India's S5 SSBN to Armed with 12 SLBM Launch Tubes, K5 Missile, and 190 MW Reactor

India's naval strength is set for a significant boost with the development of its next-generation ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), the S5 class.

These submarines are poised to dramatically enhance the country's nuclear deterrence capabilities, marking a substantial leap forward in firepower and technological sophistication.

The S5 class SSBNs are anticipated to feature a remarkable 12 or more launch tubes, a considerable upgrade from the current Arihant-class submarines, which possess only 4.

This expanded capacity will enable India to deploy a more formidable arsenal of K5 and K5 SLBMs, which are currently in the development phase. These missiles are designed to carry multiple nuclear warheads across vast distances, providing India with a potent and credible nuclear deterrent.

Furthermore, the S5 class submarines will incorporate a series of technological advancements to enhance their stealth and survivability.

Equipped with a new 190MW pressurized light-water reactor (PWR) fueled with enriched uranium, these submarines will boast a longer range and a quieter signature, making them significantly more difficult for adversaries to detect and track.

The increased size and advanced propulsion systems of the S5 class submarines will grant them greater operational freedom in the vast expanses of the Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean regions.

This will ensure that India maintains its nuclear triad, consisting of land-based, sea-based, and air-based nuclear delivery systems, which is considered vital for a robust and credible nuclear deterrent.

While the S4 and S4 Star submarines are already in the final stages of fitment, the S5 design phase is nearing completion, and the program is expected to receive official sanction soon.

This ambitious undertaking underscores India's commitment to maintaining a credible and effective nuclear deterrent in an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape.

 

[M S Chatterji]

China watch out. India is ready to take you on.

 

[Anant]

The Arihant-class has 4 launch tubes not 12, with the extended Arihant-class planned to increase that to 8. The S5-class are speculated to have 16 launch tubes, which will be at par with most SSBNs.

 

[Ysmir Rewari]

Navy is doing such a great job. Be it submarines, aircraft carriers, or destroyers! I just hope IAF and IA can absorb navy's attitute towards innovation and indigenous manufacturing. Accepting home grown products in conjunction with acquiring world class foreign systems needs to be balanced with long term focus on self sufficiency and export market penetration.

 

[Mango]

China watch out. India is ready to take you on.

China has the largest navy in the world. We still have a long way to go before we can challenge them.

 

[NSR]

Navy is doing such a great job. Be it submarines, aircraft carriers, or destroyers! I just hope IAF and IA can absorb navy's attitute towards innovation and indigenous manufacturing. Accepting home grown products in conjunction with acquiring world class foreign systems needs to be balanced with long term focus on self sufficiency and export market penetration.

Spot on, wrote many times about Indian Navy and its Warship Design Bureau (WDB)

 

[NSR]

The Arihant-class has 4 launch tubes not 12, with the extended Arihant-class planned to increase that to 8. The S5-class are speculated to have 16 launch tubes, which will be at par with most SSBNs.

Anant, I read about the following.
INS Arihant accommodates 12 750 kms range SLBMs or 4 3,500 kms SLBMs.

I wish they installed 8 2,000 kms range SLBMs to take care of terroristan/jehadistan safely and effectively from a safe distance.

 

[Anant]

Anant, I read about the following.
INS Arihant accommodates 12 750 kms range SLBMs or 4 3,500 kms SLBMs.

I wish they installed 8 2,000 kms range SLBMs to take care of terroristan/jehadistan safely and effectively from a safe distance.

Sir, the Arihant-class can carry 12 K-15s, but that is not because they have 12 launch tubes. They only have 4.

The K-15 has a lower diameter than the K-4. This allows each launch tube to be fitted with 3 K-15s instead. This would be done using a cradle holding the missiles, with each cradle being roughly as wide as the launch tube.

This isn't exactly a new concept, though the Arihant-class are only the second group of ships to do this. The Americans did the same thing when the four oldest Ohio-class SSBNs were converted to SSGNs in the 1990s. Each submarine had cradles for Tomahawk SLCMs fitted inside the launch tubes, allowing the tubes to launch 7 Tomahawks each, and giving these boats a striking power of 154 Tomahawk SLCMs (22 tubes).

The only difference is that this cradle was kind of fitted permanently in the tubes of the Ohio-class SSGNs, while it seems such a cradle has been made removable in the case of the Arihant-class.

That said, there may be an idea here too. We may eventually end up developing a similar cradle for SLCMs as well, thereby converting Arihant and Arighat into hybrid SSBN-SSGNs.

 

[Anant]

Spot on, wrote many times about Indian Navy and its Warship Design Bureau (WDB)

The difference is institutional. The WDB has been around since the early 1960s, when work began on the first Nilgiri-class (modified Leander-class) frigates. Essentially, naval designers travelled to the UK, and essentially re-drew the entire design, taking some very valuable lessons.

Moreover, the modifications we made to the second, third, and fourth ships of that class, as well as the major modifications to the last two ships, gave a lot of much-needed experience and confidence to the WDB.

Next, when it was felt the Nilgiris' lack of missiles was a problem, they experimented by fitting missiles on the bow of the two Type 12 frigates (replacing the 4.5" twin turret). Finally, someone decided to integrate all this on a larger hull, and the Godavari-class was born. Both the Brits and the Russians refused to certify tye design, but by sheer perseverance, the IN and the WDB carried on, and when Godavari went for trials, it was found that despite being larger than the Nilgiri design and despite carrying the same powerplant, the larger frigate was both faster and more maneuverable than the older frigate. The WDB had done something truly exceptional: Taken the excellent Leander-class design and somehow modified it to become even better, and that too on a first-attempt design.

The IN and the WDB, and India's path to developing and designing it's own warships is truly inspirational. I'll probably write an article or something about it at some point.

 

[NSR]

Sir, the Arihant-class can carry 12 K-15s, but that is not because they have 12 launch tubes. They only have 4.

The K-15 has a lower diameter than the K-4. This allows each launch tube to be fitted with 3 K-15s instead. This would be done using a cradle holding the missiles, with each cradle being roughly as wide as the launch tube.

This isn't exactly a new concept, though the Arihant-class are only the second group of ships to do this. The Americans did the same thing when the four oldest Ohio-class SSBNs were converted to SSGNs in the 1990s. Each submarine had cradles for Tomahawk SLCMs fitted inside the launch tubes, allowing the tubes to launch 7 Tomahawks each, and giving these boats a striking power of 154 Tomahawk SLCMs (22 tubes).

The only difference is that this cradle was kind of fitted permanently in the tubes of the Ohio-class SSGNs, while it seems such a cradle has been made removable in the case of the Arihant-class.

That said, there may be an idea here too. We may eventually end up developing a similar cradle for SLCMs as well, thereby converting Arihant and Arighat into hybrid SSBN-SSGNs.

FYI - from wikipedia...

Arihant has four vertical launch tubes, which can carry 12 (three per launch tube) smaller K-15 missiles or four larger K-4 missiles.
The K-4 has a longer range of 3,500 km (2,200 mi), and had commenced trials in 2014

 

[NSR]

The difference is institutional. The WDB has been around since the early 1960s, when work began on the first Nilgiri-class (modified Leander-class) frigates. Essentially, naval designers travelled to the UK, and essentially re-drew the entire design, taking some very valuable lessons.

Moreover, the modifications we made to the second, third, and fourth ships of that class, as well as the major modifications to the last two ships, gave a lot of much-needed experience and confidence to the WDB.

Next, when it was felt the Nilgiris' lack of missiles was a problem, they experimented by fitting missiles on the bow of the two Type 12 frigates (replacing the 4.5" twin turret). Finally, someone decided to integrate all this on a larger hull, and the Godavari-class was born. Both the Brits and the Russians refused to certify tye design, but by sheer perseverance, the IN and the WDB carried on, and when Godavari went for trials, it was found that despite being larger than the Nilgiri design and despite carrying the same powerplant, the larger frigate was both faster and more maneuverable than the older frigate. The WDB had done something truly exceptional: Taken the excellent Leander-class design and somehow modified it to become even better, and that too on a first-attempt design.

The IN and the WDB, and India's path to developing and designing it's own warships is truly inspirational. I'll probably write an article or something about it at some point.

I truly love what IN and WDB was doing with very minimal funding but achieving maximal things.
So I was writing about them for a long time especially prasing the work of WDB.

Soon we will have our own S5 SSBNs, P-76 SSKs, SSNs, many kindsof warships.

IN is in a much better pathway to be free of crippling foreign sanctions.
Regarding sanctions, IN went through debilitating sanctions on its aircraft carriers, and warshios, etc after 1998 Nuclear Test. They did learn somethings and improvise.

IAF and IA on the other hand addicted to phoren maals and kickbacks and all kinds of shady deals like Mirage-2000 upgrades which serves no purpose and it can't even go into an engagement against a F-16 on its own as it does not even have a AESA radar and can't fire BVRAAMs
Sad indeed.

 

[desigandu]

The Arihant-class has 4 launch tubes not 12, with the extended Arihant-class planned to increase that to 8. The S5-class are speculated to have 16 launch tubes, which will be at par with most SSBNs.

Columbia class SSBNs are reducing Launchpad tubes to16 from 24 in the Ohio class, and the plan is 12 boats instead of 14…Lifecycle cost of Columbia class is expected to be $380Billion - wow…

SSBNs are expensive thus we should get them right - we probably need 6 S5s, with 2/3 on patrol given our threat needs…Hopefully our next gen SSBNs beyond 2050 may be in the 20000 ton class with 16-24 tubes with true K7/K8 ICBMs with a range in excess of 12000kms, with MaRVMIRV capabilities…

Short term I hope we just accelerate project alpha as it seems at least we are on a journey towards SSBNs…Accelerated SSKs can also provide some capability at least in littoral waters…

 

[desigandu]

FYI - from wikipedia...

Arihant has four vertical launch tubes, which can carry 12 (three per launch tube) smaller K-15 missiles or four larger K-4 missiles.
The K-4 has a longer range of 3,500 km (2,200 mi), and had commenced trials in 2014

No these are VLS tubes which will launch SLBMs and also SLCMs as needed…Torpedos tube launched SLCMs are a different mechanism altogether - but may have a limited range and warhead yield, mostly conventional only…

 

[NSR]

No these are VLS tubes which will launch SLBMs and also SLCMs as needed…Torpedos tube launched SLCMs are a different mechanism altogether - but may have a limited range and warhead yield, mostly conventional only…

FYI --- From wikipedia ----
Arihant has four vertical launch tubes, which can carry 12 (three per launch tube) smaller K-15 missiles or four larger K-4 missiles.
The K-4 has a longer range of 3,500 km (2,200 mi), and had commenced trials in 2014

 

[Bobby Singh]

China has the largest navy in the world. We still have a long way to go before we can challenge them.

It is not just numbers but quality and abalities. Chine need more ship because whole world is its enemy

 

[Man-ju]

The Arihant-class has 4 launch tubes not 12, with the extended Arihant-class planned to increase that to 8. The S5-class are speculated to have 16 launch tubes, which will be at par with most SSBNs.

This is exactly what I was about to say, anyways looks like the reporter writing this has zero defence knowledge and he deduced to 12 based on 12 K-15 it can carry. He doesn't know launch tubes are designed to carry 3 k-15 each in a single VLS or compatible with 1 K4 each.

 

[Man-ju]

If current reactor is fine tuned and power output increased from 83MW to 90+ MW then i guess S4 and S4 star will be deployed almost at the same time for searching trails post reactors becoming critical. We would certainly need external help to increase the output to 190MW for future SSN and SSBN and maybe 200+ MW reactos to build a nuclear carriers. The A1B PWR of Ford class carrier is 260MW supportive to EMALS.

 

[Anant]

Columbia class SSBNs are reducing Launchpad tubes to16 from 24 in the Ohio class, and the plan is 12 boats instead of 14…Lifecycle cost of Columbia class is expected to be $380Billion - wow…

SSBNs are expensive thus we should get them right - we probably need 6 S5s, with 2/3 on patrol given our threat needs…Hopefully our next gen SSBNs beyond 2050 may be in the 20000 ton class with 16-24 tubes with true K7/K8 ICBMs with a range in excess of 12000kms, with MaRVMIRV capabilities…

Short term I hope we just accelerate project alpha as it seems at least we are on a journey towards SSBNs…Accelerated SSKs can also provide some capability at least in littoral waters…

Sir, 6 SSBNs would allow for a continuous patrol of 1 boat, with a second boat occasionally available. In order to get 3 boats on near-continuous patrol, you'd need 10 boats. The rough rule is 3.5 to 1.

 

[Anant]

If current reactor is fine tuned and power output increased from 83MW to 90+ MW then i guess S4 and S4 star will be deployed almost at the same time for searching trails post reactors becoming critical. We would certainly need external help to increase the output to 190MW for future SSN and SSBN and maybe 200+ MW reactos to build a nuclear carriers. The A1B PWR of Ford class carrier is 260MW supportive to EMALS.

Sir, the A1B reactors on the Ford-class are supposedly capable of a total of 700 MW of thermal power each, which then translates to around 135 MW of electrical power plus 260 MW shaft power.

The reactor on the Ohio-class is the 220 MWth S8G reactor, while the Virginia-class uses the 210 MWth S9G. As such, the 190 MWth reactor for the S5-class and Project 75 Alpha is perfectly fine.

That said, when it comes to the carrier, just upgrading the CLWR-B2 reactor from 190 MW to 220-ish MW will not be sufficient. We would either need an entirely new 300-ish MW reactor, or alternatively, we can slot in 3 (maybe even 4, though 3 should be sufficient) of the 190 MW reactors.

 

[desigandu]

Sir, the A1B reactors on the Ford-class are supposedly capable of a total of 700 MW of thermal power each, which then translates to around 135 MW of electrical power plus 260 MW shaft power.

The reactor on the Ohio-class is the 220 MWth S8G reactor, while the Virginia-class uses the 210 MWth S9G. As such, the 190 MWth reactor for the S5-class and Project 75 Alpha is perfectly fine.

That said, when it comes to the carrier, just upgrading the CLWR-B2 reactor from 190 MW to 220-ish MW will not be sufficient. We would either need an entirely new 300-ish MW reactor, or alternatively, we can slot in 3 (maybe even 4, though 3 should be sufficient) of the 190 MW reactors.

If we can get to 190MW by 2030 then we should go for Gen3 25-300MW! what type of investment is needed for such an endeavor - just reactor development?