Well I have used figures of 330KG in even the calculations posted much earlier. 160 kg was an early estimate which I did not correct in the earlier post. The calculations in the post read 30,000 SWU/year for nuclear submarine only and 30,000 SWU/year for other enrichment. As I pointed out the new facility is 1.9 times the old facility. So even if the calculations are off by upto 600kg it makes no difference to the buildup. This is at the lower end of the estimate. At the upper end with well over a million swu/year we must either be building the largest submarine fleet shortly or going towards weaponization. At the upper end we will generate 5 tons of HEU per year. The US program upto 1965 used 10 tons in all to run all it's naval reactors. So in three years at the upper end we will have enough HEU to run over submarines 10 of them with two nuclear aircraft carriers. Even then there is plenty to go around. What form it will take and if it will require tests isn't the crux of the post. Just an indication that there is a movement towards it and a decisive one post 2009. Also the shp is cited as 0.6-0.7 per year and not the reactor horse power. Anyways I will re check the calculations and post a corrected version.For now here ar the back of the envelope calculations for a 47,000 shaft horse power Arihant. I doubt our shaft horse power is that high, given the highest rated speed is 25 knots.
47 000 x 0.7 x 10 = 329 000 grams or 329 kg of 97% U-235. Converting these figures to 40% U-235 where the fissile material is 40% as opposed to 97%, we get the fuel requirement of 800.20 Kg of 40% HEU per year. Even with this estimate there is plenty of spare enrichment capacity for the nuclear weapons. They will be in thousands with depleted uranium blanket or in hundreds at the end of 2020 with a HEU blanket. I will account for the extra 200 kg of 40% HEU and repost the figures. It will probably reduce the bombs to 800 with depleted uranium blanket or 100 from 114 posted earlier. Hardly any change even with additional fuel requirements.
I will check the other figures in the 1989 paper. I still stand by the earlier post given the leeway and the error rates which allow up to 100% error on the 330kg figure. Even a 190 MW reactor will not make too much of a difference. I will recalculate and post the analysis using uncertainty analysis software sometime later this month.
47 000 x 0.7 x 10 = 329 000 grams or 329 kg of 97% U-235. Converting these figures to 40% U-235 where the fissile material is 40% as opposed to 97%, we get the fuel requirement of 800.20 Kg of 40% HEU per year. Even with this estimate there is plenty of spare enrichment capacity for the nuclear weapons. They will be in thousands with depleted uranium blanket or in hundreds at the end of 2020 with a HEU blanket. I will account for the extra 200 kg of 40% HEU and repost the figures. It will probably reduce the bombs to 800 with depleted uranium blanket or 100 from 114 posted earlier. Hardly any change even with additional fuel requirements.
I will check the other figures in the 1989 paper. I still stand by the earlier post given the leeway and the error rates which allow up to 100% error on the 330kg figure. Even a 190 MW reactor will not make too much of a difference. I will recalculate and post the analysis using uncertainty analysis software sometime later this month.