Why India Focusing on Expanded Nuclear Submarine Fleet Over Aircraft Carriers? Stealth, Credible Deterrence and Cost-Effectiveness Key

In a significant shift in naval strategy, the Indian Ministry of Defence (MoD) has chosen to prioritize the expansion of its nuclear submarine fleet over the acquisition of a third aircraft carrier. This decision reflects a renewed focus on stealth, deterrence, and the evolving nature of maritime security threats, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region.

Amidst growing regional tensions and China's increasing naval presence, India is reassessing its defence priorities. The Indian Navy recognizes the need for a balanced force structure capable of addressing a wide range of challenges. Nuclear submarines, with their inherent stealth and extended operational endurance, have emerged as a key component of this evolving strategy.

Both attack submarines (SSNs) and ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) offer unique capabilities. SSNs provide a potent underwater strike capability, while SSBNs, armed with nuclear-tipped missiles, form the bedrock of India's nuclear deterrence. This aligns with India's "no first use" nuclear policy, where survivable second-strike capabilities are paramount.

Compared to aircraft carriers, which are high-value targets and require extensive support infrastructure, submarines offer a more cost-effective and survivable means of projecting power. Modern advancements in anti-ship missiles and asymmetric warfare tactics have further underscored the vulnerability of surface vessels, making submarines an attractive option for maintaining a persistent and credible naval presence.

The Indian Navy plans to commission at least six new SSNs to enhance its operational capabilities. These submarines will enable India to conduct covert operations, gather intelligence, and project power far from its shores. Furthermore, the development of additional SSBNs, building upon the existing Arihant class, will bolster India's second-strike capability and strengthen its strategic deterrence posture.

This strategic shift towards an expanded nuclear submarine fleet highlights India's commitment to maintaining a credible and survivable deterrent in the face of evolving security challenges. By prioritizing stealth, endurance, and cost-effectiveness, India is building a naval force capable of safeguarding its maritime interests and contributing to regional stability.

 

[Ujjal Bedagga]

Building aircraft carrier for our country is to host a white elefant. Even Russia is not indulging for aircraft carrier. An anti ship missile can easily destroy an aircraft carrier which is much much cheaper. So why should invite a white elefant to our house. Better we build 10 nuclear submarine to make our country militarily strong.

 

[Akshay Bisht]

finally !!!!! someone at MOD got some brains. SSN/SSBN are far more sustainable, cheaper maintainance than carriers and useful for deterrence and power projection, than some expensive piece of carrier.

 

[Anonymus]

Good move but atleast atleast give approval for 10 nuclear attack subs as Navy navy going to compensate on aircraft carrier.

 

[What the heck]

We need a lot, at-least 50.

 

[Varaaah]

Nuclear AC yes, diesel AC no!

An AC is also an extended piece of land, and such ships can be used for many things, at many places. It has advantages over submarines, which are mostly for defensive roles. ACs are more versatile.

The future of many kinds of plants, e.g., is at sea, on floating platforms, AC-like platforms. The electricity problem will not be there with its nuclear reactors.

 

[Somnath Sinhababu]

Why India is unable to make diesel electric submarine..Despite India can make Nuclear Submarine...

 

[Varaaah]

Why India is unable to make diesel electric submarine..Despite India can make Nuclear Submarine...

Perhaps because different companies make them.

 

[Radha Ramanan]

In today's world of anti-ship ballistic missiles, carriers are vulnerable as demonstrated in the Israeli war when a supersonic ballistic missile could not be shot down by Israel when the IAF airbase was targeted.

The cost of a carrier will be in excess of 2 billion $, and the complement of jets will add another 2 billion $. Other costs will add another 2 billion $ conservatively. In the 1971 Indo-Pak war, Vikrant was hiding from the Pakistani submarines and then went in to bomb Dhaka. Such is the fear of a submarine. Carriers make sense in a blue water navy like the US where there are several layers of protection in the fleet. China is attempting the same, and very soon we will see a fleet of carriers sailing into the Bay of Bengal and Arabian Sea on the way to Gwadar or Chittagong. It's a matter of time.

We can get nearly 3 SSNs for the cost of a carrier when there is a good number ordered.

 

[Somnath Sinhababu]

Perhaps because different companies make them.

I have never seen a country can make nuclear submarine but can not make diesel electric submarine..... India is a really unique country... no doubt.....

 

[Varaaah]

I have never seen a country can make nuclear submarine but can not make diesel electric submarine..... India is a really unique country... no doubt.....

In India often one hand does not know what the other hand does. That way, so many talent and capability is wasted.

 

[Varaaah]

In today's world of anti-ship ballistic missiles, carriers are vulnerable as demonstrated in the Israeli war when a supersonic ballistic missile could not be shot down by Israel when the IAF airbase was targeted.

The cost of a carrier will be in excess of 2 billion $, and the complement of jets will add another 2 billion $. Other costs will add another 2 billion $ conservatively. In the 1971 Indo-Pak war, Vikrant was hiding from the Pakistani submarines and then went in to bomb Dhaka. Such is the fear of a submarine. Carriers make sense in a blue water navy like the US where there are several layers of protection in the fleet. China is attempting the same, and very soon we will see a fleet of carriers sailing into the Bay of Bengal and Arabian Sea on the way to Gwadar or Chittagong. It's a matter of time.

We can get nearly 3 SSNs for the cost of a carrier when there is a good number ordered.

Against weaker countries, ACs are very useful. But this goes mostly for countries with a colonial mindset or for countries which possess islands thousands of kilometers away.

 

[Varaaah]

finally !!!!! someone at MOD got some brains. SSN/SSBN are far more sustainable, cheaper maintainance than carriers and useful for deterrence and power projection, than some expensive piece of carrier.

ACs are visible platforms of power projection. Subs are not.

 

[op gupta]

The decision to make aircraft carriers hinges on many factors, but the most important of them all is a country's economy. Thanks to stern measures like demonetisation, more flow of money into the economy (more than the value of India's GDP) and GST (an out-of-context tax system), and also rupee devaluation among many others, India has chosen to go for only two aircraft carriers. But advancement in missile technology and sonars make aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines redundant after 20 years down the line.

 

[Enforcer]

Good Idea. 2 is good enough for now since we short on cash. Ideally India needs 5 but there are many other much more important projects that we need money for.

 

[Baiju Bhaskaran]

One of the best decisions by MOD. Strategically we need more submarines than aircraft carriers. We should have more than fifteen nuclear submarines and more than thirty conventional submarines.

 

[beencensured]

One of the best decisions by MOD. Strategically we need more submarines than aircraft carriers. We should have more than fifteen nuclear submarines and more than thirty conventional submarines.

Went from six SSN to two, went for useless MQ9 drones, 31 drones for four billion dollars, as desperate for commission, and dropped aircraft carrier.

I feel it is most shameless.

 

[Baiju Bhaskaran]

Went from six SSN to two, went for useless MQ9 drones, 31 drones for four billion dollars, as desperate for commission, and dropped aircraft carrier.

I feel it is most shameless.

I agree with your point regarding MQ9. It is one of the most useless decisions. Instead, we should have gone for our own Tapas and Dristhi drones for surveillance since the Navy does not have any issue with altitude like the Army and Air Force. It could have saved the Navy almost sixty percent of the cost of operating the P8I. Regarding SSN, I think it is only a temporary decision to go for two. After successful development, the numbers can be increased. Cancelling the aircraft carrier is one of the best decisions.

 

[Dipesh Debnath]

Apart from nuke subs, we should have many unmanned sailless AIP submarines that will escort the nuclear subs and create a large area denial zone.

 

[Rohit]

Aircraft carrier Groups along with Submarines, Destroyers, and Frigates perform a crucial function of projecting State power through Battle Group Formations. The US has been doing it for the last so many years where Russia could not as its Surface Fleet lacked a credible Aircraft carrier punch. India should at the minimum have 3 Aircraft Carriers with the third one being in the 65000 tons displacement category featuring nuclear propulsion and EMALS system with arrestor cable. Ideally positioning our Naval version of AMCA stealth Aircrafts. This would considerably enhance our prestige in the naval world including China which is closely following the US in terms of trying to build huge behemoth Aircraft carriers of 98000 Tons displacement.

 

[Sandeep]

I have never seen a country can make nuclear submarine but can not make diesel electric submarine..... India is a really unique country... no doubt.....

That’s because no indigenous diesel electric submarine designs and development took place until the B J P came to power.

 

[Yikes]

Why India is unable to make diesel electric submarine..Despite India can make Nuclear Submarine...

I mean we are working on developing both, first nuclear attack submarine would take another 10 years for development so it's not that easy either

 

[The_rED_dEVIL]

Good move but atleast atleast give approval for 10 nuclear attack subs as Navy navy going to compensate on aircraft carrier.

MoD always gives the services either-or choices...For Navy, either aircraft carriers or SSNs.For Air Force, either force multipliers or 42 combat squadron strength.

The fact is we need both these pairs simultaneously; else, they become useless. Superpowers like the US and China are going for major aircraft carrier fleets...are they fools? They went for nuclear subs as well. Moreover, TEDBF is just going to be useless if we purchase 52-65 units after pursuing a full-fledged fighter program.

Anyway, MoD's plan for only two SSNs by 2038 is useless anyway.

 

[Arin Kumar]

We must thank all our Gods that common sense is prevailing over our decision makers in Indian Navy and Ministry of Defence. May it continue for longer.

 

[vinod nair]

But we need to support AC also. We are soon going to be third largest economy That tag comes with responsibility