arsenals, and act as a deterrent not only to the attacking nation, but to others as well.

What I don't get though, is why India is always limiting the range of their own missiles? To avoid ruffling feathers in America?

Even if we did not have any problems with America, we would still want our missiles to be able to cover the globe if necessary. That's the point of deterrence.

Why do we need missiles with longer range????? we have covered all the likely adversaries with current missiles..... But once these nukes subs become operational then we may need missiles with longer range.....

I cannot deny the fact that we have some dependence on US and the previous governments did not like to irritate uncle sam... I have no idea what Modi government plans going to be....
 
.
In addition, nuclear submarines can lose contact with their bases — and officers must decide if this has happened because of technical problems, or because their nation has been obliterated.
The problem is communications. Nuke subs are supposed to lurk deep underwater to avoid detection. This would cause a communication blackout unless the sub surfaces or its antennas are put out above the water. VLF radio waves (3–30 khs) can penetrate seawater to a depth of approximately 20 meters. Hence a submarine at shallow depth can use these frequencies. A vessel more deeply submerged might use a buoy on a long cable equipped with an antenna. The buoy rises to a few meters below the surface, and may be small enough to remain undetected by enemy sonar/ radar. Because of the narrow bandwidth, VLF radio signals cannot carry audio, and only transmit text messages at a slow data rate.

However, electromagnetic waves in the ELF/SLF frequency range can penetrate seawater to depths of hundreds of meters, allowing communication with submarines at their operating depths. Building an ELF transmitter is a formidable challenge, as they have to work at incredibly long wavelengths.

Due to the technical difficulty of building an ELF transmitter, the US and Russia are the only nations known to have constructed ELF communication facilities, with India being in the process of constructing one.

The Indian Navy is constructing ELF communication facilities to communicate with its Arihant class and Akula class submarines. This facility is expected to be operational by 2015.

 
.
Yes that is a very challenging situation. But the "theoretical attacking nation" will be considering this point as well, in fact it may add to the deterrence capability if they think the submarines may still fire their arsenals, and act as a deterrent not only to the attacking nation, but to others as well.

What I don't get though, is why India is always limiting the range of their own missiles? To avoid ruffling feathers in America?

Even if we did not have any problems with America, we would still want our missiles to be able to cover the globe if necessary. That's the point of deterrence.


Range depends on 3 Things i believe
1. Political Will
2. Threat Perception- We do not have any threats beyond Pakistan and China
3. Technological complexities- Indian Solid Fuel Missile technology and its miniaturization is still not comparable to US,Russia or China
 
.
Why do we need missiles with longer range????? we have covered all the likely adversaries with current missiles..... But once these nukes subs become operational then we may need missiles with longer range.....

I cannot deny the fact that we have some dependence on US and the previous governments did not like to irritate uncle sam... I have no idea what Modi government plans going to be....

For deterrence.

It is true that India and America get along fairly well now (relatively anyway), but even back in the 1970's America was sending aircraft carriers against India.

It makes no sense that America can target India with nuclear weapons, but India cannot target America with nuclear weapons. Which basically means you are replacing "deterrence" with "hoping for their good will".

Not a good idea in my opinion. India clearly has the technology for longer range missiles.
 
.
For deterrence.

It is true that India and America get along fairly well now (relatively anyway), but even back in the 1970's America was sending aircraft carriers against India.

It makes no sense that America can target India with nuclear weapons, but India cannot target America with nuclear weapons. Which basically means you are replacing "deterrence" with "hoping for their good will".

Not a good idea in my opinion.

I dont think it is difficult to increase the range of current missiles...... We have the technology and know how to do it.... But do we have the political will??? I guess No.....

When it comes to America, they cannot be trusted.... because for them the only thing matters is "National Interests".... As long as India suits them them will support us..... The day we go against them........

The prime example infront of us is "Pakistan"..... Pakistan and US had a great relationship before..... Post 9/1 and we all know how that relationship is shaping....

Uncle sam cannot be trusted......
 
.
I dont think it is difficult to increase the range of current missiles...... We have the technology and know how to do is.... But do we have the political will??? I guess No.....

India has the technology to send satellites into space, they could easily build an ICBM, or with more effort build an SLBM with intercontinental range.

Anyway, it's just a hypothetical. The chances of a nuclear war between America and India are about zero.
 
. .
India has the technology to send satellites into space, they could easily build an ICBM, or with more effort build an SLBM with intercontinental range.

Anyway, it's just a hypothetical. The chances of a nuclear war between America and India are about zero.

We have already invaded the western world with culture and cuisine.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom