Indian Naval News & Discussion - 12 Oct 2013

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
srin
BRFite
Posts: 1882
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby srin » 05 Sep 2014 10:34

d_berwal wrote:
the author of this article is know for his paid new articles... he has no credibility... he is our own SHUKLAJIIIII


d_berwal-ji, this is an "ad hominem" attack. We have debated here on this board AS's past articles. But attacking him doesn't shed light on it. Some of the facts are verifiable (names are mentioned for instance).

d_berwal
BRFite
Posts: 513
Joined: 08 Dec 2006 14:08
Location: Jhonesburg

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby d_berwal » 05 Sep 2014 10:44

nik wrote:Not at all surprised by the INS Sindhukirti extra work saga. Russians are behaving like any sane business would do - kill any potential competition targeting their revenues.

Since it's 'Made in Russia', they will lock us down for refurbishment while the 'Made in India' Scorpene don't even make it out of the mazgoan docks unless extra $$$ for torpedo tubes is paid upfront.


lets look at an news article from form 17/11/2008
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/Navy ... 20342.html

also look what wiki says: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INS_Sindhukirti_%28S61%29

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/navys-submar ... 616-3.html (24/02/2009)

key highlights from above links:

- She can rejoin the fleet only after another five years by which time this steel shark would have spent a third of her useful life of 30 years, in a refit. "We have written off this submarine," shrugs a naval official.

- Officially, the Sindhukirti, for whose refit the navy has already paid Rs 650 crore, is to join the navy in 2010. But with barely 30 per cent of her medium refit-where the submarine is stripped of all equipment, her hull inspected for wear and tear and machinery replaced-completed since 2004, officials say there is no way she can join before 2015.

- It took the Russian shipyard between 24 and 28 months to refit each Kilo class submarine while it takes an Indian shipyard nearly a decade to complete the same refit. A Russian shipyard deploys over 200 workers in three shifts to complete the refit in two years while HSL-a yard for building commercial ships and with little experience in refitting submarines-deploys just 50 workers.

- "Developing indigenous refit capability is laudable, but should this be done at the cost of operational readiness?" says a senior naval official

INS Sindhukirti saga is well documented over the last decade and now shuklji blames russians for it?

d_berwal
BRFite
Posts: 513
Joined: 08 Dec 2006 14:08
Location: Jhonesburg

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby d_berwal » 05 Sep 2014 10:51

ManuJ wrote:The propensity of some forum members to brand people as being on a payroll, or sold-out, or unpatriotic, etc. just because they don't always say things that are in tune with the majority opinion on this blog, is perplexing and disappointing.

I myself don't agree with many things AS says, but he takes the trouble to author insightful and thought-provoking reports, which is an extremely rare trait for Indian defense journalists.
Also, he has served his country and his army, and quite well per all accounts. How many of the posters here who are doing the labeling have done that?
So let's argue on the merit of the each report rather than issuing nonsensical blanket statements.


talk to people he served with and the men under him and one might be in-lightened why he left IA.

he is the same person who branded ex-IA COAS as Rouge without proof (try doing this in any other country and one goes to jail)

who is unpatriotic here shuklaji or ex-Cheif of Army Staff ?
Last edited by d_berwal on 05 Sep 2014 11:19, edited 1 time in total.

d_berwal
BRFite
Posts: 513
Joined: 08 Dec 2006 14:08
Location: Jhonesburg

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby d_berwal » 05 Sep 2014 11:00

srin wrote:
d_berwal wrote:
the author of this article is know for his paid new articles... he has no credibility... he is our own SHUKLAJIIIII


d_berwal-ji, this is an "ad hominem" attack. We have debated here on this board AS's past articles. But attacking him doesn't shed light on it. Some of the facts are verifiable (names are mentioned for instance).


"That kind of expertise did not exist in India before and this is for the first time that we are trying it out here. Instead of sending them to Russia all the way, this one is being offloaded to Hindustan Shipyards. There are some problems in their procurement procedures. It takes a little longer than is expected," said Chief of Naval Staff, Admiral Suresh Mehta.

from 2009 article http://ibnlive.in.com/news/navys-submar ... 616-3.html

so did CONS not tell as far back as 2009 that HSL has problem with their procurement ?

the source shuklaji has mentioned has been part of HSL from 2012 onwards only

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19156
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Karan M » 05 Sep 2014 11:17

He may have been from HSL from 2012, but that doesn't mean he wont have the info!
No fan of AS here, but your stuff doesn't make sense here.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Singha » 05 Sep 2014 11:24

as anyone seen the EO device on top of ins kolkata bridge? supposed to be there per spec. might perform role of both night vision for navigation / spotting littoral targets and (ideally) spotting heat plumes of approaching missiles to cue ciws/srsam systems as a additional channel from radar. the thales sirius irst on some euro ddgs is supposed to be doing that.

https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/canada/d ... ack-system
SIRIUS provides continuous passive horizon search against sea-skimming anti-ship missiles. This passive IR search system operates simultaneously in two wavelengths (3-5 μm and 8-12 μm) and provides long-range surveillance under all atmospheric conditions.
As a complementary sensor to the on-board surveillance radar equipment, SIRIUS ensures a most effective capability against threats with respect to the timely evaluation and decision for target engagements, especially under restricted EMCON conditions.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/can ... ted-02183/

d_berwal
BRFite
Posts: 513
Joined: 08 Dec 2006 14:08
Location: Jhonesburg

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby d_berwal » 05 Sep 2014 11:27

Karan M wrote:He may have been from HSL from 2012, but that doesn't mean he wont have the info!
No fan of AS here, but your stuff doesn't make sense here.


but i also gave a source, CONS saying HSL procurement issue are causing delays and that statement is 5+yrs before the AS quoted his source.

I am just putting facts and my opinion based on these facts, i dont want any one to change their opinion. (this is a forum and i can put my opinion as any one else can)

SNaik
BRFite
Posts: 517
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 10:51
Location: Riga

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby SNaik » 05 Sep 2014 12:28

A comment made on Broadsword webpage:
HSL can blame Russians, MoD, Navy and even Chinese, Pakistani, Sea water, foul air, CIA, ISI and whoever they want. The fact is that they are horribly incompetent, inefficient and living in 18th century licence permit raj.

Its not only submarine refit, they have bungled up almost every ship building in last 10-15 years. So much so that when all other defence shipyards are making huge profits, HSL is the only shipyard making regular losses.

MoD and GoI cannot take this any longer as no management change can bring change in its work culture. Only solution is a radical reorganisation. Either it needs to be disinvested and let the private sector get its managment. Or it has to be converted in "Government Ownded Contractor Operated - GOCO" model with private management but government ownership. Then only it will start delivering.

About submarine refits in future, given the state navy's subsurface capability is in, India cannot take any chance with this shipyard. Let MDL or Naval DOckyards or private shipyards develop similar capability. HSL is a sick industrial entity which needs reorganisation, not further orders.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Viv S » 05 Sep 2014 15:12

d_berwal wrote:he is the same person who branded ex-IA COAS as Rouge without proof (try doing this in any other country and one goes to jail)


Which 'other country'?

Rogue US general could face the sack - ABC News
A General Gone Rogue - Foreign Policy Journal

who is unpatriotic here shuklaji or ex-Cheif of Army Staff ?


Assuming we accept the argument that the sanctity of the COAS' position should be respected, his attack on the current COAS Gen Dalbir Singh was certainly not in consonance with that (“If unit kills innocents, does dacoity and then head of organization tries to protect them, should he not be blamed? Criminals should go free!!’).

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4502
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby JayS » 05 Sep 2014 18:46

I dont know about AS, if he is paid DDM or something else. I read the article and the figures he has presented. Please note that I have least knowledge about Navy so this discussion is a learning experience for me. Let see.

1. Can anybody here refute the figures?? If so then the whole article unravels like a house of cards. Matter closed. Or can somebody at least argue that the inflated work parameters mentioned, even if true, could not be a significant part of the total amount of overhaul work so as to justify the increase in the time required.

2. The difference in the estimated work and actual work could be blamed on the shipyard, may be due to lack of knowledge or may be due to total incompetence. We can even blame them for not taking the overhauling seriously enough to deploy enough manpower and resources. They may have been incompetent in other areas. If the amount of work done on the overhaul was commensurate with the Russian work, we could blame HSL for not doing the work in reasonable time (twice that of Russians could be acceptable given its their first job). But if they have to do twice or thrice the amount of work then they would obviously take more time. This is no-brainer.

3. If the figures are right, then why there is so much of difference in the actual work done on the other two subs in Russia and the one in India, given that all three of them must have more or less similar operational wear and tear. Obviously IN could not have operated only one ship too badly. So how the work ballooned?? Did HSL screwed up so badly that while overhauling they damaged a whole lot of stuff from the sub which then needed to be replaced?? Is it possible?? Or did HSL simply kept increasing work for no reason to keep its workers busy?? Both things are plausible but how probable are they??

4. The theory that Russians try to sabotage HSL work is also plausible and is more likely. This is not the first time they have done things like that to us.

Given the work figures, what other logical inference can be made??

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13105
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby negi » 05 Sep 2014 19:03

I for one do not know as to what is there to even argue with regards to Russia not helping HSL with refitting Indian submarines . Of course Russians were and continue to be less than helpful when it comes to giving correct estimates and inputs to HSL for doing something which in the long term will eat into their own market is stupidity . For fck's sake they couldn't even estimate Gorshkov's build when overhauling it themselves . Fact of the matter is Russians know us Indian very well; being late on timelines is a perfect way of milking money from us and not meeting a deadline has never made heads roll so why bother ? Now French and others are learning from Ru.

Tomorrow if India is in Russia's place we too will/should do the same , every private company out there does the same i.e. no one actually gives up their IP period. ToT in real life is not much beyond screwdriver giri and handing over of repair or service manuals and this is not limited to defence equipment even in private no one shares IP/knowledge with a competitor even if in a same project .
Last edited by negi on 05 Sep 2014 19:12, edited 1 time in total.

Kersi D
BRFite
Posts: 1383
Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Kersi D » 05 Sep 2014 19:11

I, my company - a reputed engineering company, has dealt with HSL in the 1990s regarding the offshore well platforms for ONGC. The time taken by HSL to complete a project is 2 to 3 times the time taken by MDL for similar jobs.
Last edited by Kersi D on 06 Sep 2014 01:19, edited 1 time in total.

ManuJ
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 308
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby ManuJ » 05 Sep 2014 22:45

d_berwal wrote:talk to people he served with and the men under him and one might be in-lightened why he left IA.

So now you're down to belittling his service record?
Have you met the people who served under him and with him?
And I mean really, not just in your wet armchair dreams?

Grow up!

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby NRao » 06 Sep 2014 01:55

INS Sindhukirti saga is well documented over the last decade and now shuklji blames russians for it?


A contributing factor.

A comment made on Broadsword webpage:


expect you to do better than that.

Was waiting for the Russian amby to pull out his crumpled notes and say "We do not care about such news paper reports".

I, my company - a reputed engineering company, has dealt with HSL in the 1990s regarding the offshore well platforms for ONGC. The time taken by HSL to complete a project is 2 to 3 times the time taken by MDL for similar jobs.


{A stink on this thread woke me up, sorry.}

All that proves is that HSL is a good-for-nothing entity.

Nothing posted here - so far - proves that the Russian did *not* contribute to the delay.

I suspect the truth is between a bad HSL, a worse contract and a Russian who unabashedly took advantage of the situation.

OK, on to the Amurs now. Get one, open her up, fix her ....................

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20517
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 06 Sep 2014 02:15

:rotfl:
Kersi has given his experience with the yard.With such a record one wonders why the IN let it handle the sub in the first place.Looking at the history of the same,any wonder why the remaining subs were sent to Russia for refits.Perhaps there were also interested parties in dragging the work on and on.

member_28722
BRFite
Posts: 333
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_28722 » 06 Sep 2014 02:51

Irrespective of the truth of Russian involvement here or French delays in Scorpene, it would be stupidity to blame all blame on our guys only.
Any expertise we gain in sub building / repair is going to be at cost of their business.

If we look at what we were spending (% wise) on foreign acquisition compared to now we have a come a long way.

1. We have stopped buying corvettes and destroyers from Ruskies
2. Talwar class will be the last frigates we buy
3. Barak 8 will remove reliance on external SAMs
4. Vikrant onwards all carriers will be Made In India (which also ended up in India making Warship Grade steel at home)
5. Brahmos is a standard where once Styx/Uran/Klub were
6. Arihant onwards it will be indigenous subs.

At least on naval front we are very close to 100% indigenous. That would hurt arms industry in Russia, Europe and also a lot of arms dealers and politicians who are in league with them.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20517
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 06 Sep 2014 02:57

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Indi ... 680592.cms

Indian Navy takes steps to build a thriving naval base in Porbandar
Anand Kumar, TNN | Sep 4, 2014,
GANDHINAGAR: The Indian Navy has chalked out a detailed plan to make its presence in Gujarat robust, beginning with upgrading and strengthening of its aviation assets in Porbandar. The navy, which had commissioned an unmanned aerial vehicle squadron in Porbandar in January 2011, is likely to upgrade and strengthen its aviation assets in Gujarat next year.

It is building 400 houses for its officers and men at its 600 acre plot in Porbandar, which are expected to be ready by 2015. The Navy thereafter would embark upon creating berthing facilities for its ships at the proposed INS Dwarka II in Porbandar. This project would entail huge investment of money and time and is yet to get the go ahead from the central government, a senior Indian Navy officer said, adding that it could be named INS Vallabhbhai Patel.

Meanwhile, Rear Admiral Ashok Kumar, Flag Officer Commanding, Gujarat-Maharashtra area, Indian Navy, on Wednesday met chief minister Anandiben Patel in Gandhinagar. He discussed navy's future plans along Gujarat's 1,600-km-long coastline, the need for infrastructural facilities like jetty etc. and the general security situation in the region.

The primary role of navy's national-level institution INS Valsura in Jamnagar is to train officers and sailors in electrical, electronic and weapon technologies and systems. However, it is under the administrative control of Southern Command. The existing naval base INS Dwarka at Okha is not that big, giving the Indian Navy's officer-in-charge in Porbandar a limited sphere of influence in the seas off the strategically located state of Gujarat. The proposed Dwarka II base of the navy is expected to enhance the role of the commodore-rank officer posted in Porbandar, sources said.

The posting of a captain sometime ago in Gandhinagar by the navy was the first signal, which pointed towards the naval armed force's intention of deploying its frontline assets in Gujarat.



Interesting titbit and first exports to guess who!
India Could Sell High Speed Anti-Ship Missile to Vietnam, Venezuela
By: Dave Majumdar
Published: September 4, 2014
http://news.usni.org/2014/09/04/india-s ... I+News%3A+
India hopes to co-develop a new smaller, faster version of its Mach 3-capable BrahMos supersonic anti-ship missile with Russia. The country also hopes to export versions of the missile to other countries such as Venezuela, Vietnam and Indonesia according to Indian press reports.

“We are hoping to sign a tripartite agreement between DRDO [Defence Research and Development Organisation], NPOM lab and BrahMos Aerospace during the planned visit of Russian president in December,” Sudhir Mishra told the Press Trust of India.

The new missile would be roughly half the size of the current BrahMos, which was derived from the Russian NPO Mashinostroyeniya P-800 Onyx. The BrahMos is a 6,600 lbs weapons measuring 27.5ft in length with a 441 lbs warhead. There are versions that can be launched from the sea, air or land.

Compared to the older variant, the new smaller version of the BrahMos would not only be faster at Mach 3.5, it would not sacrifice much in terms of range. It is expected to have a range of around 162 nautical miles. The original BrahMos is thought to have a range of anywhere between 162 nautical miles and 270 nautical miles.

Both versions of the BrahMos will be available for sale to third parties. India is expected to sign a pact with Vietnam to supply defense equipment later this month. Meanwhile, India already has an existing defense ties with Indonesia.

The U.S. Navy considers the BrahMos missile, which is one of the fastest anti-ship missiles currently in existence, to be a particularly dangerous threat.

Part of the reason for that is the BrahMos missile’s particular flight path on terminal approach, but naval sources would not elaborate to USNI News.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13105
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby negi » 06 Sep 2014 09:48

MDL has prior experience with HDW when couple of them were being made here under license , HSL on the contrary does not have that exposure (it has primarily only done refits for the Kilo class) . Moreover MDL's hands are full with Scorpene and it is kind of now giving stiff competition to HSL when it comes to delays .

vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby vic » 06 Sep 2014 09:56

The Minesweeper deal with South Korea should be scrapped and it should be given to an Indian Pvt sector ship builder. They will buy the expertise from abroad if required.

Also the deal to send the 2 Kilos to Russia for up gradation should be scrapped and L&T should be offered the job.

All Imports Murdabad! Jai Hind!

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby arun » 06 Sep 2014 10:23

^^^ MCMV deal with South Korea's Kangnam seems headed in that direction:

Warship deal runs aground : Defence Ministry flags irregularities in purchase of mine-sweepers

On May 29 this year, the ministry encashed a Rs.3 crore bank guarantee furnished by the Kangnam Corporation, which had been shortlisted to supply the minesweepers to the Indian Navy. The liquidation of the guarantee came after an inquiry by the ministry found that the South Korean shipyard may have hired middlemen to facilitate the contract. Employing middlemen in defence deals is banned.

Vendors have to sign a pre-contract Integrity Pact stating that they will not offer bribes and are required to furnish a bank guarantee of Rs.3 crore. "There are questions about the people who the Korean shipyard hired and we are looking at whether their presence in negotiations can be construed as vitiating the process," a defence ministry spokesperson told India Today. The ministry is now awaiting the opinion of Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi to whom the case was forwarded in July.

Amit Cowshish, a former financial adviser to the defence ministry, says the quantum of the deviation from the agreement will determine the Government's next course of action. "Breach of the pre-contract Integrity Pact is a very serious matter and it will be difficult for the Government to compromise its own stand."

d_berwal
BRFite
Posts: 513
Joined: 08 Dec 2006 14:08
Location: Jhonesburg

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby d_berwal » 06 Sep 2014 12:25

NRao wrote:
INS Sindhukirti saga is well documented over the last decade and now shuklji blames russians for it?


A contributing factor.



well the list of contributing factors is long in this case if that is the argument.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7719
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 06 Sep 2014 13:27

There is a very interesting figure in the estimate versus actual chart posted on last page.

Just check the numbers under 'Secondary Structure Renewal (tonnes)' - 80 versus 2,100. That is 2,600% increase in actual over the estimate. But even that is not the 'most' interesting aspect. The surface displacement of a Kilo Class submarine is 2,300 tonnes. If my conclusion is correct, it would mean that almost 90% of the submarine by weight has been either repaired or replaced! Either Russians are too smart or we are complete dorks.

And the timing of report is interesting - HSL has been 'left' out of latest upgrade package for the six-Kilo submarines.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8188
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 06 Sep 2014 13:36

^^^

Can we be sure that this not DDM?

member_19648
BRFite
Posts: 265
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_19648 » 06 Sep 2014 22:28

^^Can you please stop this nonsense, you are going on making personal remarks against one and the other, that also in a naval discussion thread.

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby PratikDas » 06 Sep 2014 23:02

Poof
Last edited by Suraj on 07 Sep 2014 01:13, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Cleanup

Ankit Desai
BRFite
Posts: 514
Joined: 05 May 2006 21:28
Location: Gujarat

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Ankit Desai » 06 Sep 2014 23:11

Moderators, BRF started discussing about other than things relate to Indian Navy in this thread.

Please take corrective steps.

-Ankit

kmkraoind
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3908
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 00:24

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby kmkraoind » 06 Sep 2014 23:18

Deleted
Last edited by Suraj on 07 Sep 2014 01:13, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Cleanup

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 13151
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Suraj » 07 Sep 2014 01:15

Moderator's Note

This thread is pending cleanup. Please desist from further discussion of the off-topic subject here. Any further posts will earn the poster a warning or ban, as applicable.

member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby member_23370 » 07 Sep 2014 11:08

Whats happening with P17a frigate construction? The P15B steel has been cut and construction has started. After p-28's GRSE has nothing to do but build more P-17a or P-28a's.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20517
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 07 Sep 2014 18:19

Just look at the costs of a Japanese conventional AIP sub which Oz plan to buy.10 will cost $20B,$2B a sub.4 times the cost of a Scorpene.Excellent,let Oz beggar itself.

http://www.news.com.au/national/new-jap ... 7050682205
New Japanese submarines to cost Abbott Government $20 billion

4 hours ago September 07, 2014 7:33PM
Ship ahoy ... the Soryu class submarine. Source: Supplied

SEVENTY-TWO years after Japanese submarines attacked Sydney Harbour, the next generation of Australian submariners will be put to sea in boats made in Japan.

In one of the biggest and most contentious defence equipment decisions in decades, the Abbott Government will select the Japanese-built Soryu Class submarine to replace locally built Collins Class boats as the navy’s key strike weapon beyond 2030.

A decision to spend more than $20 billion on up to 10 of the Japanese vessels will be announced before the end of the year.

EXPOSED: Collins Class subs unable to be put to sea for five months

DUD SUB: Fire in Collins Class submarine

That is six months ahead of the release date for the Abbott Government’s first Defence White Paper.

The decision is being fast-tracked due to growing concerns about the massive cost of maintaining the Collins boats beyond their use-by-date of 2026. Some estimates put that cost at more than $2 billion.

“The Government cannot afford a submarine capability gap and every day past 2026/27 when Collins class is due to begin decommissioning, adds days of risk,’’ a senior defence source said.

The 4200-tonne Soryu Class boat carries a crew of 65 and is powered by an air-independent propulsion system that allows it to remain submerged for much longer periods that other conventionally powered submarines.

Range has been a major factor against the design — the Soryu has a range of about 11,000 km at 12 km/hr compared with 22,000 km at 19 km/hr for the Collins Class - but it is understood that one option under consideration is to provide submarine basing facilities in Northern Australia (Darwin) to cut the transit distances to the boats’ patrol areas by thousands of kms.

The purchase price for the Japanese built boats would be about half the price of an Australian option.

German builder TKMS told a conference earlier this year that it could build 12 submarines for $20 billion.

Both German and French submarines remain in the running, but senior sources told News Corp Australia that the Japanese option was clear favourite.

The decision will anger government owned South Australian shipbuilder ASC and the SA Government and it finally breaks the government’s election promise to “build 12 submarines in Adelaide”.

“It is ludicrous to think we can design a submarine — nobody believes that,” one insider said.

Given that the Collins fleet will not reach its availability benchmark (the amount of time a vessel is available for service) until 2016 (20 years after entering service) the government does not want to risk a submarine capability gap.

ASC will remain the centre of submarine sustainability and will play a key role in the future frigate project with work estimated at $1 billion a year flowing to South Australia by 2023.

However the yard’s woeful performance on the Air Warfare Destroyer (AWD) project ($600 million over budget and three years late) has left the government with little option but to look elsewhere for a new submarine.

“With a record like that is anyone seriously thinking we should proceed and build a fleet of future submarines in the same shipyard?” a government source said.

News Corp can also reveal that when the Commonwealth signed up to the AWD contract, it was informed by Treasury that it would incur a premium of $1 billion.

According to government auditors the premium for local production is about 30 per cent or $15 billion for a locally built submarine. That is the entire cost of the Joint Strike Fighter project.
Last edited by Philip on 07 Sep 2014 19:04, edited 1 time in total.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1882
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby srin » 07 Sep 2014 19:03

The Aussies are committing suicide. Same story as HF-24 and Avro Arrow.

The strategic response to a bad submarine is to build a better one with all the learnings of the previous one.

I hope we don't do the same with the P-75I by buying Amurs or Kilos or whatever.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 391
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby dinesh_kimar » 07 Sep 2014 19:24

^ Srin Saar, this is the first suggestion I have heard of the follow on P-75I incorporating the learning of the Scorpene (I may be wrong, though.)
The ToT and support level of DCNS, and MDL's murky procurement are unanswered questions......and nobody in DCNS or MDL want to clarify this, it seems.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19156
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Karan M » 07 Sep 2014 21:18

FYI - some open media sources state Soryu was discussed by Shri Modi & Abe's teams.

(cc: Admiral designate BRF: Singha :wink:

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2734
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby JTull » 08 Sep 2014 01:28

Karan M wrote:FYI - some open media sources state Soryu was discussed by Shri Modi & Abe's teams.

(cc: Admiral designate BRF: Singha :wink:


Any links to these 'open' sources?

Ankit Desai
BRFite
Posts: 514
Joined: 05 May 2006 21:28
Location: Gujarat

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Ankit Desai » 08 Sep 2014 02:50

Six new submarines to be built in India in Rs 50,000 crore project

Defence ministry sources said Navy has now agreed that all the six new submarines, armed with both land-attack missile capabilities and air-independent propulsion for greater underwater endurance, will be constructed in India with foreign collaboration under 'Project-75-India'.


The approved P-75I plan till now was that the first two submarines would be imported to save time, given the country's rapidly-ageing and depleting underwater combat arm, with the next three being constructed at Mazagon Docks (Mumbai) and one at Hindustan Shipyard (Visakhapatnam) with technology transfer from the foreign company eventually selected.


But this will change now. With the Rs 23,562 crore construction of six French Scorpene submarines under Project-75 running four years behind schedule at MDL, the defence establishment could well turn to a private shipyard for execution of P-75I.


-Ankit

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2336
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby John » 08 Sep 2014 03:35

Philip wrote:Just look at the costs of a Japanese conventional AIP sub which Oz plan to buy.10 will cost $20B,$2B a sub.4 times the cost of a Scorpene.Excellent,let Oz beggar itself.

Scorpene currently are about billion each and P-751 is expected to 1.5 billion/vessel after cost escalations but by the time they are built they will make Aussie subs look like a bargain.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19156
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Karan M » 08 Sep 2014 05:15

JTull wrote:
Karan M wrote:FYI - some open media sources state Soryu was discussed by Shri Modi & Abe's teams.

(cc: Admiral designate BRF: Singha :wink:


Any links to these 'open' sources?


Social media post so no links unfortunately, but by Mohan Guruswamy, leftist of the modi hating, India can't do anything sort, but has contacts.

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1077
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby shaun » 08 Sep 2014 05:19

philipji aussies planned sub line is pegged at almost 40b$ and this japanese deal if substitute it will cost them half of it !

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8188
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 08 Sep 2014 06:40

Or perhaps they are thinking of Arihant, and it's deravatives. As p 75i.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20517
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 08 Sep 2014 06:43

The news about building the 6 P-75I subs entirely in India is fraught with danger.Our total sub building experience barring the most heavily classified ATV project,with generous assistance from Russia,has been an unmitigated disaster.The U-209/1500 subs took aeons to build at MDL and after we mastered the art of sub building highly sophisticated German U-boats,we simply threw the skills we had learnt into the sea!

We then decided that we would not acquire the first 2 Scorpenes from abroad,after torturous negotiations over the price ,but build the lot at a greedy MDL,which had to go to sub-school once again to learn it "A,B,C..".The splendid manner in which the contracts were signed forgot about the timely supply of vital components,not to mention torpedoes,that lucky winner still not decided,without which the subs will go to sea unable to even sink a bumboat! This great deal is now running 5+ years late,costing almost as much as a nuclear boat (Akula 10yr lease),infinitely more capable,and we now want to use the "Men in Black" memory erasing device and start farcically all over again with a pvt. yard (which one?),where none of the country's pvt. yards have ever built a sub before (only hulls and components)!

While applauding the decision to build subs in pvt. yards instead of appeasing an incompetent MDL or HSL,are we not running a grave risk yet again in following the Scorpene pattern for disaster? So how will we build these subs pray? Let's examine the issue in detail.
1.Where will the design come from? (Great MMRCA style competition likely,taking "X" number of years) 2.Where will the weaponry come from? (Russia will not allow some of its weaponry aboard a non-Russian sub and vice versa and we don't manufacture anything totally indigenous,just venturing out into torpedoes) 3.Where will the components come from? (How much of the sub will be imported from abroad? One can easily make out a huge list from 'scopes,combat systems,TAS,engines,etc.)
4.Where will it be built? (which pvt. yard? L&T would be favourites) 5.How will it be built? (Hand held by the foreign entity like our experience with the Scorpene where the Spanish just packed their bags one day and said "adios"?) 6.AIP system,which one? (We've yet to evaluate the various foreign systems for the Scorpene alone and have yet to develop and perfect our own) 7.What is the cost per sub? (for just 6 subs the cost of indigenisation of all the components would be higher for just 6 subs,possibly making it even more expensive that acquiring an Akula!) 8.What is the time schedule?

The amount of coordination and confusion in building a foreign design for the first time in India-and the sub certainly will have only IN specific variations in the design (like the U-209s),cannot be underestimated.Lastly,the schedule of timely funding for the entire programme has to be scrupulously maintained by the GOI/MOD.It matters little if the subs were built in DPSU yards as there is little or no accountability whatsoever,but for a pvt. yard,timely funding is crucial for it to succeed as it has to import the various components.One cannot see the first of these subs ever kissing salt water at the earleist 7 years from now. This does absolutely zero to mitigating the current sub capability and numbers crisis either. Another long-running TV serial appears to be in the offing.We'll have to see whether it is played out as a comedy,action thriller,or melodramatic tragedy Bollywood style.

PS:There is still no guarantee that the subs will be built in a pvt. yard.Watch how the decision will be delayed and delayed until MDL say that they can do the business now that the Scorpene work is nearing an end.

While we have mastered to an extent N-sub building,we should instead set up a parallel line for more N-subs,SSGNs to complement our SSBNs in the pipeline.These will be far more capable and cost wise more effective than building exorbitantly expensive conventional AIP subs.It would be far better for acquiring a design of a smaller cost-effective AIP design for the littorals,while building steadily creating a nuclear sub navy ,which is the real backbone and strength of any major great power/superpower navy.The ATV design is already with us.Modifying this would be an easy task for an SSGN. This would save enormous time and money and be far more indigenous than what is planned.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests