India to Build 6 Nuclear-Powered Submarines - Navy Chief

[Gen Padmanabhan]

Don't bother to pretend to teach me ANYTHING. It would be better if you attend night school and get some basic education first.

Then learn what is Enriched Uranium or Weapon grade Uranium.

FFS, atleast google search your term Nuclear grade material. and what it means.

From August 2000, Russia signed an agreement to supply India's Tarapur nuclear power plant with 58 metric tons of LEU. Prior to that we have purchased Uranium from Russia but have enriched it ourself.

India was just bitten by the mad dog that it signed 123 Deal, even when Russia was providing your "Nuclear Grade Material".

 

[sankranti]

You would not have argued with me like a brain dead idiot if you knew the simple difference between MWth and MWe

So when you say a installed capacity of 85MW of your SSBN that's clearly thermal power but that amounts to sh!t if the efficiency don't play up

The 85MW PW Reactor itself provide 111,305 hp you idiot. It also drives a 70MW Steam Turbine which provides 47,000 Hp so where is the confusion you retard

FFS, atleast google search your term Nuclear grade material. and what it means.

India was just bitten by the mad dog that it signed 123 Deal, even when Russia was providing your "Nuclear Grade Material".

Nuclear grade material meant fissile grade Uranium.

At least learn to use google before letting everybody know you are a fool.

India Nuclear Milestones: 1945-2005

1988: Russia agrees to build two 1,000 MW (VVER-1000) reactors at Kudankulam, India. Construction reportedly begins in March 2002.

August 2000: Russia agrees to supply India's Tarapur nuclear power plant with 58 metric tons of LEU.

May 2001: Russian fuel fabricator MSZ Elektrostal has reportedly completed work on fuel assemblies and has shipped nuclear fuel to India's Tarapur facility, despite objections by the United States and European members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).

 

[Providence]

The 85MW PW Reactor itself provide 111,305 hp you idiot. It also drives a 70MW Steam Turbine which provides 47,000 Hp so where is the confusion you retard

And I am supposed to take the big indian faggoty mouth at face value ?

Consider this you idiot:

Akula class has an installed capacity of 190MW but their turbine shafts are rated at just 32MW. Going by the rough 20% rule arihant's shafts wont be rated higher than 15MW or ~20,000 hp. Placing high values like 47000 hp would have taken the 6000 tonne (submerged 7000t ) in upwards of 37 knots like a high speed SSN. A lower power rating and speds in range of 24 knots ( a typical SSBN ) is far more likely.

This reactor is okay since a SSBN is not supposed to sprint across oceans but remain silent in deep waters.

Also consider this, the follow on sub is supposed to carry far more no of ballistic missiles ( >3/4) This will mean a tonnage in range upwards of 8500 tonnes which will need at the minimum 150ish MW reactor like that of Akula class. This will explain why Indian is so interested in taking the submarine on lease.

Now schuka-B uses 2 OK-650 reactor with 20-45% HEU ( unlike the S9Gs which has 93-95% HEU consequently one single loading is sufficient for 25-30 years ). This 20-45% HEU design is a 1980s technology and Russia I am afraid still uses it in it's Borei class SSBNs. Yours will be at a similar level or a bit worse.

What this will mean is lesser deterrent patrols for arihant since a fuel loading requires hull cutting and what not.

Anyway, carry on spitting on the face of every goddamn member who cares to bring down your hyper-nationalist rhetoric. Frankly no one here give two shits about it including the learned Indian members as well.

 

[sankranti]

And I am supposed to take the big indian faggoty mouth at face value ?

Consider this you idiot:

Akula class has an installed capacity of 190MW but their turbine shafts are rated at just 32MW. Going by the rough 20% rule arihant's shafts wont be rated higher than 15MW or ~20,000 hp. Placing high values like 47000 hp would have taken the 6000 tonne (submerged 7000t ) in upwards of 37 knots like a high speed SSN. A lower power rating and speds in range of 24 knots ( a typical SSBN ) is far more likely.

This reactor is okay since a SSBN is not supposed to sprint across oceans but remain silent in deep waters.

I don't give a fcuk about what you believe. My posts are for other Indians who have this tendency to consider even US retards as geniuses.

Akula has a 32 MW steam turbine in-spite of having a 190 MW reactor, Arihant OTOH has a 70 MW steam turbine in-spite of having a 85 MW reactor.

And THAT makes ALL the different dumb@ss.

The technology used in Akula is from the 1970's. BHEL produces Multi stage back pressure Steam Turbines with efficiency of 40% to 50%. so a 70 MW steam Turbine with 47,000 hp rating is a reality in Arihant.

Arihant was designed to be an SSN , it was only much later it was turned into an SSBN which is why the reactor for the Arihant is powerful enough to be used on an SSN.

So your "expert opinion" is just that, a frustrated desire of an American who do not wish to give credit where its due.

Also consider this, the follow on sub is supposed to carry far more no of ballistic missiles ( >3/4) This will mean a tonnage in range upwards of 8500 tonnes which will need at the minimum 150ish MW reactor like that of Akula class. This will explain why Indian is so interested in taking the submarine on lease.

Rubbish

India will soon have 2 Aircraft carrier and NO Submarines to defend it.

Only Akula's have the necessary speed of 30+ knots to keep up with the AC fleet. That is till Indian SSN is finished.

THAT and the obvious training opportunity it provides and the need to quickly address falling numbers of submarines.

Now schuka-B uses 2 OK-650 reactor with 20-45% HEU ( unlike the S9Gs which has 93-95% HEU consequently one single loading is sufficient for 25-30 years ). This 20-45% HEU design is a 1980s technology and Russia I am afraid still uses it in it's Borei class SSBNs. Yours will be at a similar level or a bit worse.

What this will mean is lesser deterrent patrols for arihant since a fuel loading requires hull cutting and what not.

Arihant has 40% HEU fuel enough for 10-12 years. After which it will come back for refueling and planned upgrade.

Anyway, carry on spitting on the face of every goddamn member who cares to bring down your hyper-nationalist rhetoric. Frankly no one here give two shits about it including the learned Indian members as well.

LOL..... don't worry about me yank. Your ignorance is not my problem, I just enjoyed the opportunity to trash you and rubbish all your claims. Your frustrated rant is quite enjoyable

 

[Providence]

I don't give a fcuk about what you believe. My posts are for other Indians who have this tendency to consider even US retards as geniuses.

Akula has a 32 MW steam turbine in-spite of having a 190 MW reactor, Arihant OTOH has a 70 MW steam turbine in-spite of having a 85 MW reactor.

And THAT makes ALL the different dumb@ss.

The technology used in Akula is from the 1980. BHEL produces Multi stage back pressure Steam Turbines with efficiency of 40% to 50%. so a 70 MW steam Turbine with 47,000 hp rating is a reality in Arihant.

Arihant was designed to be an SSN , it was only much later it was turned into an SSBN which is why the reactor for the Arihant is powerful enough to be used on an SSN.

So your "expert opinion" is just that, a frustrated desire of an American who do not wish to give credit where its due.




Rubbish

India will soon have 2 Aircraft carrier and NO Submarines to defend it.

Only Akula's have the necessary speed of 30+ knots to keep up with the AC fleet. That is till Indian SSN is finished.

THAT and the obvious training opportunity it provides and the need to quickly address falling numbers of submarines.



Arihant has 40% HEU fuel enough for 10-12 years. After which it will come back for refueling and planned upgrade.



LOL..... don't worry about me yank. Your ignorance is not my problem, I just enjoyed the opportunity to trash you and rubbish all your claims. Your frustrated rant is quite enjoyable

I knew a brain dead idiot will go incoherent at some point of time.

Your sole basis of argument is it was meant to be a SSN not SSBN and that's why it is a supposedly high speed design which falls flat considering that Akula is a SSN and still has 20% efficiency

You guys are leasing Akula for a simple reason which may not be apparent to a faggoty mouth like you but apparent to rest of the world !

 

[sankranti]

I knew a brain dead idiot will go incoherent at some point of time.

Your sole basis of argument is it was meant to be a SSN not SSBN and that's why it is a supposedly high speed design which falls flat considering that Akula is a SSN and still has 20% efficiency

You guys are leasing Akula for a simple reason which may not be apparent to a faggoty mouth like you but apparent to rest of the world !

LOL. The basis of my argument is that Arihant is a 85MW PWR that drives a 70 MW Steam Turbine you Retard .

But looks like you have no more scientific evidence to flash ...... except call me names

Just because Akula has a 20% efficiency, Arihant is supposed to have it too ? .............."logic" for Retards.

 

[Providence]

LOL. The basis of my argument is that Arihant is a 85MW PWR that drives a 70 MW Steam Turbine you Retard .

But looks like you have no more scientific evidence to flash ...... except call me names

Just because Akula has a 20% efficiency, Arihant is supposed to have it too ? .............."logic" for Retards.

Calling names is something which you have started.

And akula's 20% efficiency consequently arihant will have it is not a theory out of thin air. You guys are leasing it not one but two

And considering that the same reactors are in use in the borei class submarines (Russia's frontline SSBN in coming decades), I don't think russians have anything better to offer you guys !

And lastly, why would a SSBN sprint through the seas and create "waves" ? It is supposed to be undetected and not meant to explore seas.

 

[sankranti]

Calling names is something which you have started.

And akula's 20% efficiency consequently arihant will have it is not a theory out of thin air. You guys are leasing it not one but two

And considering that the same reactors are in use in the borei class submarines (Russia's frontline SSBN in coming decades), I don't think russians have anything better to offer you guys !

And lastly, why would a SSBN sprint through the seas and create "waves" ? It is supposed to be undetected and not meant to explore seas.

So we are leasing Akula and that has an efficiency of 20% so Arihant will have efficiency of 20% ?

So tomorrow if I lease a Limousine which has a fuel efficiency of 3 km per litre, the fuel efficiency of my own vehicle will drop from 18 to 3 km/lt ?

You are free to claim that Aliens gave India its Nuclear reactor and Nuclear bombs or that our rocket to Mars was based on "US design" ........ what ever floats your boat yank.

Just because a SSBN can sprint at 37 knots does not mean that is how it will normally move you fool. Such speed will only be to evade enemy ships, subs or weapons. I am certain for normal operations silence will be preferred over speed. Just like any other SSn or SSB in the world ........ or do Whites have to teach us that too ?

 

[Providence]

So we are leasing Akula and that has an efficiency of 20% so Arihant will have efficiency of 20% ?

So tomorrow if I lease a Limousine which has a fuel efficiency of 3 km per litre, the fuel efficiency of my own vehicle will drop from 18 to 3 km/lt ?

You are free to claim that Aliens gave India its Nuclear reactor and Nuclear bombs or that our rocket to Mars was based on "US design" ........ what ever floats your boat yank.

Just because a SSBN can sprint at 37 knots does not mean that is how it will normally move you fool. Such speed will only be to evade enemy ships, subs or weapons. I am certain for normal operations silence will be preferred over speed. Just like any other SSn or SSB in the world ........ or do Whites have to teach us that too ?

Extremely bad analogy with the limousine Too bad nuclear reactors for submarines are not available like limousines.
Except fools like you everyone knows about the Russian help !!

 

[Nilgiri]

It also drives a 70MW Steam Turbine which provides 47,000 Hp

47000 HP is more like 35MW

 

[sankranti]

Extremely bad analogy with the limousine Too bad nuclear reactors for submarines are not available like limousines.
Except fools like you everyone knows about the Russian help !!

LOL.... who is "everybody" ? ........... more Retards and Red Necks like you ?

You might want to read this well researched and well documented article just to wipe out your enormous ignorance and Racist superiority complex. You will be doing yourself a favour.

Critical feat | Frontline

Reactor development

The reactor development itself was a big and tough task. At the heart of the reactor is its pressure vessel, which houses the fuel. Developing the pressure vessel entailed the use of a special technology and a special steel. The material had to have high fracture toughness and the toughness had to be retained even if the steel got exposed to radiation. So a special type of steel was developed to withstand the radiation environment.

The design of the vessel was another major challenge. The issue of the reactor’s compactness came in. The entire PWR had to fit into the cramped space of the submarine’s hull. Steam generators, tall structures consisting of a maze of pipes, posed another big problem. They produced steam to drive the turbine which generated electricity. So the steam generator and the pressure vessel were designed in such a way that every small space in the hull was made use of. This was a very important mechanical engineering design, which BARC engineers, after many trials and efforts, evolved.

Development of hundreds of subsystems and high-pressure valves and pumps posed various challenges, which were met by BARC engineers. Indian industry rose to the occasion by manufacturing them. The entire reactor structure had to be designed in such a way that it is stable when the submarine accelerates. What had to be taken into account here was that the reactor was housed in a submarine that sped under water. The thrust generated by the submarine’s propulsion required a design for the reactor that was different from that of a nuclear power reactor on terra firma.

“In designing the propulsion of the submarine, we had to take into account the various sea conditions, including rough sea, the submarine’s pitching and rolling, the effect of saline water, enemy action which includes underwater explosions/depth charges and internal conditions,” explained Basu. “Yet another factor is that the propulsion plant had to be compact and so weight and volume had to be minimised. Thirdly, the plant had to be very reliable. It is moving under water, hundreds of kilometres away from the shore. In case of an accident, no help will be available from outside. So back-up safety systems should function perfectly.”

So, the design of the safety system was crucial. BARC went for passive safety systems, which would not need an external source of electricity, to come into action. The passive thermo-siphoning system will come into play in abnormal conditions. Since a submarine’s reactor has no exclusion zone, unlike its counterpart on land where no human settlement is allowed a few kilometres around it, gamma shielding, and partly neutron shielding, by water was done.

In land-based reactors, control rods fall by gravity and bring the reactors to a halt in case of an accident. But the rolling and pitching of the boat demands that the control-rod mechanism is designed suitably to take care of the submarine’s various movements. “Since power has to be generated in a regulated manner, it puts a lot of restrictions on the design of the control mechanisms. Diverse techniques were used to design them. We had to take into consideration the possibility of the boat going upside down. So special sensors and drives were made for ensuring a safe and reliable operation of the control-rod mechanisms,” said Srivastava in August 2009. Indeed, 13 control mechanisms were accommodated within a diameter of 0.8 metre.

BARC also built a simulator at Visakhapatnam to train navy personnel in operating the reactor. When the Russians were shown this simulator, they were amazed at its sophistication.

 

[Providence]

47000 HP is more like 35MW

The 70MW claim is dubious in first place. So no question of validity of 70MW translating to a 35MW shaft power arise.

Damn even our 20,000T submarines don't need such shaft power

The S9Gs/S8Gs are powering our latest SSBNs and SSNs which are more then double the tonnage of arihant.

Source: http://www.ewp.rpi.edu/hartford/~er...tudents/Misiaszek/NuclearMarinePropulsion.pdf

When idiots refuse to accept such simple facts and just ramble on creates a goddamn nuisance in the forum !!

 

[sankranti]

47000 HP is more like 35MW

Yes. Which is why the figures are Real.

 

[amardeep mishra]

You can't fabricate nuclear fuel and can fabricate a miniaturized reactor, *all by yourselves*.......... in just one go, that too by not going through the learning curve of designing a totally indigenous world-class diesel-electric submarine......... who are you kidding? Give the credit to Russian design bureau, where it's due, which in this case points to the whole damn submarine.

Most of your *break throughs* are like a transparent glass, from Agni to K series, the whole world can see through them, other than Indian awam, and that too, some highly educated Indian awam. Don't you guys stop at some point and think, why, how, wtf sometimes - or you're fed "indigenous" koolaid from your pre-school days?

hi dear @Hyperion
I wish to shed some light on the research and development of light water reactor that went into ARIHANT. India indeed went through the very decent learning curve in ATV project- mind you my friend the project was sanctioned a good 3 decades back. Russian help was very crucial in a lot of areas but if you're thinking that russians are generous enough to simply hand over their blue prints etc to us then you're badly mistaken. In india unfortunately a lot of folks simply dont know the nature of russian involvement in our projects inspite of transparent nature of our research. Russians merely provide the much needed "technical consultancy". Lets suppose they are here for consultancy in SLBM project,and are asked what materials shall we use for efficient operation of RCS in SLBM?then they will give roughly 3-4 choices to narrow down.This helps a lot and cuts a lot of development time- but this has limitation in terms of what they can "tell"- or allowed to discuss with their indian counterparts!
As far as the design of LWR of arihant is concerned,it is our own,however without russian help we wouldnt have made a "sea worthy" reactor in first go! Miniaturizing a light water reactor is one thing- making it reliable for sea operations is QUITE ANOTHER- and thats where russian consultancy helped BARC/DRDO.
UNLIKE PAKISTAN,india has designed a variety of land based reactors right from heavy water reactors,fast breeder reactors to now light water reactors. I only wish you had taken the pain of going through the vast plethora of scientific literature out there on indian designed nuclear reactors.
Now they have even scaled up the design of arihant's reactor to 900MW-
Had it not been our own design,then they wouldnt have been able to scale up like that and work on the installation. The only reason why india didnt go for the LWRs in past was something to do with the poor production of uranium in country,now since NSG doors have been opened and influx of foreign uranium has begun in a big way,india can now afford to install her own LWRs of 900MW
Work begins on India’s first Light Water Reactor after smaller version | The Indian Express

This is another futuristic design from BARC
Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR)- Bhabha Atomic Research Centre(BARC)

 

[sankranti]

The 70MW claim is dubious in first place. So no question of validity of 70MW translating to a 35MW shaft power arise.

Damn even our 20,000T submarines don't need such shaft power

The S9Gs/S8Gs are powering our latest SSBNs and SSNs which are more then double the tonnage of arihant.

Source: http://www.ewp.rpi.edu/hartford/~er...tudents/Misiaszek/NuclearMarinePropulsion.pdf

When idiots refuse to accept such simple facts and just ramble on creates a goddamn nuisance in the forum !!

LOL..... really ?

Nuclear-Powered Ships | Nuclear Submarines

India launched its first nuclear submarine in 2009, the 6000 dwt Arihant SSBN, with a single 85 MW PWR fuelled by HEU driving a 70 MW steam turbine.