Indian Naval News & Discussion - 12 Oct 2013

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 08 Sep 2014 08:28

We will need at least a couple of large private shipyards to build container ships in the very near future when India begins to replace China as a source for cheap stuff, unless we want to buy the entire lot from China. If we want to be ready, the time to start is now. These yards will start like all other yards have--with foreign collaboration, most likely Japanese and/or Korean. Eventually, these yards will take over the Navy requirements. BJP needs to be ready for the howl of protest from the PSU unions. Nothing less than a solid thrashing will help.

negi · Post by **negi** » 08 Sep 2014 08:59

John wrote:
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.

If some country pays 'X' USD for a piece of military equipment India will pay 2X if not more for the same, the only chaps who are even bigger fools than us in this scene are Barbarians from ME. The justification for extra cost will be given using clauses like 30% offset clause and ToT. Then MDL/HSL obviously will not get required hand holding with assembly as assumed by babus who ink the deal and costs will shoot up with time because of market forces.

soumik · Post by **soumik** » 08 Sep 2014 09:10

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
Any links to these 'open' sources?

http://www.newindianexpress.com/columns ... 414561.ece

here you go sirjee!

For instance, Modi’s reference in Tokyo to the 18th century-style imperialistic tendencies of China to grab land and sea territories, and Tokyo’s agreeing to sell 15 US-2 amphibious aircraft along with transfer of technology (ToT) that will result in a US-2i version tailored for Indian needs to be designed with Indian military’s inputs, and the talk of the Soryu-class conventional hunter-killer submarine in the Indian fleet, have made an Indo-Japanese pincer real. Beijing has reacted with reports suggesting that Xi Jinping is preparing to match Abe’s ante and to up it with even more attractive investment and other deals. To maximise geostrategic gains, Modi should maintain pressure by announcing the sale/transfer of Brahmos supersonic cruise missiles to Vietnam and other Southeast Asian states in the run-up to Xi Jinping’s visit.

soumik · Post by **soumik** » 08 Sep 2014 09:19

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.

[/quote]

Can someone enlighten us to the real cost of a Soryu earlier reports had the sub pegged at 500mil$ a piece, i'm guessing the increase has something to do with the infrastructure requirements for the abnormally(for SSK's) large Soryu's, it could include the lifecycle costs as well.

http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/japan-en ... -offering/

The Japanese Soryus are extremely competitive with these boats. At 4,200 tons submerged, the Soryu-class is considerably larger than either the Type 214, Scorpene, or Improved Kilo, and can carry a much heavier weapons load. This size also makes them quieter and longer-ranged than the other boats on the market. At current price expectations of around $500 million, the Soryus are not wildly more expensive than the other boats.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Sep 2014 09:39

http://www.news.com.au/national/new-jap ... 7050682205

According to government auditors the premium for local production is about 30 per cent or $15 billion for a locally built submarine.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 08 Sep 2014 09:43

I think that we need to be careful when we look at the price quoted by the Aussies. For a simple reason, when the Aussies speak $ then mean Aus $. When we speak $ we mean US$. The two currencies are very different the valuation.

soumik · Post by **soumik** » 08 Sep 2014 09:56

just checked the exchange rates as pointed out by pratyush, i do not think the difference in price can be explained away by that alone as both dollars have similar valuation

1 Australian Dollar equals
0.94 US Dollar

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 08 Sep 2014 11:00

Still that doesn't explain the cost the Aussies are planning to pay for the Subs. The Aussies are planning paying nearly 3 billion $ / boat for 12 boats.

In the Indian context, we are budgeting nearly 2.5 Billion $ / Boat for 6 boats. Personally, I don't think that this gives us the capacities we need, unless we are planning nuke boats.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 Sep 2014 12:03

when things go wrong whether its collins class noise or S80 weight issues it seems always groton electric boat is called in as the uber consultant to fix the mess. and they have long ceased to make SSKs.
http://www.defensenews.com/article/2013 ... weight-Sub

that kind of tells us the BAE astute is the uber-sub in the water - not!

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Sep 2014 12:13

Pratyush wrote:Still that doesn't explain the cost the Aussies are planning to pay for the Subs. The Aussies are planning paying nearly 3 billion $ / boat for 12 boats.

In the Indian context, we are budgeting nearly 2.5 Billion $ / Boat for 6 boats. Personally, I don't think that this gives us the capacities we need, unless we are planning nuke boats.

Beyond the capability of Subs/TOT etc and 30 % overhead of manufacturing the subs locally , Need to factor in 6-10 years time period of Military Inflationary cost as the subs roll out and since its fixed price contract need to factor in premium for delays involved.

We would be paying those money in tranches based on agreed schedule.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 08 Sep 2014 12:48

The Soryu does look a like a nice sub, 6 tubes with impressive reloads upto 30, if adapted with brahmos universal laucnher, this thing could be quite a mean beast for the IN, though it is probably wiser just to order more Scorpenes with AIP for the P-75I instead of starting to the whole process of setting up a line for another sub type, we would save some time. But, with all the problems with French on the Scorpene and the delays, I can imagine why they want something different.

I would have a deeper look at the Soryu, at current prices of around around $460 million as per Aussie estimates of 500 million, this is not entirely bad.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 08 Sep 2014 13:19

^and an Asian supplier of subs at that. Japan's defense production will be benefited by any big order from us. Why not a SK joint venture for ship building in India? SK has good record in Ship Building.

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 08 Sep 2014 13:49

rohitvats wrote: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.

There is a possible explanation to some of the figures, albeit probably not a very popular one. At least, it may explain the totally ridiculous figure of 90% structural renewal and a few others. If you do something wrong on the first try, you have to redo it again as many times as necessary to be accepted. For instance, if the weld is defective, it has to be re-welded. If you muck up with cabling or piping, you have to break it up and do again. Und so weiter.

Ganesh_S · Post by **Ganesh_S** » 08 Sep 2014 13:55

Can someone enlighten us to the real cost of a Soryu earlier reports had the sub pegged at 500mil$ a piece, i'm guessing the increase has something to do with the infrastructure requirements for the abnormally(for SSK's) large Soryu's, it could include the lifecycle costs as well.

These estimates for the most recently launched sub, probably from a critic and could be expected to be on the higher side.

The submarine Kukoryu was made by Kawasaki Heavy Industries and is said to be made with leading edge technology, costing Japanese taxpayers a hefty 53.4 billion yen (around US$540 million). But not only was the submarine itself expensive, it seems that the MSDF spared no cost for the launch ceremony, having cool party stuff that would be the envy of any 7-year-old boy. The launch committee had put out streamers, lots of balloons, and confetti to decorate the ceremony venue – making the launch ceremony a cross between a war rally and a really fun kiddie party.

http://japandailypress.com/japan-launch ... e-0438960/

Here is what the Aussie defense minister had to say

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-09/d ... nt/5377266

"I still do not know what the potential costs of a new designed submarine or an evolved Collins submarine will be and I am very concerned about that," he said.

"The Japanese design is the nearest design that comes to what our requirements are.

"There's no other diesel electric sub of that size and dimension, it's extremely impressive that they can get a boat of that size - 4,200 tonnes - through the water with diesel electric power."

jagga · Post by **jagga** » 08 Sep 2014 14:05

Delays force Navy to drop demand for foreign submarines

Frustrated with seven years of debilitating delay in even kicking off the process to select a foreign collaborator to help make new-generation stealth submarines, the Navy has junked its long-standing demand for getting two of the six such vessels directly from aboard.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'.

Ganesh_S · Post by **Ganesh_S** » 08 Sep 2014 14:07

Specs for Soryu
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... -specs.htm

Can some Guru's comment on its AIP Endurance Range in light of our look east policy.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 08 Sep 2014 14:41

If you want to have the ranee for south Pacific. Then you need self sustaining AIP. Nuke is the best source for it. However, the DRDO is also working on a self sustaining fuel cell. That will recharge it self when the boat is not doing full speed. But I cannot say what is the progress made on that device.

negi · Post by **negi** » 08 Sep 2014 16:26

Operational and running costs of Soryu are still a unknown variable , mind you Japan's decision to go for a large AIP capable sub could be more to do with it's policy of strictly no use of nuclear power in military side of things we however don't suffer from a similar dogma. Soryu unlike the German/French subs uses Stirling engines when operating underwater afaik even the French are now switching to fuel cells on their latest version of MESMA AIP on offer . If we are to avoid the logistics nightmare in future when it comes to maintaining a submarine fleet with platforms from Germany, Ru and Japan we better learn whatever we can from Scorpene and build our own (DRDO along with NMRL is working on it's own AIP based on fuel cells) . Soryu if I am not wrong will come with a lot of strings attached with Unkil based OEMs.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 08 Sep 2014 17:07

Also because of the huge size the soryu may exclude to from being able to complete some littoral missions.

srin · Post by **srin** » 08 Sep 2014 17:35

I think we are mixing up the immediate and long-term.

We need more subs immediately. Dump more money into this sinkhole called Scorpene, and get more subs. Definitely there are glitches, but it will be cheaper and quicker than a whole new sub line.

For longer-term, design an SSK version (or may be SSN version) of Arihant. This will take time, so we should import AIP from Japan or something, torpedoes from Europe and sonar from somewhere else. Do harbour trials for 5 years if necessary. But it is our design. Eventually, we'll start replacing the off-the-shelf with our own better ones. And we will finally be on our own. Get around 10 of those (instead of the measly three or four per class like we do today).

Will · Post by **Will** » 08 Sep 2014 17:42

abhik wrote:Also because of the huge size the soryu may exclude to from being able to complete some littoral missions.

Isn't the P75-I supposed to be a bigger Ocean going sub? The Soryu fits the bill. There were reports that one of the main reasons that the P75-I project was delayed for so long was cause that the IN wants a larger ocean going sub and none of the vendors had one at that time. Now companies like HDW have come with designs like the U-216(but none having being built might disqualify the same from the tender). But having said that why doesn't the IN just go in for more scorpenes for littoral warfare and just have an all nuclear, ocean going sub fleet. Could probably get a homemade SSN cheaper than what a conventional will cost, going by the price escalations of the scorpenes

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 08 Sep 2014 18:14

I think SSN is the way to go. 75I was proposed with we have no SSN capability. It does not make any sense to introduce one more type of SSK with its very high cost. If IN wants a boat with large range then SSN is the only was forward. A SSN version of Arihant class can be developed. Aim to introducing 2 boats a year and see the fun.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 08 Sep 2014 18:22

Any new design will take very long. The gap created by lost boats and aging fleet needs immediate replacement. The requirements under P 75I is also an old one by now and is making the navy desperate. The choice that Navy has to make is limited by the immediate gap in capabilities. Therefore, the SSN may be a long term objective but may be too long in the making for P75I.

member_28722 · Post by **member_28722** » 08 Sep 2014 23:49

Today we have around 8-9 active SSK (Kilo + Shishumar) and 1 active SSN
In next 6 years, We will have max 3-4 SSBN, max 2 SSN with min 10 to max 16 SSK (best case scenario)

The SSK numbers are more than enough to hold whatever is remaining in PN today, whether they have AIP or not. SSN/SSGN versions of Arihant class are the way to go ahead for long range patrols ( or shadowing future PLAN groups in IOR

). We definitely don't need a 3rd line of SSK.

koti · Post by **koti** » 08 Sep 2014 23:57

In the next 10 years, IN will be mulling the replacement of Shishumar and Early Kilo's probably. We do not want a tender process to begin then right.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 09 Sep 2014 02:09

The logic is bewildering.There is no substitute for a quick fix for falling numbers than an import,whatever the type,with a lease/quick construction.Just look how quickly Vietnam has obtained its Kilo subs and at such low cost too. To acquire a new design from either east or west and build this new design at home,either with a pvt. yard or MDL,whose track record speaks for itself,will see us not get the first sub until 2022 or thereabouts.Whereas we already have the ATV design with us ,could tweak it little for an SSGN,and could very easily set up a parallel line for the same.There would be little cost involved for the royalty on the design,infrastructure required already well known and the result would be an infinitely more capable and lethal sub that in a crisis could even carry nuke tipped missiles.Look at how Israel is equipping its 4th Dolfin class from Germany with the same,using its larger TTs for a modified version of the Popeye missile which has a range of 1500km.Good planning IN/MOD!

member_28722 · Post by **member_28722** » 09 Sep 2014 02:11

koti wrote:In the next 10 years, IN will be mulling the replacement of Shishumar and Early Kilo's probably. We do not want a tender process to begin then right.

Would it be better to start design work for future SSN now?
Kalvari + Upgraded Sindhughosh will still give us at least 12-13 operational missile SSK between 2018 and 2030. Wouldn't it be better to replace each retirement here with an SSN. Instead of floating a tender now for a new line it would be better to focus next 10 years on getting our SSBN numbers and then move to SSN. We will have more than decade worth of sub-building to use in SSN, which should speed up the work.

srai · Post by **srai** » 09 Sep 2014 05:16

Philip wrote:The logic is bewildering.There is no substitute for a quick fix for falling numbers than an import,whatever the type,with a lease/quick construction.Just look how quickly Vietnam has obtained its Kilo subs and at such low cost too. To acquire a new design from either east or west and build this new design at home,either with a pvt. yard or MDL,whose track record speaks for itself,will see us not get the first sub until 2022 or thereabouts.Whereas we already have the ATV design with us ,could tweak it little for an SSGN,and could very easily set up a parallel line for the same.There would be little cost involved for the royalty on the design,infrastructure required already well known and the result would be an infinitely more capable and lethal sub that in a crisis could even carry nuke tipped missiles.Look at how Israel is equipping its 4th Dolfin class from Germany with the same,using its larger TTs for a modified version of the Popeye missile which has a range of 1500km.Good planning IN/MOD!

Given how long it takes India to issue RFI, undertake trails, negotiate with the winner, sign the deal, produce them and finally induct them (easily 10 to 20 year process), it makes sense for the armed forces to shore up on existing types before/during any future major replacement projects are undertaken. This way there would be far less pressure even with delays, which in Indian context is inevitable. For example, when the Scorpene SSK deal was being negotiated/built the IN should have been allowed to buy/lease two of the existing type (i.e. Kilo) as a risk mitigation strategy. Similiarly, the IAF should have been allowed to purchase/lease couple of more squadrons of new/ex-MiG-29/Mirage-2000s when MMRCA RFI was being issued.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 09 Sep 2014 05:59

Whats wrong with continuing to build scorpenes under project 75i? Every sub need not have brahmos or similar vl capability ... Exocet/harpoon/klub do allow for decent missile armament.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 09 Sep 2014 06:01

srai wrote: Given how long it takes India to issue RFI, undertake trails, negotiate with the winner, sign the deal, produce them and finally induct them (easily 10 to 20 year process), it makes sense for the armed forces to shore up on existing types ..

It is easier to change the rules and get these decisions fast tracked. After all, what is the massive mandate to BJP for other than to change the utter idiocy?

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 09 Sep 2014 06:07

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

(cc: Admiral designate BRF: Singha

Yeah and this was the earlier reaction

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 0#p1671930

bhavani · Post by **bhavani** » 09 Sep 2014 06:27

The french have suspended the delivery of the three mistrals to Russia, Wouldn't it be good deal to acquire 3 mistrals for 1.7 billions.

I was surprised when russia was able to get 3 mistrals for just 1.7 Billion.

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 09 Sep 2014 06:56

2 of them were supposed to be built in Russia.. and I am not too sure about 1.7 billion price tag...

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 09 Sep 2014 06:57

The French should not be touched with a barge pole after they have canceled the dilivery of the ships already paid for.

bhavani · Post by **bhavani** » 09 Sep 2014 07:06

Pratyush wrote:The French should not be touched with a barge pole after they have canceled the dilivery of the ships already paid for.

2 of them are ready for delivery and if the french cancel the contract, we can pick up 2 ready made top class amphibous ships with no wait time.

The french are under pressure from UK, USA and all the assorted Euro countries. No body would oppose the ships being sold to us.

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 09 Sep 2014 07:14

Pratyush wrote:The French should not be touched with a barge pole after they have canceled the dilivery of the ships already paid for.

USA also did the same for Pakistan for F-16s (Pressler Amendment)

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 09 Sep 2014 07:24

The 2 are different situations. The US did for internal reasons. The French are doing it for the external reasons.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 09 Sep 2014 08:26

pratyush ji after pokhran 2 the french did not shut their door for us , didn't they ?
@bhabani , the low cost tag for mistral if true is because it was not off the shelf buy for russia, it was more of a jv between french and ruskis as the later have state policy of not buying any foreign hardware.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 09 Sep 2014 08:31

"Suspended",not cancelled. Plus,NATO ,under US pressure,plans to induct them to use them against Russia (!) if they can afford it.

Our amphibs should be built to a suitable design in a pvt. yard,in modules for quick delivery,as CSL will have to undertake the follow on larger carriers. After the Misrtal fiasco,where France surrendered to an impotent O'Bumbler,even more disgracefully than in WW2 to Hitler's blitzkrieg,bringing to mind the famous quote by De Gaulle about "governing a country that has 246 varieties of cheeses?"

If Marie Le Pen becomes pres.,things will change dramatically in France.She is anti-Immigrant and will not indulge in votebank politics which keeps the socialists in power.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 09 Sep 2014 09:24

What the french did 17 years ago is immaterial. What matters is what they have done today and under what reasons. If the same situation is repeated vis a vi India. You are going to see a repeat of the Minstral saga.

So thanks but no thanks, the lesson is that whole of the west cannot be relied for critical capacity building. We must do so on our own or through the efforts of the like minded states.