Indian Navy News & Discussion - 03 July 2018

Rishi_Tri · Post by **Rishi_Tri** » 10 Aug 2019 16:09

chola wrote:
Philip wrote:The alleged HDW scandal torpedoed the further building of U- boats.Decades later the courts found no wrong-doing.A great shame.Veteran submariners reminiscing, bemoan how valuable machinery was sold for scrap in Bombay. Nothing prevents us from doing the same today.
HDW scandal or not, it should not have derailed our ownership of that technology. We already paid for it.

The Scorpene should have been an Indian sub based on Type 209 technology. But instead we went clean slate and paid again for another gora sub in the Scorpene.

Again, the Koreans paid once to the Germans for the Type 209 and with that technology went to develop the Chang Bogo I/II/III classes. They exported their version of the Type 209 too because they paid for and own that ip.

Now they have yet another export contract with Indonesia for their latest sub the Chang Ho which was developed from the Chang Bogo but upscaled and fully indigenized.

Pay once for TOT and then use that to develop your own. That is the only way to do this logically.

With us, we paid one set of goras for Type 209, then another set of goras for Scorpene and now will pay more goras for P75I. How in hell does this make sense? Why not just buy from phoren yards directly and save some rupees if we never learn enough from these things to build our own?

Does the HDW - Scorpene - 'Next Submarine' say that so much was compromised in Scorpene during the leaks that it is being considered as not worth pursuing Scorpene? If you can build n-submarines, have built conventional submarines for two decades or more, extension of Scorpene design should have been logical and reasonable line of action to pursue.

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 11 Aug 2019 03:58

Indian Navy commissions sixth Mark-IV class landing craft utility ship.

The Indian Navy has commissioned the sixth ship of the Mark-IV class landing craft utility (LCU) vessels, IN LCU L-56, during a ceremony at Eastern Naval Command in Visakhapatnam.

The commissioning ceremony was attended by officials from the Indian Navy and the shipbuilder Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers Limited (GRSE).IN LCU L-56 was launched in March 2016 and is the 100th warship of GRSE.

Designed to carry 216 personnel, the Mark-IV class LCU vessels can be used to transport and deploy main battle tanks, armoured vehicles, troops, and equipment from ship to shore.

The vessels in this class are based at the Andaman and Nicobar Command. India will induct a total of eight GRSE-designed and built Mk IV LCU amphibious vessels.

The navy will deploy the ships in support of multirole activities, such as beaching operations, search and rescue, disaster relief operations, supply, and replenishment and evacuation from distant islands.

IN LCU L-56 is armed with two indigenous CRN 91 guns for artillery fire support during landing operations.In addition, the vessel features integrated bridge system (IBS) and an integrated platform management system (IPMS). Around 90% of the systems used in LCU are developed locally. In a statement, the Indian Ministry of Defence said: “The Mark-IV LCU vessels are a further improved version of the Mk-III LCU vessels presently being used by the Indian Navy.”

About 22 vessels meant for the Indian Navy and the Indian Coast Guard are in various stages of construction at GRSE.

The company won the contract for the design and construction of eight LCU ships in September 2011.

chola · Post by **chola** » 11 Aug 2019 14:02

Rishi_Tri wrote:
chola wrote:
HDW scandal or not, it should not have derailed our ownership of that technology. We already paid for it.

The Scorpene should have been an Indian sub based on Type 209 technology. But instead we went clean slate and paid again for another gora sub in the Scorpene.

Again, the Koreans paid once to the Germans for the Type 209 and with that technology went to develop the Chang Bogo I/II/III classes. They exported their version of the Type 209 too because they paid for and own that ip.

Now they have yet another export contract with Indonesia for their latest sub the Chang Ho which was developed from the Chang Bogo but upscaled and fully indigenized.

Pay once for TOT and then use that to develop your own. That is the only way to do this logically.

With us, we paid one set of goras for Type 209, then another set of goras for Scorpene and now will pay more goras for P75I. How in hell does this make sense? Why not just buy from phoren yards directly and save some rupees if we never learn enough from these things to build our own?
Does the HDW - Scorpene - 'Next Submarine' say that so much was compromised in Scorpene during the leaks that it is being considered as not worth pursuing Scorpene? If you can build n-submarines, have built conventional submarines for two decades or more, extension of Scorpene design should have been logical and reasonable line of action to pursue.

Whatever was compromised in the Scorpene design was for the Scorpene design. That's it. It should be meaningless in our new development, especially since the actual transfer of IP for Scorpene was negligible. Scorpene tech ends with the Vagsheer. DCNS gave us no rights to build anything after.

What we should have learned from the experience of these programs with HDW and DCNS is the fundamentals where we could design and build a conventional submarine of our own. If the Scorpene was compromised then we should be able to design and build something that isn't compromised.

But here we are again looking to pay goras for P75I. To me, why bother paying phoreners for SSKs when we can build nuke subs on our own? Just go with an all nuke but indigenous sub fleet. At this point, it makes no sense to spend treasure for outside help on an inferior class of ships when we can build SSNs.

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 11 Aug 2019 14:14

+ chola saar. I too mentioned no need for SSK, have a good number of SSNs, especially when phoren SSKs are almost same price as an indigenous SSN. After 6th scorpene, whatever SSKs we have is good for PN, if at all you need one, considering we also have P-8Is and other anti-sub surface vessels. Just increase the SSN order to 12 from present planned 6 and build in pairs, and start construction of next pair as soon as the first pair is launched. This way, we can have 2 SSNs every 3 years after first pair is launched. But alas, not sure if our defense budget will allows us.

chola · Post by **chola** » 11 Aug 2019 14:48

^^^ Yes Karthik ji. A SSK doesn't really makes sense for us. An SSK operates best near the littoral. It is slow and has little persistence so it is best suited for ambush of surface ships.

I do not see any foreign navy operating in our green waters in the face of the IAF and IN (unless we end up fighting the USN!) So what use is a SSK to us? I hear people saying we need them to counter Pakistan's SSKs but that's stupid. You don't hunt other subs with a slow DE boat, you use surface ships and aircraft.

Our real need is for SSNs to operate in blue water to keeps any potential enemy navy from even reaching our littorals.

Pakistan's navy to be honest will be annihilated from the air since everything above or below the surface is within range of Carrier India. A SSK is good to have if we can build them on our own but paying others through the nose for it? Not worth it.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 11 Aug 2019 21:07

The Arabian Sea shelf is pretty shallow and you need SSK in such an environment, for us this is a requirement or our North west coast and to approach the Pakistani coast.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Aug 2019 21:49

Kartik's idea of 2 SSNs in the given timeframe would be great but the budget sadly won't be there for it.If we could have 2 to 3 AIP subs and one SSN every 3 years, it would be great. SSBNs separate, one every 2 to 3 years too.

A recent analysis of Ru N-sub building came out with this v.interesting observation, That Borei class SSBNs, being built steadily, are much cheaper than the Yasen class since they have a single operational task.The Rus themselves admitted some design flaws in the latest Yasen-M improved boats and a delay in their induction.It's because of the multi- role nature of attack boats which are really SSGNs with the extra land attack missiles carried like Kalibir.and special forces support plus UUVs.In the case of US attack boats, even UCAVs are carried. The Kalibir missile is now being improved with a 4, 500km range from 2, 500km adding to the role.

The mistake we should avoid is tarting up out conv. AIP boats to make them mini- N boats in capability, adding substantially to costs and resulting in lesser numbers built. Our delayed Scorpenes are in the range of $600+M, almost double that of the latest Kilo 636.3s. A German U- boat may be 10% cheaper than a Scorpene built in India.An Amur even less.Almost all Pak land targets are well within Indian land-based tactical missile range and with soon to be inducted 40+ B' Mos equipped MKIs, also within stand-off range of the IAF.

Unless we plan to also equip our conv. subs with land attack missiles with N-warheads in a crisis, we should leave such eventualities to our fleet of much faster SSBNs which have unlimited range , and a 90+ day endurance unlike the 45 day .std. endurance of conv. boats. We need SSKs fundamentally for sanitising the chokepoints and hunting down the PN and PLAN subs operating in the IOR and sinking their surfacd combatants and merchantmen. Anti-sub and anti-ship missiles taking priority over land attack ones. Our surface warships could carry such ordnance like Ru's small corvettes.The 4 extra Talwars to be acquired are supposed to have a possible Kalibir capability. Our SSN/ SSGNs could be tasked instead for the complete multi-role , multi- ocean operations.

In the littoral waters of the IOR, Tracking small AIP subs is quite a task even with the latest P-8Is. Tackling the ASW conundrum iz best when one prosecutes it 3- dimensionally. We had the recent report that during the Balakot crisis, it took us 29 days (?) to locate a PN Agosta-90B AIP boat , which scuttled off to waters off Gwadar/ Straits of Hormuz to avoid being detected by the IN.

wig · Post by **wig** » 13 Aug 2019 09:22

https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/natio ... 17208.html

To match China’s pace, Navy adopts new ship-making tech
from the above

The ongoing project, 17-A, which is using modular construction, is what the Navy thinks will be its future and set the pace for making new warships.
The Navy is hopeful that the building time will be brought down from the present seven-eight years to three-four years for each warship. The first one is expected to be inducted in three years. All the seven warships of this project are expected by 2026 or 2027. The construction on the first one started in February 2017 and it should be ready for trials in 2021. The cost of each warship is around Rs 6,300 crore.

and

Three of the warships are being made at the Garden Reach Ship Builders (GRSE) Kolkata and another four at Mazagon Dock Limited (MDL), Mumbai. Both the ship builders have created modular construction facilities.

The warships will incorporate the latest stealth features and carry a compact weapon platform that will include Barak 8 and BrahMos missiles, which will be vertically launched.

The manpower usage will also come down. Existing such warships have a crew of 250 whereas advanced automation will bring it down to 160, which will reduce operational costs by around 20 per cent and result in higher operational availability of the warships.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 13 Aug 2019 10:45

V.good to read the Tribune report.Modernisation of the shipyards has been on the cards for ages.If the time has indeed being brought down to that mentioned, superb.

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 14 Aug 2019 16:10

I can see where MDL is going to build four P-17A once they are done with P-15B, but pardon me, GRSE looks so tiny and with no space to expand, they can probably build only single ship of that size at a time. How the hell one can expect seven ships ready by 2027???

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Aug 2019 06:03

Aren't the numbers being split up between the yards? At least 2 can be built at a time.The high cost per unit, nearing $1B , beggars the Q whether larger numbers of cheaper smaller corvettes could not do the job or complement it as well.A combination of DDGs, FFGs and corvettes is required.A multi- purpose missile corvette ( not the P- 28 design) could be built within $300M .A fleet of 12 to 16 such corvettes also armed with Kalibir or equiv. SSMs, would give us the numbers required to attend to simultaneous crises anywhere in the IOR.
The need for such corvettes in no way is suggested as replacements for FFGs, but an innovative way in which we can increase numbers of capable platforms at affordable cost.

wig · Post by **wig** » 21 Aug 2019 10:39

‘Make in India’ Software Defined Radio: ‘Mother’ of all solutions for tactical communications of armed forces

extracts

Indian Navy’s Tactical Data Link will be the immediate beneficiary of this indigenous SDR Technology which is very critical as it will help for achieving better transfer rates for a large volume of Real Time data, with a reduced Network latency

and

Indian Navy’s Tactical Data Link will be the immediate beneficiary of this indigenous SDR Technology which is very critical as it will help for achieving better transfer rates for a large volume of Real Time data, with a reduced Network latency.

This indigenous technology will be readily implementable for the Indian Army and Indian Air Force (IAF) for improved transfer rates for data, voice and video information. This will enable troops on the ground carrying Handheld Man-portable SDR versions to achieve integration with higher echelons to accomplish true C4I capability. Also, with SDR technology, the possibility of swarms of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) operating in the battlefield looks encouraging.

With each warship as a Node generating humongous Real-Time data related to navigation, combat information etc., and the SDR solution was evolved by the Indian Navy through the efforts of it’s premium R&D organisation, WESEE.

https://www.financialexpress.com/defenc ... s/1680536/

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 24 Aug 2019 00:38

France set to offer nuclear submarines to India
http://www.spsnavalforces.com/news/?id= ... s-to-India

India has an ambitious program to build six nuclear-powered attack submarines at an approximate cost of over 100,000 Crore. The French are likely to offer partnership in designing and building these submarines in India. France's Naval Group is currently building the Barracuda Class SSNs for the French Navy.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 24 Aug 2019 00:44

The first Barracuda Class SSN - for the Marine Nationale (French Navy) - was just launched on 19 July 2019.

souravB · Post by **souravB** » 24 Aug 2019 02:35

I am actually hyped for this deal. Not for the Nuke part but for ToT in pumpjet propulsion and SF insertion tube.
The pumpjet propulsion would be huge step up from Russi subs blade propulsion in stealth and speed. And SF insertion capability for a quick subterfuge would be a nightmare for the Pakis.
If this deal comes through I'd also like to see India and France working jointly on shaftless submarine drive using electric drive motors.

kit · Post by **kit** » 24 Aug 2019 03:05

Rakesh wrote:France set to offer nuclear submarines to India
http://www.spsnavalforces.com/news/?id= ... s-to-India

India has an ambitious program to build six nuclear-powered attack submarines at an approximate cost of over 100,000 Crore. The French are likely to offer partnership in designing and building these submarines in India. France's Naval Group is currently building the Barracuda Class SSNs for the French Navy.

Wonder how well that would go down with the Australians !!

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Bu ... 52%2F24456

Following is the tech sharing agreement between France and Australia.,

2.31
Any information that is created by either Australia or France under the proposed Framework Agreement or, otherwise created in the performance of the FSP, will be owned by Australia except information generated under collaborative research and development activities (Article 6(9)). France may only use Australian‑owned information for the purpose of performing tasks required by Australia and under specific circumstances (Article 6(10)).
2.32
Australia and France must also protect classified information provided or generated under the proposed Framework Agreement in accordance with a separate agreement signed in 1985 (Article 9).28 The Committee has also examined a new classified information agreement with France. The Committee’s report on its inquiry is in Chapter 3 of this Report.
2.33
The proposed Framework Agreement requires Australia and France to administer export control rules and licences in a manner that supports the FSP and promotes efficiency (Article 7). The NIA states that this will ‘reduce disruptions and delays to transfers of technology and information critical to the FSP’.29 Similarly, the Agreement obliges Australia and France to minimise the impacts of customs duties, as well as import and export taxes which may be applicable to the FSP (Article 18).

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 24 Aug 2019 04:33

kit, if the French sold the Aussies the Shortfin Barracuda...the French will sell India the Longfin Barracuda.

That ironclad agreement that the French and Aussies have is for the Shortfin Barracuda platform that is customized for the Royal Australian Navy. The French are however free to sell the Barracuda platform (SSN or SSK) to any nation, as long as it does not mimic what is on the Aussie boats.

P.S. The Aussies screwed us over when they leaked the Scorpene data. If India does get the Barracuda, it will be the Circle of Life for the Aussies

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 24 Aug 2019 09:10

Aren't design of desi SSN ready already? In this 2 year old video, at 6:52, SU mentions navy is confident of having first sub in next 6 7 years.

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 24 Aug 2019 17:21

France can help us build our Nuclear submarine and would expect a quid pro quo to give any technology. We could well see Barracuda conventional subs order for the Project 75I. It can offer help in building a 150 MW reactor for a 12000 ton submerged weight class submarine.

John · Post by **John** » 24 Aug 2019 22:51

Rakesh wrote:kit, if the French sold the Aussies the Shortfin Barracuda...the French will sell India the Longfin Barracuda.

That ironclad agreement that the French and Aussies have is for the Shortfin Barracuda platform that is customized for the Royal Australian Navy. The French are however free to sell the Barracuda platform (SSN or SSK) to any nation, as long as it does not mimic what is on the Aussie boats.

P.S. The Aussies screwed us over when they leaked the Scorpene data. If India does get the Barracuda, it will be the Circle of Life for the Aussies

Australia is spending 2.5 bill USD for each Shortfin Barracuda and they haven't even been built yet so do expect more cost overruns. So France is taking them to the cleaners with this deal, I would hate to spend anywhere close to that for a SSK.

kit · Post by **kit** » 24 Aug 2019 23:16

Karthik S wrote:Aren't design of desi SSN ready already? In this 2 year old video, at 6:52, SU mentions navy is confident of having first sub in next 6 7 years.

That singular program is progressing well ahead away from prying eyes and ears, somewhere down the line we "might" hear about commissioning/deployment. But it's just as well be like that.

Better not to ask how "many" black programs we have

kit · Post by **kit** » 24 Aug 2019 23:18

John wrote:
Rakesh wrote:kit, if the French sold the Aussies the Shortfin Barracuda...the French will sell India the Longfin Barracuda.

That ironclad agreement that the French and Aussies have is for the Shortfin Barracuda platform that is customized for the Royal Australian Navy. The French are however free to sell the Barracuda platform (SSN or SSK) to any nation, as long as it does not mimic what is on the Aussie boats.

P.S. The Aussies screwed us over when they leaked the Scorpene data. If India does get the Barracuda, it will be the Circle of Life for the Aussies
Australia is spending 2.5 bill USD for each Shortfin Barracuda and they haven't even been built yet so do expect more cost overruns. So France is taking them to the cleaners with this deal, I would hate to spend anywhere close to that for a SSK.

actually, there is indeed a problem with "lunch hours"

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-27/ ... p/11049748

kit · Post by **kit** » 24 Aug 2019 23:28

The Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A, designed by DCNS specifically for the Royal Australian Navy, will be the recipient of France’s most sensitive and protected submarine technology and will be the most lethal conventional submarine ever contemplated.

Pump jet propulsion means the Shortfin Barracuda can move more quietly than submarines with obsolete propeller technology. In a confrontation between two otherwise identical submarines, the one with pump jet propulsion always has the tactical advantage.

The sonar suite performance provided by Thales will be the best available ever for a submarine this size.

It is this coupling of excellent acoustic discretion, leading edge detection capabilities and pathways for technology development that will grant the Commonwealth the capacity to remain ahead of any regional adversary now and in the future

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 25 Aug 2019 08:08

kit wrote:
Karthik S wrote:Aren't design of desi SSN ready already? In this 2 year old video, at 6:52, SU mentions navy is confident of having first sub in next 6 7 years.

That singular program is progressing well ahead away from prying eyes and ears, somewhere down the line we "might" hear about commissioning/deployment. But it's just as well be like that.

Better not to ask how "many" black programs we have

Happy to know, thanks.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 25 Aug 2019 10:52

Please read my post in the Ru weapons td. on the latest news that the Ru N is to get 6 subs next year, 4 top- of- the- line N- boats and 2 new Kilos, latest avatar.It shows what' possible and achievable for us, at least between 2-3 boats/yr. of both N-boats and diesel.

Given the contours and incremental progress of the IN's nuclear navy, the future SSN will most likely have major Ru N-sub tech especially reactor tech, sensors and weaponry common to the SSBN programme as well.There could be some French input from the Scorpene programme, but that too is perhaps dated.Key tech/ eqpt. required are NHPP scopes, Kalibit- ER class missiles, Shkval torpedoes , our own heavyweight torpedo could be carried along with western ones which are planned to feature on the Arihant class, plus B' Mos.
Hard kill anti- torpedo weaponry , decoys and exotic sensors , UUVs, special forces modules too.Most likely an advanced version (or new )of the sonar system on our
upgraded Kilos will feature on our SSN. I expect a new desi combat system will be installed.We've made huge progress in combag systems aboard our warships.

The SSN is most probably going to be larger than the Arihant but smaller than an Akula.Possibly the same size as the larger Arihant classes in the pipeline using the same more powerful reactors.
Commonality would simplify our N- sub programmes. Next year coulx probably be when the work on the first boat begins with a 5 to 6 year building period and all 6 planned completed by 2030.

VikramA · Post by **VikramA** » 25 Aug 2019 11:07

the Australian deal to build 12 SSK is a weird one. for starters how can a SSK cost 2.5 billion dollars?its not like they are building 2-4 of these, they are building 12 of these ,shouldn't economy of scales kick in? and these are supposed to have pumpjet propulsion without a nuclear reactor powering it. how does that work out? i was under the impression that pumpjet propulsion requires considerable more peak power for long periods of time which was practically only possible with nuclear power because conventionally powered subs would run out of fuel faster thus reducing time at sea considerably.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 25 Aug 2019 11:25

^ Barracuda shortfin is a lemon. Russians made one Kilo with pumpjet propulsion and it failed miserably.

Hence french are nervous they have bitten more than they can chew. Immediately after winning australian competition, they called upon Germany to "...we Europeans work together and keep Asians out ..."

For australians its going to be Collins redux.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 25 Aug 2019 11:53

Yes, the Oz. gigaboat based upon the Barracuda is going to carry a huge amount of noisy eqpt. It's also not a proven concept.The SoKo gigaboat based upon years of building German U-boats- and is a larger avatar of the previous series, has a better chance of success and features a proven AIP system better than MESMA. But these large conv. boats are attempts by non- nuclear navies to try and compete with N-boats, something that isn't possible except in littoral warfare where detecting conv./ AIP boats is more difficult.A fine balance between enhanced capability and performance in conv. boats as compared with N-boats is a challenging task.An N -reactor has the reqd. power available for greater speed, endurance and variety for the sub with extra weaponry.
Our conv./ AIP subs must be carefully tailored to first meet our IOR littoral tasks- anc we may need mord than one class, as well as undertaking operations in the Indo- China Sea and beyond.Our SSGN/ SSNs will be better suited to that task.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 25 Aug 2019 19:04

John wrote:Australia is spending 2.5 bill USD for each Shortfin Barracuda and they haven't even been built yet so do expect more cost overruns. So France is taking them to the cleaners with this deal, I would hate to spend anywhere close to that for a SSK.

Project 75I will likely see a platform that will be an ocean going SSK.

Government invites proposals for building submarines
http://theindependent.in/government-inv ... ubmarines/

The Prime Minister of India – Narendra Modi’s administration has invited proposals from leading global warship manufacturers and Indian shipyards for building 6 conventional submarines for U.S. $6.6 billion.

And that cost will only balloon up once the contract is awarded and construction begins.

If we look at the four competitors in the Project 75I competition, who among them stands a chance?

• I am not sure the IN - and I believe you mentioned this yourself earlier - is keen on the Amur/Lada Class. In her present avatar, is she worth upwards of $1 billion? And is it advisable to go with a new untested platform from the Russians?

• The hydrogen fuel cell on the Type 214 is not something the IN is very interested in.

• The less said about Saab's Kockums A26 boat...the better. Classic case of brochuritis.

• And then there is the Scorpene or something bigger i.e. the Barracuda. The current batch of six Scorpenes is costing around $500 million per boat. I hope the MoD takes up Naval Group's offer of three additional Scorpene boats.

• The Dark Horse - the Soryu would be an excellent candidate for Project 75I, but that will not happen. But she will be ridiculously cheaper than the Barracuda Class. The sixth Soryu boat - costs approx $550 million - to build for the Japanese Navy. Even if the Japanese double that amount, it will be still cheaper than the Barracuda Class.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 25 Aug 2019 19:28

Amur/ Lada isn't $1B, closer to $350/400M a pop.But what's being offered iz a custom built design based on the platform to accommodate BMos, etc. and possibly the DRDO AIP system.SoKo have a new large boat developed from their U-boats, but all these western offerings will be upwards of at least $600+ M. If you calculate the 10 yr. lease cost for an Akula or around $1,5 B for a desi- built SSN, the high costs of large conv. boats become apparent.Vietnam paid only $300 M each for her 6 Kilo 636.6s, a real bargain, taking only 2 years to build a sub.The IN needs two types of conv. boats.One, SSKs for the IOR, prioritised against the PNs subs and sanitising the chokepoints into the IOR and a second multi- purpose boat say Kilo size with land attack missiles az well as the usual complement of anti- ship missiles and a variwty of torpedoes. The old BMos plug models of Amurs seen at defence shows if such a design does exist could be a strong contender especiallh on price. Ru may have already factored in an offer with transfer of N -sub tech for our SSNs. There may be more sub-surface info that we are unaware of

kit · Post by **kit** » 25 Aug 2019 19:36

VikramA wrote:the Australian deal to build 12 SSK is a weird one. for starters how can an SSK cost 2.5 billion dollars?its not like they are building 2-4 of these, they are building 12 of these, shouldn't economy of scales kick in? and these are supposed to have pumpjet propulsion without a nuclear reactor powering it. how does that work out? i was under the impression that pumpjet propulsion requires considerable more peak power for long periods of time which was practically only possible with nuclear power because conventionally powered subs would run out of fuel faster thus reducing time at sea considerably.

Actually, there has been some "discussion" as to why the Aussies chose the French design. Their long term plan is to build nuclear-powered submarines and someone " thought" it s as might be well to have a design that is actually derived from a nuclear boat.

The Aussies sub building capability is far from any desired level by any stretch of mind, the Barracuda deal is to build up the capability, training AND the infrastructure to go with it. As someone higher up said " we would need to be able to build future (nuclear) subs all by ourselves.

Good luck to that is what i would say!

OT but relevant to Indian Navy's future plans as to what the potential adversaries are planning ( Aussies are one )

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 26 Aug 2019 01:22

Rakesh wrote:Project 75I will likely see a platform that will be an ocean going SSK.....
If we look at the four competitors in the Project 75I competition, who among them stands a chance?

Hainji? What about the SMX Ocean type that dcns was touting as a 5 ton SSK?

John · Post by **John** » 26 Aug 2019 15:15

Actually, there has been some "discussion" as to why the Aussies chose the French design. Their long term plan is to build nuclear-powered submarines and someone " thought" it s as might be well to have a design that is actually derived from a nuclear boat.

Seen that argument I highly doubt it's feasible more like car salesmen pitch to convince the conservatives. If you're long term plan is SSN you are not going to blow your whole budget building 12 SSKs, the cost of maintaining that will eat into your 10 bill or so naval budget. No chance they can afford to spend 10+ billion on SSN till 2040.

You will ideally build small number of SSK to build up your capabilities and turn the last vessel into RD vessel for nuclear propulsion.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 26 Aug 2019 19:58

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1165944687896813568 ---> JUST IN: Indian MoD signs ₹380 crore contract for nine Precision Approach Radars with Data Pattern (India) Pvt Ltd. will be installed at Indian Naval air stations and Indian Air Force stations.

Company Website ---> https://www.datapatternsindia.com/index.php

https://twitter.com/defence_updates/sta ... 7982107648 ---> The installation and commissioning of radars at Indian Naval Air Stations is envisaged to be completed by April 2022 and at Indian Air Force Stations by December 2022.

kit · Post by **kit** » 26 Aug 2019 22:40

John wrote:
Actually, there has been some "discussion" as to why the Aussies chose the French design. Their long term plan is to build nuclear-powered submarines and someone " thought" it s as might be well to have a design that is actually derived from a nuclear boat.
Seen that argument I highly doubt it's feasible more like car salesmen pitch to convince the conservatives. If you're long term plan is SSN you are not going to blow your whole budget building 12 SSKs, the cost of maintaining that will eat into your 10 bill or so naval budget. No chance they can afford to spend 10+ billion on SSN till 2040.

You will ideally build small number of SSK to build up your capabilities and turn the last vessel into RD vessel for nuclear propulsion.

As with deals of this magnitude, some hanky panky behind the scenes seems to have happened .,

https://fortune.com/2016/05/02/france-j ... rine-deal/

Actually, that particular deal holds pointers as to why the Japanese Soryu has never been a front runner in any of the Indian sub programs despite the bonhomie and some trust issues but no major sticking factors ...

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 26 Aug 2019 23:07

Cain Marko wrote:
Rakesh wrote:Project 75I will likely see a platform that will be an ocean going SSK.....
If we look at the four competitors in the Project 75I competition, who among them stands a chance?
Hainji? What about the SMX Ocean type that dcns was touting as a 5 ton SSK?

SMX Ocean = Barracuda SSK

Barath · Post by **Barath** » 27 Aug 2019 09:16

kit wrote: Actually, there has been some "discussion" as to why the Aussies chose the French design. Their long term plan is to build nuclear-powered submarines and someone " thought" it s as might be well to have a design that is actually derived from a nuclear boat.

<very relevant point on creating sub-building infrastructure/industry deleted>

OT but relevant to Indian Navy's future plans as to what the potential adversaries are planning ( Aussies are one )

Australia is opposed to nuclear power. Despite providing 1/3rd of the world's uranium, nuclear power has been banned in Australia since 1998, and there continue to be strong anti-nuclear movement advocates. Thus even though, range factors for Australias sub would have been appropriate for a nuclear sub, they went for the world's largest non-nuclear submarines instead. [size helps range]

AFAIK, there is no plan to build nuclear submarines or any other nuclear power in Australia in the future. There are many who advocate for going the nuclear route 20+ years down the road (for the generation after the planned attack class), and to start soon, but this is not official.

Creating a viable nuclear navy is more than just slapping a propulsion unit in. Operating, refueling, dismantling and othewise creating a nuclear support industry is required at scale and is extremely expensive (most of manhattan project costs went to booting up the industry). And in Nuclear NIMBY australia, that's not much of an option. [Incidentally - that's part of why India is paying so much for the Chakra leases - they get help from Russia in operating and delay the refueling/dismantling etc other expenditures until homegrown subs are at scale, industry is investment and ramp up is ready]. It's not easy to see Australia using fuel from non-IAEA reactors for hypotheticall Attack class sucessor subs, when they have no reactors and were among those pushing for IAEA safeguards historically

There is/was significant discussion around why Australia went for the french option. A major factor for the deal was kickstarting Australian ship/sub-building industry over strengthening political and military alliance with japan

I'd also say that Australia is more likely to be an Indian ally than an adversary, given wariness of both towards China and potential for Quadrilateral Security Dialogue revival

---

The point about Japan not having experience of military export (for bidding etc) and their issues in working out military ToT to a local supply chain is well made.

Monitoring what Australia does is useful for general benchmarking and as they are a player in the Indian ocean. Another general benchmark is the brazilian strategy to build a nuclear sub (brazilian reactor and french sub building consulting for non-nuclear bits), though they are far behind India.

chola · Post by **chola** » 02 Sep 2019 16:50

IN Chief says we need carriers in alarming tone.

https://m.economictimes.com/news/defenc ... 864740.cms

NEW DELHI: Raising an alarm over the ongoing expansion of the Chinese Navy that will rapidly add warships to its fleet in the next decade, navy chief Admiral Karambir Singh said India requires at least three aircraft carriers to meet operational needs in the region.

New Lend-Lease scheme from the US:
https://intpolicydigest.org/2019/08/14/ ... nment/amp/

The Indian Navy only has one operational aircraft carrier, the INS Vikramaditya. The Vikramaditya is a Russian made Kiev-class carrier purchased from Russia in 2004. However, the Vikramaditya was not officially accessed into the Indian Navy until June of 2014.

Currently under production is the INS Vikrant which has been plagued by cost overruns and by construction difficulties. Originally scheduled for launch in 2010, the carrier, which is not expected to be commissioned until 2023, was launched in 2013. India has also begun construction on its third aircraft carrier, the Vishal, which is not expected to be available for active service until the 2030s.

The Vishal will be the first aircraft carrier not to employ a ski jump to assist in the launching of its aircraft. Instead, it is planned to employ the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS).

India’s strategic naval objective is to have three operating carrier strike groups (CSGs) operational so as to have two CSGs on station at all times. With the INS Vikramaditya’s hull currently 32 years old, by the time the Vishal is commissioned, the Vikramaditya will be over 45 years old and would be no match for the aircraft carriers that China is currently constructing.

To bridge the gap between the time India is able to bring 3 modern aircraft carriers online, the U.S. could use a new Lend-Lease Act to give either the USS Kitty Hawk and/or the USS John F. Kennedy to the Indian Navy. If a Tarawa-class amphibious escort carrier is available, it also should be considered as a part of any Lend-Lease ship transfer.

Imagine these in the IN!

USS Kitty Hawk

USS Kennedy

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 02 Sep 2019 20:22

Without fighters will these flat tops use spit balls for offence and defence? Pipe dreams?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 02 Sep 2019 20:35

chola wrote:Imagine these in the IN!

I am already imagining the maintenance nightmare this will end up as. Please no more used aircraft carriers.

After Vikrant (ex-Hercules), Viraat (ex-Hermes) and Vikramaditya (ex-Gorshkov)....please no more.

Just go with new build (Make in India) vessels.