Project 75I - It Begins

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7053
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby nachiket » 05 Apr 2019 01:26

Austin wrote:If they want a 12 LACM VLS with 18 Torpedo then they are looking at 4000T class submarine and a conventional submarine of such class will have limitations in many aspects ......They are better off going nuclear for such boats.

Even the latest Australian sub proposed by France Shortfin Barracuda is around 4000 T but cannot carry more than 28 Torpedo and 12 subs cost $38 billion

I really don't understand IN's thinking here. There is no sub in the world that currently fulfills these requirements. Project 75I is already hugely delayed. What purpose does making these incredible SQRs serve at this time? Even if such a sub can be built they will not receive the first of this type for another 10 years if they proceed with this.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2086
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Vips » 12 Apr 2019 04:13

Navy wants local inputs for Rs 40,000 crore submarines project.

The navy wants Indian steel, missiles, torpedoes and an indigenously developed air independent propulsion system for its Rs 40,000-crore project to construct six new submarines domestically, one of the largest ‘Make in India’ military orders currently being processed by the government.

The project, which has been moving faster than another mega plan to build 110 fighter jets in India, has been taken forward with the navy sharing its draft requirements with foreign players who are to share technology with Indian partners to produce the next generation of submarines.

The requirements, which will be finalised in the coming months before being formally issued to all competitors, make a strong case for Indian systems to be fitted on the submarines with at least 45% indigenisation content.

The new technology that will differentiate these submarines is Air Independent Propulsion (AIP), a technology that enables the boats to stay underwater for weeks, unlike earlier models where they have to surface after a few days to recharge batteries and take in oxygen.

As per the draft requirements, foreign players have to certify that they will integrate a ‘proven indigenous AIP’ if required by the navy. (Keeping the door open for the dalal lobby). This would be a reference to an AIP that is currently under development by DRDO and is being shore tested as of now.

The navy has also stated that it wants to utilise indigenously developed steel for the construction of the submarines as far as possible. In fact, the navy will include special incentives in the programme for foreign players that use Indian steel for the programme. The biggest boost for Indian developed systems is the requirement for foreign vendors to ensure that an indigenously developed heavy weight torpedo has to be integrated to the submarines.

The project is currently being undertaken by DRDO that has already supplied such torpedoes for warships and is working on a submarine launched version as well.

India’s missile programme also finds mentions in the requirements, with the navy set to mandate that the submarine torpedo launched cruise missiles (SLCM) being developed domestically are to be a part of the weapon suite. The Brahmos missile complex is currently working on a next generation missile to meet such requirements. The submarines to be built are to have a minimum service life of 30 years and would have to be upgraded and served in India throughout this period.

However, one clause that the navy has put in its draft requirements that mandates all copyrights for the submarine to be vested to India may raise concern by foreign players who are to share technology. The clause says that post the delivery of the sixth submarine, India will have the unlimited right to produce more of the submarines or to modify them. (Would be a big deal if foreign players agree to this, they will do so only if Indian demand is firm and we make this condition non negotiable).

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4197
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Manish_Sharma » 12 Apr 2019 11:02

Austin wrote:Since India is now member of MTCR they can also fit in 2000 km range Caliber on Kilo/P-75I

What I dream is they create a Micro-Yasen 4000 tons for us with all its exotic titanium-welding, noise cancellation tech and 9 Nirbhay + 3 Bramhos missile carrying abilities, with our own Shakti thermal torpedoes

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4197
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Manish_Sharma » 12 Apr 2019 11:08

kit wrote:also interesting to see the IN going for the big boys club, looking out for their next 10,000 + ton destroyer

I can't find it could you post links?

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby srin » 12 Apr 2019 11:31

I don't know about this P75I guys. It's taken so long and specs are so demanding that it may end up to be super expensive and super delayed (given our MoD track record). And we've already lost some 10 years now, and we will lose another 10 years, given that it looks like MMRCA circus redux.

I think we should simply kick the can down the road by: keep ordering say, more Scorpenes at MDL, and Kilos at HSL, with progressively desi components (AIP, sonar, torpedoes, Brahmos NG from torpedo tubes) till we get our SSNs (say 10 years from now).

Get more boats in the water, and keep improving / indigenizing the modules. Don't wait for the files to move in the MoD.

arvin
BRFite
Posts: 245
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby arvin » 12 Apr 2019 12:04

The key clause here is unlimited production. Anyone who offers it will ensure indian diesel sub market is theirs for next many many years.
'If required by the navy' thing is also clever because say for e.g HDW is not able to integrate DRDO aip but ready to agree unlimited numbers that will also us to get our hands on a good design. I think scorpene and hdw will both be able to support tube launched brahmos.

VikramA
BRFite
Posts: 158
Joined: 29 Aug 2018 15:41

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby VikramA » 12 Apr 2019 12:10

when we already have building blocks for a SSN why are we building more SSKs?

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby srin » 12 Apr 2019 17:40

VikramA wrote:when we already have building blocks for a SSN why are we building more SSKs?

Time. It will happen, just not soon enough. We need more SSKs in the meantime.

India’s SSN: Waiting period 15 years
https://defenceupdate.in/indias-ssn-wai ... 5-years-2/

The Chief of the Naval Staff Sunil Lanba while speaking to a media outlet, revealed that development of Indian nuclear attack submarine project which was sanctioned only earlier this year will take over 10 years to mature and as per latest media reports, Indian Navy has been told to fast-track the development and deliver the first submarine in less than 15 years from now.

Navy’s submarine design bureau which is in charge of the design and development of Six classified nuclear attack submarine project is still working out on staff requirements of the submarines and evaluating technological challenges with all stakeholders before it starts work on the design.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7053
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby nachiket » 13 Apr 2019 03:49

Indian Navy looks Forward To DRDO’s Air Independent Propulsion System For Submarines

Still six years away at least.

It seems a decision has been taken by the Indian Navy (IN) to install an air-independent propulsion (AIP) system developed by the Naval Materials Research Laboratory (NMRL), Ambernath, which is a part of the Defence Research & Development Organization (DRDO), on all six of its Scorpene class diesel-electric submarines once they become due for their first major refit. This decision is of course contingent upon NMRL’s AIP being fully proven by then as a ‘safe plug’. Given that the refit of even the first Scorpene Class submarine, the INS Kalvari, is not due for at least another six years, NMRL is confident of having refined its already advanced prototype sufficiently by that point, to satisfy IN’s requirements.


The earlier plan of installing NMRL’s AIP on the last two Scorpenes has been given up since NMRL’s AIP plug was not deemed sufficiently mature by the original equipment maker (OEM) of the Scorpene Class, France’s Naval Group, once known as DCNS. As such, it is felt by various stakeholders that it is now too late to install the AIP on the last two Scorpenes which are also at an advanced stage of construction.


The article goes into details of the system. Worth a read.

While based on a proven fuel cell technology type i.e PAFC, NMRL’s AIP system, nonetheless, incorporates a set of innovations that make it a rather contemporary system. For one, NMRL’s AIP package has an onboard hydrogen generation plant, which produces hydrogen ‘in situ’ unlike many other AIP configurations where hydrogen for a mission has to be carried on board. Moreover, on board hydrogen production in NMRL’s AIP does not require any kind of combustion. NMRL’s AIP supplies hydrogen ‘in situ’ by reacting hydrogen ‘rich’ sodium borohydride, which is carried on board, with water, to generate hydrogen and sodium metaborate (see Fig. 1, above). The advantages of this kind of ‘borohydride hydrolysis’ (BH) to generate hydrogen vis a vis other forms of on-board hydrogen generation are given below in Fig. 2. NMRL’s BH process generates a considerable amount of hydrogen without entailing the release of any gaseous effluents which add to system noise and can compromise submarine stealth. Moreover, BH plants also have long operational lives.

Lilo
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4069
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 09:08

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Lilo » 13 Apr 2019 04:48

Recently i asked a random question pertinent to this thread and answered it myself in below manner
Before that I dont understand why we dont design and build our own Diesel-electric Sub?
^
bhai, we are giving chauthaai to western Maai baaps
^
Hmm if i think in that line further, Indian Navy's expansion in Indian ocean - the conventional fleet (leaving aside the strategic nuke sub projects) is being tightly controlled by massa signals & its calibrated leeway to India as a counter to China.Under Mahan's doctrine, Massa would not be wanting Indian ocean crawling with dozens of shiny indian indigenous subs & big tonnage naval ships which can in the blink of an eye threaten straits like malacca despite the US carrier groups.They would want to keep our warship building rate constrained while preventing the development of capacity for a quick rampup in say the runup to any war on an industrial scale.
Accordingly we are not attempting to use the knowhow we gained from scorpene ToT (remember that we insisted for ToT & indigineous construction due to which the project got delayed by six years). We are for now sitting on the knowhow (like how the knowhow for bofors gun was sitting in MOD lockers for 30 years before it was finally dusted off & a new arty gun like dhanush was made & demoed in few years).
India is not ramping up its Sub building with indigenous designs (subs being majorly an offensive weapon which can threaten shipping).Our shipyards are not being upgraded to enable "modular shipbuilding" able to quickly deliver big tonnage ships/subs in shrinked timelines.
Anyone can correct me here but of all the shipyards we are having only few like Pipavav, MDL & GRSE have modular shipbuilding capabilities & that too patrol class level or frigate level - i.e low tonnages.
In this context is the sabotage angle - like how recently one Admiral was forced to resign after a series of "mishaps" including a Kilo class sinking in the docks.

One another recent example below:
This too looks like sabotage where the newly commissioned goliath crane in GRSE "fell due to wind" and had to be written off while destroying the P17 modular construction facility setting back the construction work by several months.
Crane collapse at GRSE will hurt warship work
May 01, 2018

...
The module hall where blocks for the P 17-A class frigates are being fabricated was destroyed in the mishap and has become unusable. “This has a direct impact on the P 17-A frigates-building programme. A large store adjoining the building berth has been damaged and is now unusable, further impacting the work at the shipyard. A new Goliath crane has a time-period of 30 months from issue of tender to installation and commissioning. Thus, not only will the ongoing programmes suffer, but this will also impact the contract under negotiation with the Ministry of Defence (MoD) for anti-submarine warfare shallow water crafts,” said the expert, who has knowledge of the incident...
Related datapoint: HSL's pact with HHI for modular shipbuilding collaboration is struck in limbo since 2015.
Just like the colonial St George's Cross still squatting on our naval ensign - Indian Navy is not yet free to pursue India's destiny in Indian ocean.
Last edited by Lilo on 13 Apr 2019 12:41, edited 1 time in total.

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 528
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby souravB » 13 Apr 2019 05:56

srin wrote:
VikramA wrote:when we already have building blocks for a SSN why are we building more SSKs?

Time. It will happen, just not soon enough. We need more SSKs in the meantime.


battery operated SSKs are stealthier than SSNs for a comparable generation. It's a compromise on stealth for endurance. Even if we build SSNs, we'll have SSKs for littoral protection.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66600
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Singha » 13 Apr 2019 08:45

if we look at the last 50 years the U209 template has been the best selling SSK design worldwide. from chile/argentina, to indonesia a lot of players have used it and its offshoots.

instead of painting ourselves into a corner with very high end specs, we should have focussed on producing a medium caliber SSK in numbers and sensors could always be replaced later --- this should have started around 2000 when we had 15 yrs exp in u209 but the vested interests always hobble our extended production plan by introducing scandals in each deal. so piecemeal low volume imports are all thats "allowed" by the powers that be.

its now or never though - we need to tone down our requirements to a level where we need less foreign inputs and make a "yuan class" type vessel that is capacious and extendable but perhaps 80% of the best level (U214/scorpene) and more importantly produce 24 in tranches of 6 with technology improvements. it does not need to fight the USN, just PLAN/PN ships which lack any organic LRMP cover from land .... but we need numbers - fast.

just another 6 shot high priced import deal for a soryu or barracuda-lite is going to make Emperor Xi double up with laughter at our inept handling of things

so perhaps best way is scrap this P75I rfp and go with DCN to make a more indigenous Scorpene-E with a plug from day1 sized for any AIP system - it can be fitted in later , or else can partially house marcos swimout chamber, storage for chariots, ...... we already have the trained people and yard in place . lets not waste it. even if P75I plans go ahead, we need to continue on and produce another 6 Scorpene for sure, because the older kilos inducted in early 90s and the 4 u209 cannot last more than 1 decade. even the newest kilo is 20 years old!

so finally we will be left with 12 scorpene in 2030 off that line plus whatever lead ships come out of P75I

ideally we need about 24 SSK to stand a chance of partrolling the IOR end to end, backed by 10 SSNs for strike role.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3324
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby kit » 13 Apr 2019 16:54

x posting

Does any Indian company manufacture HY 100 or HY 130 steel? Arcelor Mittal USA makes the HY100 but subject to export regulations

Apparently, the IN wants to source all its future steel requirements indigenously

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 528
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby souravB » 13 Apr 2019 17:50

kit wrote:x posting

Does any Indian company manufacture HY 100 or HY 130 steel? Arcelor Mittal USA makes the HY100 but subject to export regulations

Apparently, the IN wants to source all its future steel requirements indigenously

SAIL produces the DMR292A steel for underwater applications. Industeel, a subsidiary of Arcelor Mittal produces both HY-100 grade and HLES 80 which is used in scorpene/Kalvari class. SAIL's steel probably is atleast comparable or better if IN wants to source it for 75I.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2086
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Vips » 16 Jul 2019 22:28

Will Russia and India Build 'Stealth' Submarines Together?

In its latest bid to secure the Indian Defense Ministry’s (MoD) submarine procurement tender, Moscow has offered New Delhi a joint diesel-electric development project based on the Russian Amur-class submarine design.

In a bid to undercut its Swedish, French and German competitors, the Kremlin is going beyond a conventional licensing arrangement in favor of a technology transfer scheme: “We are not put forward [an idea of] usual licensed production of submarine, we are proposing to jointly devise a project with our Indian partners and jointly build the first pilot model on the basis of the Amur-1650 diesel-electric submarine project, equipped with an air-independent propulsion system," said Vladimir Drozhzhov, Deputy Director of the Russian Federal Service of Military-Technical Cooperation, in a press statement issued last week. The proposed vessel will be compatible with a submarine-launched variant of the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile, which was itself jointly produced by Russia and India.

Russia’s proposal was fashioned in the spirit of the MoD’s January 2019 procurement plan-- a subset of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Make In India Initiative-- which calls for six conventional submarines to be produced by India’s indigenous defense industry in collaboration with an Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM). Drozhzhov added that our "our preliminary proposal is much more favorable than those of other foreign partners,” referring to its emphasis on supporting India’s domestic submarine construction industry. “This project can be successfully implemented in the interests of our countries."

The Amur project is the export variant of Russia’s upcoming Lada class, the diesel-electric successor to the aging, Soviet Kilo attack submarine line. There is, however, a curiously large degree of specifications overlap between the Lada and Kilo. Lada’s core defining feature, if not the sole justification for its existence, is its Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) system, which purportedly generates half the system noise of a diesel-electric powered Kilo submarine, offers 25% lower displacement (vessel weight), and facilitates a significantly smaller crew size.

There is only one problem: the manufacturer, Rubin Central Design Bureau, has been unable to produce a working, AIP-equipped prototype; the first two Lada project submarines, Saint Petersburg and Kronstadt, were both laid down with conventional diesel-electric engines. Drozhzhov’s confirmation that the jointly-produced Amur pilot model will feature an AIP system becomes all the more intriguing in light of Russia’s ongoing Lada troubles, as well as the fact that India’s procurement search guidelines explicitly require designs with AIP systems.

There is little to suggest that Rubin has made meaningful headway in AIP technology over the past year; to the contrary, Russian defense media is reporting that Russia’s AIP development has been delayed into the late 2020’s due to budgetary concerns. Instead, an apparent quid pro quo emerges behind Drozhzhov’s generous technology-transfer offer: Moscow will provide New Delhi with the expertise and technical assistance needed to indigenously produce Amur-class submarines, in exchange for Indian investment into a jointly-produced AIP system that will then be reappropriated by Russia’s own shipbuilding industry.

At a time when Russia’s naval budget is being stretched thin by a glut of ambitious long-term commitments, including the upcoming Yasen and Borei submarines, sharing AIP development costs with India could provide Rubin with the resource spurt it needs to get the moribound Lada project back on track.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2646
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby JTull » 26 Jul 2019 18:09

https://mod.gov.in/sites/default/files/MoDAR2018.pdf


System Definition & Engineering of DRDO AIP System on P-75 Submarines and Development of Deliverable LOX System:

The primary objective of the project is to develop the optimized design of Phosphoric Acid Fuel Cell (PAFC) system, hydrogen generators, power conditioners, control systems, heat exchangers, DM water system and auxiliaries of AIP system and qualify the same for P-75 platforms. The project is progressing in collaboration with M/s DCNS France. During the period (January, 2018 – March, 2019), major safety reservation data was submitted and accepted. Naval Group France cleared all blocks and declared sufficiency to take-up detailed design phase.


Land Based Prototype (LBP) for Air Independent Propulsion (AIP):

DRDO is involved in the development of indigenous technologies for the development of a LBP for AIP system for Indian submarines in collaboration with M/s L&T, Mumbai as Lead System Integrator (LSI) and other industry partners viz. M/s Thermax, Pune and M/s Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (M/s CDAC), Thiruvananthapuram. The successful development of the LBP will ultimately lead to realization of fuel cell based AIP for P-75 class (Scorpene) submarine, which would result in additional underwater endurance of the submarine at nominal power consumption level. It aims to package the AIP plant sub-systems, reactant tanks and waste tanks inside the simulated hull section of the P-75 submarine. During the period (January, 2018 – March, 2019), all piping modification design/drawing were completed and approved. Equipment mounting and hull modification was also completed. Endurance mode trials are expected in June, 2019.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4258
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby srai » 27 Jul 2019 06:21

^^^
The work is for P-75 integration. There will need to be another effort to customize for P-75I. Different hull and internal design.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3324
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby kit » 27 Jul 2019 21:44

Vips wrote:Will Russia and India Build 'Stealth' Submarines Together?

In its latest bid to secure the Indian Defense Ministry’s (MoD) submarine procurement tender, Moscow has offered New Delhi a joint diesel-electric development project based on the Russian Amur-class submarine design.

In a bid to undercut its Swedish, French and German competitors, the Kremlin is going beyond a conventional licensing arrangement in favor of a technology transfer scheme: “We are not put forward [an idea of] usual licensed production of submarine, we are proposing to jointly devise a project with our Indian partners and jointly build the first pilot model on the basis of the Amur-1650 diesel-electric submarine project, equipped with an air-independent propulsion system," said Vladimir Drozhzhov, Deputy Director of the Russian Federal Service of Military-Technical Cooperation, in a press statement issued last week. The proposed vessel will be compatible with a submarine-launched variant of the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile, which was itself jointly produced by Russia and India.

Russia’s proposal was fashioned in the spirit of the MoD’s January 2019 procurement plan-- a subset of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Make In India Initiative-- which calls for six conventional submarines to be produced by India’s indigenous defense industry in collaboration with an Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM). Drozhzhov added that our "our preliminary proposal is much more favorable than those of other foreign partners,” referring to its emphasis on supporting India’s domestic submarine construction industry. “This project can be successfully implemented in the interests of our countries."

The Amur project is the export variant of Russia’s upcoming Lada class, the diesel-electric successor to the aging, Soviet Kilo attack submarine line. There is, however, a curiously large degree of specifications overlap between the Lada and Kilo. Lada’s core defining feature, if not the sole justification for its existence, is its Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) system, which purportedly generates half the system noise of a diesel-electric powered Kilo submarine, offers 25% lower displacement (vessel weight), and facilitates a significantly smaller crew size.

There is only one problem: the manufacturer, Rubin Central Design Bureau, has been unable to produce a working, AIP-equipped prototype; the first two Lada project submarines, Saint Petersburg and Kronstadt, were both laid down with conventional diesel-electric engines. Drozhzhov’s confirmation that the jointly-produced Amur pilot model will feature an AIP system becomes all the more intriguing in light of Russia’s ongoing Lada troubles, as well as the fact that India’s procurement search guidelines explicitly require designs with AIP systems.

There is little to suggest that Rubin has made meaningful headway in AIP technology over the past year; to the contrary, Russian defense media is reporting that Russia’s AIP development has been delayed into the late 2020’s due to budgetary concerns. Instead, an apparent quid pro quo emerges behind Drozhzhov’s generous technology-transfer offer: Moscow will provide New Delhi with the expertise and technical assistance needed to indigenously produce Amur-class submarines, in exchange for Indian investment into a jointly-produced AIP system that will then be reappropriated by Russia’s own shipbuilding industry.

At a time when Russia’s naval budget is being stretched thin by a glut of ambitious long-term commitments, including the upcoming Yasen and Borei submarines, sharing AIP development costs with India could provide Rubin with the resource spurt it needs to get the moribound Lada project back on track.


and why not ? .. doesn't purchasing outright without tech transfers a worse idea, something India has been doing all along?.. this should include sharing of IP rights, if in case they sell this tech to other countries both countries stand to receive royalties, also choose which countries can receive it , something like a Brahmos partnership

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2086
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Vips » 28 Jul 2019 00:29

Even in case of Brahmos though India has the majority stake, Russians has not allowed or given the clearance to sell to other countries.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3235
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Kakkaji » 28 Jul 2019 07:34

'Joint Development' as in FGFA? :eek:

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4197
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Manish_Sharma » 30 Jul 2019 05:57

Kakkaji wrote:'Joint Development' as in FGFA? :eek:

:rotfl:

Or remember "Eta Secret" (it's a secret) by Russians to every question by our Naval Officers while handing over of INS Vikramaditya?

IAF pilots were not allowed anywhere near fgfa despite GOI having paid 300 million in advance.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2101
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby John » 30 Jul 2019 07:56

Vips wrote:Even in case of Brahmos though India has the majority stake, Russians has not allowed or given the clearance to sell to other countries.

They cleared it for a few nations but nothing matelerized because Russians offered Yakhont at a much cheaper price to Indonesia and Vietnam. They also packaged it with vessels ( our sy still struggling to export vessels) and others arms deals.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20056
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Philip » 01 Aug 2019 16:45

Only a real dumbo in the MOD will enter into a JV with any nation for an AIP system which at the end of development will belong to the foreign entity! The Brahmos JV enabled us to save time, leapfrog old tect. and develop the world's cutting edge supersonic multi-role cruise missile, with a hypersonic version in the pipeline. Read Dr.Pillai's great book on the Brahmos success mantra.If we follow ghe samd roadmap, we can shorten the timd for developing an AIP system or any other system.

Now that we're giving Burma one of our Kilos, on which sub will thr desi AIP system be tested at sea under water? It would be absurd to fit a lab-only tested system on a series of subs.

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1849
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Kakarat » 01 Aug 2019 16:59

Philip wrote:Only a real dumbo in the MOD will enter into a JV with any nation for an AIP system which at the end of development will belong to the foreign entity! The Brahmos JV enabled us to save time, leapfrog old tect. and develop the world's cutting edge supersonic multi-role cruise missile, with a hypersonic version in the pipeline. Read Dr.Pillai's great book on the Brahmos success mantra.If we follow ghe samd roadmap, we can shorten the timd for developing an AIP system or any other system.

Now that we're giving Burma one of our Kilos, on which sub will thr desi AIP system be tested at sea under water? It would be absurd to fit a lab-only tested system on a series of subs.


You are right we should not accept Russia's offer for developing their AIP with our money when our own AIP is almost ready

Our AIP was never meant to be fitted it a Kilo but in a Scorpène-class, before which a under construction 1:1 prototype will be tested in a simulated environment

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20056
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Philip » 03 Aug 2019 16:12

It has to be tested in a real combat environment under the testing regime that all new subs undergo.Being our very first AIP attempt, we cannot suffer malfunctioning later on when fitted to subs inducted which woild be a calamiyy. Since we don't have extra subs, one possibility is that if there is a JV.we use an old Ru boat, of which the RuN have several.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3324
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby kit » 04 Aug 2019 15:36

Kakarat wrote:
Philip wrote:Only a real dumbo in the MOD will enter into a JV with any nation for an AIP system which at the end of development will belong to the foreign entity! The Brahmos JV enabled us to save time, leapfrog old tect. and develop the world's cutting edge supersonic multi-role cruise missile, with a hypersonic version in the pipeline. Read Dr.Pillai's great book on the Brahmos success mantra.If we follow ghe samd roadmap, we can shorten the timd for developing an AIP system or any other system.

Now that we're giving Burma one of our Kilos, on which sub will thr desi AIP system be tested at sea under water? It would be absurd to fit a lab-only tested system on a series of subs.


You are right we should not accept Russia's offer for developing their AIP with our money when our own AIP is almost ready

Our AIP was never meant to be fitted it a Kilo but in a Scorpène-class, before which a under construction 1:1 prototype will be tested in a simulated environment


The AIP tech being developed can be made to suit the kilos , the tech doesn't look like its specific to one type.

dinesha
BRFite
Posts: 1097
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 11:42
Location: Delhi

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby dinesha » 12 Sep 2019 17:51

Adani Group puts in last-minute bid for Indian Navy's Rs 45,000-crore submarine project
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... s?from=mdr
Others that submitted bids for the submarine programme are L&T, MDL and Reliance Naval.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9509
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Yagnasri » 12 Sep 2019 21:09

Adanis have no capacity. I hope MoD do not allow them to jump into this matter

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2086
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Vips » 29 Sep 2019 04:42

Late & over-budget, new submarine triggers Project 75-I stake rise

On Saturday, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh commissioned into service the Navy’s 15th conventionally powered, diesel-electric submarine, INS Khanderi. Built in Mazagon Dock Ltd, Mumbai (MDL) in technology partnership with French shipyard Naval Group, this is the second of six Scorpene submarines the Navy contracted in 2005 for Rs 18,798 crore.

Singh described the commissioning as “a proud moment for the nation, the Indian Navy and MDL”. In fact, INS Khanderi is being delivered more than six years late, well over cost and with several defects that remain to be resolved.

When the Khanderi first sailed out of Mumbai for sea trials on June 1, 2017, it was expected to join the naval fleet by end-2017. However, the trial team found dozens of shortcomings that MDL and Naval Group have grappled with for over two years. While the Navy’s vice chief, Vice-Admiral G Ashok Kumar, insists the Khanderi is now a “fully combat capable submarine”, Navy sources say it is being commissioned with several shortcomings still unresolved.

According to previous reports that there were 35 defects that still remained to be resolved. Of these, 29 could not have been resolved during the monsoon period, since they required testing in absolutely calm seas — or what is called “Sea State-1”.

Nor is the Khanderi being commissioned with a full complement of its primary weapon, the torpedo. This after the government cancelled the purchase of 98 torpedoes from Italian firm, WASS, because its group company, AgustaWestland, was accused of bribing Indian officials to win a contract for VVIP helicopters.

As an emergency stopgap, German firm Atlas Elektronik was contracted to modernise 64 torpedoes, bought in the 1980s and 1990s for the Navy’s four Shishumar-class submarines. This meagre quantity is now being shared with the Scorpene submarines being commissioned. By 2022-23, when six Scorpenes will have been commissioned to supplement the four Shishumar-class boats, there will be just six torpedoes for each submarine.Besides these, the Navy operates nine Russian-origin conventionally powered Kilo-class submarines, one nuclear powered attack submarine (INS Chakra) and a nuclear powered, nuclear missile submarine, INS Arihant. That is well short of the Navy’s assessed requirement of 24 conventionally powered submarines and six nuclear powered attack submarines.

Yet, there is delay and confusion in the proposal to build six more conventional submarines, with “air independent propulsion” (AIP) that would allow them to remain submerged for up to two weeks, compared to just 36-48 hours for a diesel-electric submarine. When a submarine is submerged, it is far harder to detect.

The new proposal, called Project 75-I, envisages selecting an Indian firm as “strategic partner” (SP). Chosen SPs will bid to build the six AIP submarines in partnership with a foreign “original equipment manufacturer” (OEM) that offers a suitable submarine design and transfer of technology.

In response to a navy enquiry, five Indian entities have submitted Expressions of Interest (EoI) for being the SP in Project 75-I. These include MDL, Larsen & Toubro (L&T), Reliance Naval and Engineering (RNaval), Hindustan Shipyard Ltd, Visakhapatnam (HSL), and a proposed special purpose vehicle (SPV) consisting of HSL and Adani Defence.

Navy sources say only L&T and MDL are realistic contenders, since financially stressed RNaval and HSL do not meet the financial criteria and the HSL-Adani SPV remains to be formally incorporated.

The more difficult choice is between the five firms that have submitted EoIs for selection as the chosen OEM. Rubin Design Bureau (Russia) has offered its Amur submarine, Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems (TKMS, Germany) its Type 218 boat, Naval Group (formerly DCNS, France) its Shortfin Barracuda, Navantia (Spain) its S-80 and Daewoo (South Korea) its KSS-3 submarine.

Of these, only Rubin, TKMS and Naval Group are considered to have a chance. The Navantia S-80 is grappling with serious weight imbalance issues, while the Korean submarine is an untested design. Indian naval submariners are almost unanimously convinced (Claiming unanimous sources aka lobbying?) of the superiority of the TKMS Type 218, the design of which is optimised for the shallow Baltic Sea, which has similarities with the Arabian Sea, where the waters 40 kilometres off Karachi are just 40 metres deep. The Type 218 is also reputedly the most silent design. However, it is probably the most expensive of the three.

The Shortfin Barracuda would be significantly cheaper, with the infrastructure having already been set up in MDL for building six Scorpenes. However, since the French Navy operates only nuclear-powered submarines, Naval Group builds conventionally powered and AIP submarines only as a commercial ploy to keep its submarine line active. The submarines themselves, like the Scorpenes, are less than cutting-edge (On what basis is he claiming that Barracuda shortfin is not cutting edge and implying that german 218 is the best of the lot) .

The Russians are the dark horses, with naval planners wary of the tendency to submit low-cost tenders and then raise the price during construction, as with the aircraft carrier, Gorshkov (now Vikramaditya). Also going against Moscow is New Delhi’s concern that awarding Russia the Project 75-I contract might invoke sanctions from Washington under the 2017 law, Countering American Adversaries Through Sanctions Act.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20056
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Philip » 29 Sep 2019 08:14

The problem of paying for anything Russian has been permanently sorted out by the two countries as of the recent statements by both countries. The S-400 buy despite dire US threats was a snub to Washington.
Of the subs on offer, the German U-boat options and AIP system are the most popular in Asia and certainly after the Scorpene leak, plus our excellent experience of operating our U-209s, the best western option.Fitting Russian weapons like Brahmos may be problematic though.

However, Russian subs have also served us very well for decades. The few accidents that happened was due to rank apathy of the UPA ( and AKA) in not attending to the problems of regular maintenance, ordering spares in timely fashion, etc., leading to the resignation of a CNS in protest. Our Kilos undergoing their second refit will have to be replaced in the next decade.Another line of Russian conventional subs is required so that we operate the best of the east and west.While new U-boats can replace our aging 209s, a new Ru design tailormade for the IN could start replacing our Kilos , while work continues with our nuclear boat fleet.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2086
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Vips » 29 Sep 2019 18:41

The Russian offer for Amur is simply not good. The sub is old wine in old bottle not comparable at all to the German and French subs. If at all hafta has to be given to Russia it is preferable to buy SU57.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7772
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Rakesh » 30 Sep 2019 07:43

Vips wrote:Late & over-budget, new submarine triggers Project 75-I stake rise

Of these, only Rubin, TKMS and Naval Group are considered to have a chance. The Navantia S-80 is grappling with serious weight imbalance issues, while the Korean submarine is an untested design. Indian naval submariners are almost unanimously convinced (Claiming unanimous sources aka lobbying?) of the superiority of the TKMS Type 218, the design of which is optimised for the shallow Baltic Sea, which has similarities with the Arabian Sea, where the waters 40 kilometres off Karachi are just 40 metres deep. The Type 218 is also reputedly the most silent design. However, it is probably the most expensive of the three.

How are these un-named Indian naval submariners convinced that the Type 218 is the most silent design, when not one Barracuda SSK has taken to the water? The first Barracuda SSN - the Suffren of the French Navy - has just started her sea trials. She is a nuclear boat and will be louder than a SSK. But not a single Barracuda SSK exists.

Vips wrote:The Shortfin Barracuda would be significantly cheaper, with the infrastructure having already been set up in MDL for building six Scorpenes. However, since the French Navy operates only nuclear-powered submarines, Naval Group builds conventionally powered and AIP submarines only as a commercial ploy to keep its submarine line active. The submarines themselves, like the Scorpenes, are less than cutting-edge (On what basis is he claiming that Barracuda shortfin is not cutting edge and implying that german 218 is the best of the lot) .

How can the Type 218 be more expensive than the Barracuda SSK? Someone needs to point out to Ajai Shukla on the cost (estimated with guaranteed cost overruns) of the Shortfin Barracuda SSK program for the Australian Navy and the cost for four Type 218SG boats that the Singapore Navy is acquiring.

In 2016, the Australian Navy signed a contract with Naval Group for 12 Shortfin Barracuda SSKs at a cost of $50 billion in Australian dollars. That works out to almost US $34 billion at today's exchange rates. At that cost, each boat is expected to cost over $4.1 billion in Australian dollars or US $2.7 billion at today's exchange rates. A nuclear-powered US Navy Virginia Class boat (minus the Virginia Payload Module) costs US $2.8 billion. Comparatively, the Singapore Navy signed a deal for a pair of (and later signed for another two more) Type 218SG SSKs. The first two boats will reportedly cost €1.6 billion or approximately US $1.75 billion at today's exchange rates. That works out to €800 million per boat or approximately US $875 million at today's exchange rates.

Apart from the Soryu Class, the Scorpene Class is among the quietest of all modern SSK designs. The Type 218SG is a customized design (adopted by the Singapore Navy) from the Type 216 design. The Type 216 is designed to be an ocean-going SSK, just like the Shortfin Barracuda SSK. The Type 216 design is in turn adopted from the smaller Type 214 design. This variant - Type 214 - is the export version of the Type 212 design. The Type 214 does not feature the non-magnetic steel hull of the Type 212. The Shortfin Barracuda SSK is as cutting edge as it gets. Ridiculously expensive, yes...but definitely state-of-the-art. But is it worth the cost?

What a tamasha this Project 75I program is turning out to be. Just take up Naval Group's offer of three more Scorpenes and be done with this SSK program. Convert Project 75I to Project 75N. Do a 6 + 6 build of nuclear boats, each armed with a 24 - 36 BrahMos VLS cell and Varunastra torpedoes. It will be more expensive, as a twelve build SSN program will be, but will have far greater utility.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7053
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby nachiket » 01 Oct 2019 01:23

Didn't the French promise the Australians that they would not sell the Shortfin Barracuda to India or any other potential Asian rival?

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3324
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby kit » 01 Oct 2019 02:10

nachiket wrote:Didn't the French promise the Australians that they would not sell the Shortfin Barracuda to India or any other potential Asian rival?

Not exactly that , there is somewhere in that agreement where the French guarentees the technological superiority and not to sell same level of tech to another country !!., so it could mean they would sell the Barracuda but in a watered down version and btw the Aussie Barracuda comes with a combat suite integrated by Lockheed Martin so to ensure high levels of tech comparable to time when the boats actually hit the water.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7772
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Rakesh » 01 Oct 2019 02:25

In addition to what kit said, the French are only obligated to not sell the Australian version of the Barracuda SSK to any other nation. Australia has no control over how Naval Group customizes the Barracuda platform for other nations.

IMVHO, the Indian Navy should convert the P75I competition to a P75N one. Launch a competition for six nuclear boats to Indian specifications and then build another six more boats (improved) based on that design. Their already exists a plan to build six SSNs right now.

France and Russia would be the only two serious contenders in the contest. The French use a LEU (Low Enriched Uranium) design in their reactors. Quicker refueling time. The Russians use a HEU (Highly Enriched Uranium) design, which is what is on the Arihant Class now. The French gave a presentation on the Barracuda SSN design to then Naval Chief - Admiral Sunil Lanba - last year.

France’s Choice for Naval Nuclear Propulsion: Why Low-Enriched Uranium Was Chosen
https://fas.org/pub-reports/frances-cho ... as-chosen/

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7772
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Rakesh » 01 Oct 2019 03:16

DRDO AIP to be retrofitted on all six Indian Navy Scorpene submarines
http://www.spsnavalforces.com/story/?id ... Submarines

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7629
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Indranil » 01 Oct 2019 03:51

How does one trust the French? They said that to the Australians. They eeked out of every major ToT in the Rafale purchase.

In this case, I would pay the money to the Germans. Anyways, their offering is technological superior to the rest.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7772
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Rakesh » 01 Oct 2019 03:54

Not different from any other OEM who would do the same to protect their IP. The Russians did it to us. The Americans did it to us and the French are no different.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18407
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Karan M » 01 Oct 2019 04:52

Indranil wrote:How does one trust the French? They said that to the Australians. They eeked out of every major ToT in the Rafale purchase.

In this case, I would pay the money to the Germans. Anyways, their offering is technological superior to the rest.


Way back when we purchased the Type 209, we took a promise from the Gernans they wouldn't share the data with anyone else. Lo and behold, we found it was being hawked to the South Africans and several other countries. Only plus was we got several of our naval designers trained in Germany apart from the TOT for sub-welding, assembly.
Very similar to how the Scorpene data found itself around Asia, and then Australia.

As regards German technology, shipbuilding etc. Folks like Shukla have short memories.
Leaving even the corruption claims etc out, much to be read.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldn ... ailed.html
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/gr ... der-05801/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424 ... 1108208712

Following years of delay, the Greek Government has recently insisted that the submarines are finally due to start full sea trials imminently, although no date has been set. When one of the Greek submarines first went to sea, it was found to list heavily in certain sea conditions.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18407
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Project 75I - It Begins

Postby Karan M » 01 Oct 2019 04:52

Point being, pun intended, all are in the same boat. Type 214 is at least a mature design, so we will likely get a ready submarine more easily than some "cutting edge" French brochure.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Kakarat, navneeet, prahaar and 61 guests