What's new

Russia to lease nuclear submarine to India for decade: report

air marshal

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
11,056
Reaction score
2
Russia to lease nuclear submarine to India for decade: report

MOSCOW, Jan. 12 (Xinhua) -- Russia will lease a multifunctional nuclear submarine to India for a decade in the second half of this year, the Itar-Tass news agency reported Tuesday, quoting a Russian Defense Ministry official.

The Nerpa nuclear submarine, which successfully concluded tests last December, will be handed over to India this summer or autumn, the unidentified official told Itar-Tass.

The official said Indian crew would come to Russia's military base near the far eastern port of Vladivostok to take the Nerpa on trial. "After the signing of an act of acceptance, the Nerpa will head for India," the source said.

Mikhail Dmitriev, director of the Federal Service of Military and Technical Cooperation, said in December 2008 that Russia might lease a nuclear submarine to India for 10 years.

The Nerpa, one of Russia's newest nuclear-powered submarines, had an accident during trials in the Sea of Japan in November 2008,killing 20 people and injuring 21 others. The submarine passed successfully several rounds of tests and was transferred to the Russian navy on Dec. 28, 2009.

Russia to lease nuclear submarine to India for decade: report_English_Xinhua
 
. .
what is a best way to counter nuke subs with more U 214 like subs or wait for our nuke sub.
 
. .
Well the bare minimum for us is to have 10-15 Agosta B subs, and 4-5 higher class subs from Germanny

Nuclear subs are quieter and stay underwater longer but , if you can detect the subs they are dead ducks - by advace Orion or our chinese anti sub warfare....

I favour quantity , for Agosta , and some quality additions from Germany and top it off with Chinese new subs
 
.
since , as it claims, pakistan has a defencive doctrine, more subs does not necessarily make sense.

the objective of PN would probably be to keep pakistani sa lanes open by keeping IN away from them.
this can be achieved much better with maritime patrol aircraft and at a much lower cost by larger surface ships.

while subs are quiet and deadly, they are in essence offensive weapons used to blockade enemy sea lanes. defensively , when trying to stop some indian ships from moving into pakistani lanes, the subs will find themselves at a disadvantage.

a warship with good anti submarine capabilities will be able to fend off the submarine and still block the pakistani sea lanes. or a submarine could be used, making the odds equal for both.

however if the PN is to use a maritime patrol aircraft, it can keep both types of ships away from the sea lanes with atleast the sub completely incapable of hitting back.
 
.
Nuclear subs are quieter and stay underwater longer but , if you can detect the subs they are dead ducks - by advace Orion or our chinese anti sub warfare....

Well, not exactly ...

The advantages of an SSN over a conventionally powered SSK are much longer endurance (limited more by the crew than the boat), higher speed, and extremely quiet operation. Unlike most SSKs, SSNs do not have to surface periodically for air, which would compromise their stealth. These considerations are less significant for modern conventional submarines: LOX and Stirling engine powered vessels can cruise underwater for up to a week and are significantly quieter than nuclear submarines, since they do not need to run the powerful (and noisy) pumps associated with the cooling circuits of pressurized water reactors.

The main disadvantages of an SSN are the technological challenges and huge expense of building, refuelling and maintaining a nuclear power plant. Nuclear submarines are also a political problem, as some countries refuse to accept nuclear-powered vessels as a matter of policy. Furthermore, decommissioned nuclear submarines require costly dismantling and long term storage of the radioactive waste.

SSN (hull classification symbol) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

TKMS claims next-generation AIP will close SSK, SSN gap

Article Abstract:

The article discusses the methanol-reformer fuel-cell systems adapted for submarine use with Air Independent Propulsion (AIP). The ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS) feels that the method would help reduce the submerged performance gaps between diesel electric (SSK) and nuclear-powered submarines (SSN).

author: Pape, Alex
Publisher: Jane's Information Group
Publication Name: Jane's International Defense Review
Subject: Military and naval science
ISSN: 0020-6512
Year: 2007
Abstracts: TKMS claims next-generation AIP will close SSK, SSN gap. Germany needs international interest for IDAS submarine self-defense system - Military and naval science


Excerpt from Armed Forces Journal article "A balancing act The shortfall of nuclear-powered attack submarines can be mitigated with conventional subs" by Milan Vego

SSN VERSUS SSK

The optimal solution to resolve the Navy’s shortfall in its attack submarines in the next 15 to 20 years is to acquire a modest force of advanced conventional submarines (SSKs), specifically those fitted with an air-independent propulsion (AIP) system. Both SSNs and SSKs can be successfully employed in the littorals. However, and despite the claims of the SSN proponents, the SSKs have some obvious advantages in most enclosed and semi-enclosed seas (collectively called narrow seas.) The SSKs displace between 1,000 and 2,000 tons. For example, the Swedish AIP Gotland-class submarines displace about 1,240 tons on the surface and 1,500 tons submerged. The Scorpene Compact class has a submerged displacement of 1,450 tons and is optimized for operations in shallow waters.

In contrast, the SSNs are much larger. For example, the Los Angeles-class SSN displaces 6,900 tons, the Virginia class about 7,925-tons, and two of the three Seawolf-class boats about 9,100 tons. The third Seawolf class, the Jimmy Carter, displaces some 12,160 tons. The SSNs also have large crews, from about 130 on board Los Angeles-class vessels to 145 for the Seawolf class. Advanced conventional submarines are highly automated resulting in small crews. For example, the Gotlands and German-built Type 212As have a crew of about 25.

SSNs are much faster than any SSK. They are capable of high sustained speeds for a very long time. For example, the maximum submerged speed of the U.S. SSNs is listed as between 25 and 28 knots and as high as 32 knots. This is a distinct advantage in operations on the open ocean. In contrast, the Gotland/Sodermanland classes have a maximum speed of 10 knots on the surface and about 20 knots submerged. The corresponding figures for the Type 212A and French Agosta 90B classes are 12 and 20 knots. In the littorals, because of the much smaller maneuvering space and often rough topography of the sea bottom, all submarines must necessarily sail at low speed. Hence, the SSN advantages over SSKs are much reduced in such waters. However, because of their low speed and endurance, SSKs cannot be employed for operating with carrier and expeditionary strike groups.

SSN proponents claim that there is not much difference in the sizes of the SSN and SSK, but this is not true. The maximum length of the Los Angeles-class SSNs is about 360 feet, Virginia class about 380 feet, and the Seawolf more than 450 feet. In contrast, the length of the Gotlands and Type 212/Type 214 is about 200 feet. The height of the Type 212A and Type 214 is 38 feet and 43 feet, respectively. SSN advocates say the SSN is only 15 feet taller than the SSK. Yet this is not a negligible factor when a submarine has to operate in shallow waters.

Because of their smaller size and displacement, SSKs are more maneuverable. Proponents contend that modern SSNs such as the Virginia class fitted with a new computer-controlled autopilot and hovering system can maintain a specific depth to within 1/10 of a foot and remain at stable depth even in the roughest weather conditions. They can also penetrate close to shore whenever contours of the sea floor permit. However, the size and displacement of SSNs still greatly limit their maneuverability in shallow waters such as the Baltic Sea and many parts of the Persian Gulf. Advanced SSKs are also fitted with a number of features that greatly enhance their capabilities in shallow waters. For example, the Gotland-class is fitted with a rudder configuration that allows extreme maneuverability and operations very close to sea bottom. Its turning radius is very small. And Type 212As can reportedly sail in waters as shallow as 65 feet. Clearly, modern SSKs such as the Gotlands and Type 212A/Type 214 are far more capable and better suited for shallow-water operations than U.S. SSNs.

SSNs provide first-on-the-scene capability because of their stealthiness, high-sustained speed and mobility. Their covertness allows surprise attacks on the sea surface and on land. The very presence of an SSN in certain areas invariably has a great impact on enemy dispositions. SSNs also have virtually unlimited endurance submerged. However, in a typical enclosed or semi-enclosed sea their much smaller maneuvering area reduces that advantage. An AIP conventional submarine can transit rapidly on the surface and submerge for long, quiet patrols at low speed, preserving its batteries for high-speed bursts. The AIP allows a submarine to remain submerged up to three to four weeks. The Gotland/Sodermanland class reportedly can operate on AIP for two weeks submerged without the need for snorting and at a speed of five knots. The Type 212A has a range of 8,000 nautical miles at eight knots on the surface and has an endurance of about 12 weeks. The Agosta 90B’s range is 8,500 miles at nine knots snorting and 350 miles at 3.5 knots submerged. With the AIP, its range submerged is four times longer at a speed of about four knots. It can stay submerged for up to two weeks. The endurance of the Scorpene Basic AIP is about 50 days. In contrast, the non-AIP Russian Kilo-class and the German Type 209 class built in the 1970s and 1980s had an endurance submerged of about 72 hours.

One of the greatest advantages of SSNs over SSKs is that they are fitted with a large and diverse number of advanced sensors and weapons. They can carry larger numbers of heavyweight torpedoes or mines and long-range antiship and/or land attack cruise missiles. The SSNs also can defend themselves with stand-off weapons and, if necessary, withdraw into deep water.

The Virginia-class is also superbly quiet with an absolute minimum nonacoustic signature. It is optimized to operate in littoral waters. However, the great advantage of SSNs of stealthiness has been eroded by the significant technological improvements of diesel-electric submarines operating on AIP at low speed. AIP-fitted submarines are also much quieter than nuclear-powered submarines. The Gotlands have a very low noise, magnetic and infrared signature and because they are vibration-free they are extremely hard to detect. The Type 212A is perhaps the quietest conventional submarine at sea today. Its waterborne noise, magnetic, radar, infrared and pressure signature have been drastically reduced. Its pressure hull is built from a nonmagnetic material and its shaped hull has no straight lines.

One of the greatest disadvantages of the SSKs is their inability to deploy covertly and quickly from homeports many thousands miles away from their prospective operating areas. Hence, host nation support is critical.

SSKs should not be considered either as an expendable force or replacement for the SSNs. They should be deployed only in those littoral waters where the deployment of highly capable but also high-cost vessels is too risky. SSNs should not be deployed in the littorals to search and destroy enemy quiet conventional submarines. It does not make sense to use this $2 billion-plus platform against an enemy platform that costs between $200 million and $300 million. SSKs are excellent quiet platforms for attacking enemy surface combatants and merchant vessels, especially at the approaches to maritime trade choke points such as international straits and narrows and off enemy naval bases and ports. They can also be highly successful for secondary missions as covert offensive and defensive mining, mine reconnaissance, and covert insertion of special operations teams.
A balancing act - February 2009 - Armed Forces Journal - Military Strategy, Global Defense Strategy

See, it's a little bit more complicated ;-)
 
.
since , as it claims, pakistan has a defencive doctrine, more subs does not necessarily make sense.

the objective of PN would probably be to keep pakistani sa lanes open by keeping IN away from them.
this can be achieved much better with maritime patrol aircraft and at a much lower cost by larger surface ships.

while subs are quiet and deadly, they are in essence offensive weapons used to blockade enemy sea lanes. defensively , when trying to stop some indian ships from moving into pakistani lanes, the subs will find themselves at a disadvantage.

a warship with good anti submarine capabilities will be able to fend off the submarine and still block the pakistani sea lanes. or a submarine could be used, making the odds equal for both.

however if the PN is to use a maritime patrol aircraft, it can keep both types of ships away from the sea lanes with atleast the sub completely incapable of hitting back.

Modern submarines are an excellent instrument for denying an opposing force sea control and thus fit very well with a defensive strategy.

Excerpt from "Behind the Kitty Hawk Incident":
Rear Admiral Hank McKinney, the former commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet’s submarine force, tells us not to be to hard on the sub-hunters:

Noah, I have no inside information on this event, but it is very difficult to detect a quiet diesel submarine and the Song–class submarines are quality submarines. Operating in international waters in the vicinity of a US battle group is perfectly normal — good operational training.
The Chinese very well could have staged this event to make a point about the vulnerability of the Battle Group to submarine attack. The US Navy is fully aware of [those] vulnerabilities…
The Chinese are building a credible submarine force which will make it very difficult for the US Navy to maintain sea control dominance in or near coastal waters off of China.

I suppose that comment could very well apply to the situation of Pakistan vis-a-vis the numerically larger and systemically more powerfull fleet of India. Looking at a regional map, I'm inclined to venture a bet that if push came to shove, India would be more dependent on SLOC than Pakistan....

bd22bfbfb9e17b91d87781e1baa42a22.jpg

b6434892fbef63f21d5730a12624860a.jpg


0e791a6dd3695421ede3c7282b4cef44._.png
 
Last edited:
. . .
The Akula-class (Project 971) nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN) Nerpa (K 152) was commissioned into the Russian Federation Navy's Pacific Fleet on 28 December.

Local media reported that the commissioning ceremony took place at the town of Bolshoy Kamen in Russia's Far East, near to Amur Shipyard, following the completion of sea trials. Nerpa was repaired there following a fatal incident in November 2008 that delayed its delivery to the navy.

A malfunction in the boat's fire-extinguishing system during sea trials resulted in the suffocation of 20 sailors and technicians. Following repairs costing RUR1.9 billion (USD60 million), Nerpa returned to sea in July 2009.

The 9,100-ton SSN will not fly the Russian flag for long as it is due to be leased to the Indian Navy (IN) for 10 years under an agreement worth a reported USD650 million.
 
. .


I taught Indian media was not reliable......anyways ...............the article ends by saying ....... Recommending that the Navys second production line for six conventional submarines, Project 75 ( India), be kickstarted without further delay and the embattled Scorpene project be provided with urgent attention to avoid any further slippages.

Quite obviously a kick in as they wanted some news but they havent mentioned the IN acquisition till 2015 but have mentioned the ships which will retire .............Praise the lord for such news channels that keep GOI on their toes and foes resting peacefully :wave:
 
. . .
Back
Top Bottom