cogitoergosum
2010-09-02 04:23:46 UTC
← Technology Headlines Updates
Boss, we have a Problem
Posted on September 2, 2010 by navanavonmilita
http://chopshoptopcop.wordpress.com/2010/09/02/boss-we-have-a-problem/
B: “Chela, why this gloomy look on your face? Have you stuck with
India’s Super Bug or something?”
A: “No Boss. I wish I had died in my mother’s womb and not seen this
day.”
B: “A, simmer down. This ain’t the end of the world, as we both know.
Problems come and problems go but we two-some go on and on and more
on. Get on with it. Spill out your problems to me. Trust me, I can
handle anything and everything that India throws, oops, hides for the
fear that India would be branded as a non-Super Power of this
century.
This is India’s century. mark my words, India hasn’t made a single run
and the game is almost over. Just last innings to be played. However,
India per, oops, per, oops double time, perseveres. India cannot lose
this super duper game of being a super power. China is getting ahead
of India and India is getting behind China. Far behind, Far, far,
farthest of far behind.”
A: Crying his heart out at the nice words spoken by the Boss…”Boss.
please stop torturing me. I know that I am the greatest jingoist of
India. I cannot not be the jingoist. I love India. I love being a
fanatic of mother India. However, judging from the scandal brewing in
the English media, nasty Business Standard and nastier Rediff
bastards, we , I mean India is losing the battle, before she, oops,
the battle even started.”
B: “Holy Hindu cow! What now? Going back to the ancient middle ages
days of hand to hand sword fighting?”
A: “I believe, that even that ancient battle tested technique wouldn’t
not work for Indians, jingoist or dingoist. We are doomed forever.”
B: “A. We can’t be that bad. We are going to moon soon, I guess. If
India can go to the moon and put a Indian footprint on lunar soil, why
India can do any other thing that makes India proud for the next
thousand and one years.”
A: “The End.”
B: “May Allah be Praised.”
N-subs: India debates, China struggles
September 02, 2010 03:53 IST
Tags: SSN, SSBN, Advanced Technology Vessel, Indian Navy, China
An increasingly apparent reason for the Ministry of Defence’s slow
decision-making on a second submarine production line for the Indian
Navy is: the deep divisions within the navy over India’s [ Images ]
submarine force. A debate rages between the submarine arm and the
surface navy particularly the dominant aviation wing on whether
the future lies in submarines or aircraft carriers. The navy’s
submariners, meanwhile, debate the merits of conventional versus
nuclear-powered submarines.
Slowed by these internal debates, India’s 30-Year Submarine
Construction Plan, which the government approved in 1999, has
languished. The 30-Year plan envisioned building 24 conventional
submarines in India. Six were to be built from western technology and
six with Russian collaboration; then Indian designers, having absorbed
the best of both worlds, would build 12 submarines indigenously.
Project 75, to build six Scorpene submarines (the “western” six), was
contracted in 2005. In this series of articles, Business Standard has
reported that the MoD believes it is still 4-6 years away from Project
75I, i.e. beginning work on the second six submarines.
A senior retired admiral, reflecting the views of the submarine arm,
blames the navy’s “aircraft carrier lobby” for the delay in building
submarines. He alleges: “The last two naval chiefs (Admirals Arun
Prakash and Sureesh Mehta) were aviators, who had no interest in using
the navy’s limited budget for building submarines. So they exploited
the division of opinion amongst submariners the nuclear-powered
versus conventional submarine debate to push submarine building into
the future.”
Nuclear-powered submarines are of two types: ballistic missile
submarines (called SSBNs) and attack submarines (referred to as SSNs).
Both are propelled by power from a miniature on-board reactor, but
SSBNs also fire nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles. SSBNs are not a
part of the fighting navy; they constitute a country’s nuclear
deterrent and fire their nuclear-tipped missiles on orders from the
national leadership. SSNs operate as part of a naval fleet, moving
under nuclear power and sinking surface warships with conventional
torpedoes and missiles.
Interestingly, India is the only country that has chosen to build
SSBNs (the recently-launched INS Arihant [ Images ], and two successor
submarines) before building an SSN force. The reason has been a deeply
felt need to operationalise the nuclear triad land, sea and air-
based nuclear delivery systems that India’s Draft Nuclear Doctrine
stipulates as a secure second-strike capability.
But the possibility of an SSN force remains tantalisingly alive. In
2004 when INS Arihant was being developed under the Advanced
Technology Vessel, or ATV, programme Admiral Arun Prakash, then navy
chief, proposed that the ATV programme be enlarged to six SSBNs and
four SSNs. This required the allocation of Rs 10,000 crore for the
DRDO to develop the necessary technologies. Pranab Mukherjee
[ Images ], then the defence minister, backed the allocation of this
funding. But, according to sources close to the ATV project, once AK
Antony took over as defence minister in 2006, he backed off, insisting
that the Prime Minister’s Office should take all decisions relating to
India’s strategic nuclear programme. The proposal for funding
technology development lapsed.
But the Director General of the DRDO, Dr VK Saraswat, confirms that an
SSN could be developed without difficulty. Talking to Business
Standard, Saraswat said, “I have no charter to build an SSN at the
moment. But once the government takes a policy decision we can start
working on it. The only major difference between a nuclear powered
attack submarine (i.e. an SSN) and an SSBN is weaponry, and the size
changes. The technology for design, packaging, and integration remains
similar.”
Votaries of nuclear submarines, such as Rear Admiral (Retired) Raja
Menon, argue that nuclear-powered submarines have a crucial advantage
over conventional ones: endurance. While conventional (diesel-
electric) submarines are more quiet and harder to detect while
submerged, they are easily picked up when they surface to charge their
batteries. Furthermore, they move slowly underwater, unlike nuclear
submarines, which can remain submerged almost indefinitely. This
allows a single nuclear submarine travelling underwater to its
patrol station and remaining there, undetected, for months to do the
job of multiple conventional submarines, which give their position
away when they surface at regular intervals.
Admiral Menon explains, “A single SSN can dominate an area 1,000
nautical miles (1,850 km) away as effectively as three conventional
submarines, which require one submarine on station, another transiting
to relieve it, and a third transiting back to refuel. If the patrol
area is farther than 1,000 nautical miles, a single SSN does the job
of five conventional submarines. That is why the US Navy fields an all-
nuclear force.”
But Menon accepts that the Indian Navy would always need conventional
submarines. India’s coastal waters are so shallow that SSNs, which
typically weigh 4,000-5,000 tonnes, run the risk of scraping the
bottom. Conventional submarines, which normally weigh around 1,500
tonnes, are needed for dominating the coastal areas. But the
complexities of a nuclear submarine programme are evident from China’s
current difficulties. The Pentagon’s [ Images ] recent report to the
US Congress, entitled “Military and Security Developments Involving
the People’s Republic of China, 2010″ reveals that China’s SSN and
SSBN programmes are in trouble. China relies on its four primitive Han-
class attack submarines (Type 091), having decided to close
construction of the newer Shen-class (Type 093). Currently, China is
grappling with a newer Type 095 SSN; five of these could be added “in
the coming years”.
China also faces problems in developing SSBNs. The first Xia-class
(Type 092) SSBN line produced just one submarine, which was never
deployed on a deterrence patrol. Then China shifted focus to a newer
Jin-class (Type 094), of which the first SSBN “appears ready”, with
four more under construction. However, the long-range ballistic
missile for the Jin-class SSBNs, termed the Julang-2, has “encountered
difficulty failing several of what should have been the final round
of flight tests.”
Ajai Shukla in New Delhi Source:
Discussion Board
Showing 1-2 of total 2 messages
Indian gov’t
by Jaganath Bharat (View MyPage) on Sep 02, 2010 05:17 AM
They always promises YOU something, but eventually it’s delivered only
to your great-great-grand kids, if at all.
Build Submarines or targets
by Dogra Narinder (View MyPage) on Sep 02, 2010 04:22 AM
I have learned from ex-navy sailors who chide each other over
submarines and targets (above surface vessels that includes aircraft
carriers)that submarines is better choice. But India needs aircraft
carriers as well. More nuclear submarines but only a few aircraft
carriers.
Re: Build Submarines or targets
by stryker (View MyPage) on Sep 02, 2010 07:39 AM
2 on the way
admiral gorshov almost refitted
7 more to be aquired by 2015
need more navy men though
chinese cant win against gorkhas, jaats , marathas , rajputs , sikhs
only weapons cant win a war
Message(s) deleted by moderator not displayed on this page
Message(s) deleted by moderator not displayed on this page
…and I am Sid harth
This entry was posted in Indian Politics, Politics. Bookmark the
permalink. Edit
← Technology Headlines Updates
Boss, we have a Problem
Posted on September 2, 2010 by navanavonmilita
http://chopshoptopcop.wordpress.com/2010/09/02/boss-we-have-a-problem/
B: “Chela, why this gloomy look on your face? Have you stuck with
India’s Super Bug or something?”
A: “No Boss. I wish I had died in my mother’s womb and not seen this
day.”
B: “A, simmer down. This ain’t the end of the world, as we both know.
Problems come and problems go but we two-some go on and on and more
on. Get on with it. Spill out your problems to me. Trust me, I can
handle anything and everything that India throws, oops, hides for the
fear that India would be branded as a non-Super Power of this
century.
This is India’s century. mark my words, India hasn’t made a single run
and the game is almost over. Just last innings to be played. However,
India per, oops, per, oops double time, perseveres. India cannot lose
this super duper game of being a super power. China is getting ahead
of India and India is getting behind China. Far behind, Far, far,
farthest of far behind.”
A: Crying his heart out at the nice words spoken by the Boss…”Boss.
please stop torturing me. I know that I am the greatest jingoist of
India. I cannot not be the jingoist. I love India. I love being a
fanatic of mother India. However, judging from the scandal brewing in
the English media, nasty Business Standard and nastier Rediff
bastards, we , I mean India is losing the battle, before she, oops,
the battle even started.”
B: “Holy Hindu cow! What now? Going back to the ancient middle ages
days of hand to hand sword fighting?”
A: “I believe, that even that ancient battle tested technique wouldn’t
not work for Indians, jingoist or dingoist. We are doomed forever.”
B: “A. We can’t be that bad. We are going to moon soon, I guess. If
India can go to the moon and put a Indian footprint on lunar soil, why
India can do any other thing that makes India proud for the next
thousand and one years.”
A: “The End.”
B: “May Allah be Praised.”
N-subs: India debates, China struggles
September 02, 2010 03:53 IST
Tags: SSN, SSBN, Advanced Technology Vessel, Indian Navy, China
An increasingly apparent reason for the Ministry of Defence’s slow
decision-making on a second submarine production line for the Indian
Navy is: the deep divisions within the navy over India’s [ Images ]
submarine force. A debate rages between the submarine arm and the
surface navy particularly the dominant aviation wing on whether
the future lies in submarines or aircraft carriers. The navy’s
submariners, meanwhile, debate the merits of conventional versus
nuclear-powered submarines.
Slowed by these internal debates, India’s 30-Year Submarine
Construction Plan, which the government approved in 1999, has
languished. The 30-Year plan envisioned building 24 conventional
submarines in India. Six were to be built from western technology and
six with Russian collaboration; then Indian designers, having absorbed
the best of both worlds, would build 12 submarines indigenously.
Project 75, to build six Scorpene submarines (the “western” six), was
contracted in 2005. In this series of articles, Business Standard has
reported that the MoD believes it is still 4-6 years away from Project
75I, i.e. beginning work on the second six submarines.
A senior retired admiral, reflecting the views of the submarine arm,
blames the navy’s “aircraft carrier lobby” for the delay in building
submarines. He alleges: “The last two naval chiefs (Admirals Arun
Prakash and Sureesh Mehta) were aviators, who had no interest in using
the navy’s limited budget for building submarines. So they exploited
the division of opinion amongst submariners the nuclear-powered
versus conventional submarine debate to push submarine building into
the future.”
Nuclear-powered submarines are of two types: ballistic missile
submarines (called SSBNs) and attack submarines (referred to as SSNs).
Both are propelled by power from a miniature on-board reactor, but
SSBNs also fire nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles. SSBNs are not a
part of the fighting navy; they constitute a country’s nuclear
deterrent and fire their nuclear-tipped missiles on orders from the
national leadership. SSNs operate as part of a naval fleet, moving
under nuclear power and sinking surface warships with conventional
torpedoes and missiles.
Interestingly, India is the only country that has chosen to build
SSBNs (the recently-launched INS Arihant [ Images ], and two successor
submarines) before building an SSN force. The reason has been a deeply
felt need to operationalise the nuclear triad land, sea and air-
based nuclear delivery systems that India’s Draft Nuclear Doctrine
stipulates as a secure second-strike capability.
But the possibility of an SSN force remains tantalisingly alive. In
2004 when INS Arihant was being developed under the Advanced
Technology Vessel, or ATV, programme Admiral Arun Prakash, then navy
chief, proposed that the ATV programme be enlarged to six SSBNs and
four SSNs. This required the allocation of Rs 10,000 crore for the
DRDO to develop the necessary technologies. Pranab Mukherjee
[ Images ], then the defence minister, backed the allocation of this
funding. But, according to sources close to the ATV project, once AK
Antony took over as defence minister in 2006, he backed off, insisting
that the Prime Minister’s Office should take all decisions relating to
India’s strategic nuclear programme. The proposal for funding
technology development lapsed.
But the Director General of the DRDO, Dr VK Saraswat, confirms that an
SSN could be developed without difficulty. Talking to Business
Standard, Saraswat said, “I have no charter to build an SSN at the
moment. But once the government takes a policy decision we can start
working on it. The only major difference between a nuclear powered
attack submarine (i.e. an SSN) and an SSBN is weaponry, and the size
changes. The technology for design, packaging, and integration remains
similar.”
Votaries of nuclear submarines, such as Rear Admiral (Retired) Raja
Menon, argue that nuclear-powered submarines have a crucial advantage
over conventional ones: endurance. While conventional (diesel-
electric) submarines are more quiet and harder to detect while
submerged, they are easily picked up when they surface to charge their
batteries. Furthermore, they move slowly underwater, unlike nuclear
submarines, which can remain submerged almost indefinitely. This
allows a single nuclear submarine travelling underwater to its
patrol station and remaining there, undetected, for months to do the
job of multiple conventional submarines, which give their position
away when they surface at regular intervals.
Admiral Menon explains, “A single SSN can dominate an area 1,000
nautical miles (1,850 km) away as effectively as three conventional
submarines, which require one submarine on station, another transiting
to relieve it, and a third transiting back to refuel. If the patrol
area is farther than 1,000 nautical miles, a single SSN does the job
of five conventional submarines. That is why the US Navy fields an all-
nuclear force.”
But Menon accepts that the Indian Navy would always need conventional
submarines. India’s coastal waters are so shallow that SSNs, which
typically weigh 4,000-5,000 tonnes, run the risk of scraping the
bottom. Conventional submarines, which normally weigh around 1,500
tonnes, are needed for dominating the coastal areas. But the
complexities of a nuclear submarine programme are evident from China’s
current difficulties. The Pentagon’s [ Images ] recent report to the
US Congress, entitled “Military and Security Developments Involving
the People’s Republic of China, 2010″ reveals that China’s SSN and
SSBN programmes are in trouble. China relies on its four primitive Han-
class attack submarines (Type 091), having decided to close
construction of the newer Shen-class (Type 093). Currently, China is
grappling with a newer Type 095 SSN; five of these could be added “in
the coming years”.
China also faces problems in developing SSBNs. The first Xia-class
(Type 092) SSBN line produced just one submarine, which was never
deployed on a deterrence patrol. Then China shifted focus to a newer
Jin-class (Type 094), of which the first SSBN “appears ready”, with
four more under construction. However, the long-range ballistic
missile for the Jin-class SSBNs, termed the Julang-2, has “encountered
difficulty failing several of what should have been the final round
of flight tests.”
Ajai Shukla in New Delhi Source:
Discussion Board
Showing 1-2 of total 2 messages
Indian gov’t
by Jaganath Bharat (View MyPage) on Sep 02, 2010 05:17 AM
They always promises YOU something, but eventually it’s delivered only
to your great-great-grand kids, if at all.
Build Submarines or targets
by Dogra Narinder (View MyPage) on Sep 02, 2010 04:22 AM
I have learned from ex-navy sailors who chide each other over
submarines and targets (above surface vessels that includes aircraft
carriers)that submarines is better choice. But India needs aircraft
carriers as well. More nuclear submarines but only a few aircraft
carriers.
Re: Build Submarines or targets
by stryker (View MyPage) on Sep 02, 2010 07:39 AM
2 on the way
admiral gorshov almost refitted
7 more to be aquired by 2015
need more navy men though
chinese cant win against gorkhas, jaats , marathas , rajputs , sikhs
only weapons cant win a war
Message(s) deleted by moderator not displayed on this page
Message(s) deleted by moderator not displayed on this page
…and I am Sid harth
This entry was posted in Indian Politics, Politics. Bookmark the
permalink. Edit
← Technology Headlines Updates