Indian Naval Discussion

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 12 Jul 2010 10:29

Even if it will only be two numbers it is imperative that a private yard be involved. Has to be L&T with its experience with the nuke sub.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Jul 2010 10:35

Looking at the way MOD have planned to build the P-75I ( 3 at MDL , 1 at HSL and 2 in private yard ) the P-75I has all the elements in it to delay this more then P-75 Scorpene program.

Niether HSL or Private yard has any experience in building conventional submarine they will be building those skills from ground up which has built in delay switch in it due to learning curve , if they manage to do a good job with it is another subject.

MDL even with the experience that it has building conventional SSK is too busy in building 6 scorpene and they already showed how bad they are with managing the project by delaying the program till 2015 and beyond for the first submarine inspite of tall promises.

Since IN is already facing a sort of sub crunch with depeleting operational strength and the first P-75 program is already delayed , it would be prudent to build the first 3 subs in foreign yard and the remaining 3 in a selected private Indian Yard like L&T which has some contribution in ATV program , though they may get delayed as they do not have any experience in building conventional SSK they will certainly do a good job.

All this 3 yards affair to build just 6 conventional sub , 2 PSU and 1 Private is a classic fight and lobbing between PSU , IN and Private players and this will significantly affect the operational strength of IN

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Jul 2010 10:39

I agree, now that they have left the acquisition for so long there is little option but to buy from abroad else IN's sub fleet numbers go down. a horrible pattern is emerging.

akshay · Post by **akshay** » 12 Jul 2010 12:43

The number of subs will not come down ..see the foxtrot usage..but yes overall quality if the underwater nw will suffer.But it might be a strategy all the same ..go slow on diesel subs while quitely build Arihant class to 3 nos.

I think by 2015 we will have these 16 subs along with 2 Arihant class and atleast 2 Scorpenes

If we looking at China , Arihant is what we need and what will work. Infact conventional IN is of little use. For Pak, 50 Su-30 with Brahmos, Delhi/Kolkotta Class & Kilo, its a first strike planned like Karachi attack.

ManuJ · Post by **ManuJ** » 12 Jul 2010 13:13

Although at first glance the decision to split the order amongst 3 shipyards seems insane, it is being done to build capacities and skills. As the previous poster said, neither HSL nor L&T (assuming that's the private shipyard) has any experience building conventional submarines, but you have to start somewhere. And better now than never. Both yards in question have had a part in building the nuclear sub, so general sub-building skills (e.g. precise welding) are already present. It shouldn't take them too long to adapt their skills for a line of conventional submarines. Also, there is a need to retain their talent and keep it fully occupied, when it is not busy building nuclear submarines.
It is a little confusing why MDL is also getting the order, probably to minimize risks? MDL also doesn't have a piece of the nuclear submarine action. It probably does mean that the number of Scorpenes will be limited to 6 unless there is a delay in getting this off the floor.
It may have been ideal if MDL was the sole public shipyard specializing in conventional submarines, along with one private shipyard, with HSL specializing in nuclear submarines. But since the nuclear submarine tasks are split amongst the private shipyard and HSL, the conventional submarine order has been given the same treatment.
Highly unlikely that any future IN submarine will be built abroad.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Jul 2010 14:42

It is better to have core competencies built at 2 yards (Public/Private) to build conventional/ nuclear submarine since the infrastructure required and trained man power needed to build a sub is available at a premium and takes decades to build.

Even with the experience that MDL has it has taken them a long time to retain and build their skills and still they did a bad job of Project Managing P-75

A delay of even a year with depleting fleet strength and taking in to account availability of fleet is a dent in operational rediness. Even in US they have 2 builders that develop nuclear submarine.

Spreading them across many PSU and Pvt Sectors will just delay such projects and risk the quality which is at a premium for submarine building , this is Socialism and not smart planning

We need very few quality builders who can deliver project on time and budget , we do not need more builders who do nothing better then delay the project and do a shoddy job.

Kanan · Post by **Kanan** » 12 Jul 2010 15:54

Austin wrote:

MDL even with the experience that it has building conventional SSK is too busy in building 6 scorpene and they already showed how bad they are with managing the project by delaying the program till 2015 and beyond for the first submarine inspite of tall promises.

Since IN is already facing a sort of sub crunch with depeleting operational strength and the first P-75 program is already delayed , it would be prudent to build the first 3 subs in foreign yard and the remaining 3 in a selected private Indian Yard like L&T which has some contribution in ATV program , though they may get delayed as they do not have any experience in building conventional SSK they will certainly do a good job.

Good Point!I have to agree!

But 50,000 crores for six SSKs! Compared to the Scorpene Deal doesn't it seem HUUUGE? Any idea why such a huge estimate? More THAN DOUBLE the scorpene deal!

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 12 Jul 2010 15:58

Two submarine builders should be enough, one of them building both nuclear and conventional subs, other dealing with conventional subs and providing for repairs and upgrades. Soviet Union had 5 at the peak, but that was way too much for the economy.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Jul 2010 16:09

I am a hardboiled practical individual,with the eyes on the stars,but with feet firmly on the ground.It's great wanting the "latest and bestest",but as the saying goes,"a bird in the hand is worth two...".You get the pic.What the IN needs right now is another 6 subs that can fight a war if and when it is thrust upon us.The Scorpene's deal certainly had a "sting" in it for the IN.Overdue and overpriced.If one considers the cost of the lease of the Akula for 10 years and that of Russian subs ,ships,naval weaponry,etc.,when compared with those from the west,there is significant financial gain.However,as we are seeing these days,Russian subs even of the Kilo class are still being ordered by many navies of the developing world.Vietnam being the latest.The DRDO/IN wants Brahmos on a sub,but none are available,therefore for the forseeable future,Klub will have to suffice.Integrating these two missiles,Klub and Brahmos with a western sub imposes certain practical difficulties,perhaps Russian reluctance to allow western yards to acquire their secrets thereby,etc.For the moment,it would be prudent for us to acquire 6 Amur class subs,supposedly cheaper than Kilos,perhaps with Brahmos and an AIP fuel cell module.This can be achieved as I've said before by also buying another 4 AIP U-214s to complement our existing U-209s.If we are not interested in MESMA as an AIP option,then it is of no use pursuing French subs in the future and we would be best off with Russian and German sub tech,especially as our ATV has a significant amount of Russian sub tech inside it and the majority of our subs are of Russian origin which have served us very well in the past.

The US is using western diesel/AIP subs for studying how to fight in the littorals.The USN is just too devoted (US naval sub-builders lobby) to the Rickover formula of possessing a nuclear navy and will instead equip its nuclear subs with UUVs for ops in littoral waters.Supporting conventional/AIP subs far from home requires bases abroad and sub-support vehicles,impractical for it.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Jul 2010 16:36

Bang for Buck there is no sub like Kilo !

Who told know Amur will be cheaper then Kilo , Amur is not been exported yet so cost remains unknown

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 12 Jul 2010 16:42

Rahul M wrote:I have to say I'm quite disappointed with the submarine affair, it is shaping up to be yet another arty acquisition saga. this tender etc could easily have been floated 5 years back, wth did they have to wait this long ?

Rahul M wrote:I agree, now that they have left the acquisition for so long there is little option but to buy from abroad else IN's sub fleet numbers go down. a horrible pattern is emerging.

Sir, in my humble opinion, i believe they are acting as part of the plan. I think a small part of the plan was revelaed in not so ubiquitous manner. Though whatever i can understand may be considered as part of my imagination, i duly feel that one should give enough time to see the plan evolving. And it is premature to discuss anything on that now.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 12 Jul 2010 16:53

ManuJ wrote:Although at first glance the decision to split the order amongst 3 shipyards seems insane, it is being done to build capacities and skills.

Yes, probably true.

As the previous poster said, neither HSL nor L&T (assuming that's the private shipyard) has any experience building conventional submarines, but you have to start somewhere. And better now than never. Both yards in question have had a part in building the nuclear sub, so general sub-building skills (e.g. precise welding) are already present. It shouldn't take them too long to adapt their skills for a line of conventional submarines. Also, there is a need to retain their talent and keep it fully occupied, when it is not busy building nuclear submarines.

You maybe right.

It is a little confusing why MDL is also getting the order, probably to minimize risks? MDL also doesn't have a piece of the nuclear submarine action. It probably does mean that the number of Scorpenes will be limited to 6 unless there is a delay in getting this off the floor.
It may have been ideal if MDL was the sole public shipyard specializing in conventional submarines, along with one private shipyard, with HSL specializing in nuclear submarines. But since the nuclear submarine tasks are split amongst the private shipyard and HSL, the conventional submarine order has been given the same treatment.

what is the difference between building conventional and nuclear sub in terms of MDL building capabilities ?

Highly unlikely that any future IN submarine will be built abroad.

You maybe right.

narayana · Post by **narayana** » 12 Jul 2010 17:03

what will happen now to 6+6 for same price offer of scorpene?will we stick to only 6 Scorpenes and not use the addl 6 offer

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Jul 2010 17:19

Aus,Amur according to manufacturers Rubin is cheaper than Kilo (perhaps being single-hulled) and has a far better sonar pefromance,but I agree with you that the "Kilo" delivers a "ton" of capability! I think what we need are two types of conventional AIP subs,one multi-role even for open ocean going ops,where the Kilo has performed very well,and another for littoral warfare,HUKs,with AIP ,that can operate off an enemy's coastline and pick off his subs at will.It needs to be exceptionally stealthy,high endurance and possess excellent anti-sub weaponry (both 533mm and larger TTs for Shkval),possibly even carrying a couple of UUVs which can penetrate enemy defences.

We also need to increase our anti-sub warfare capability in our surface fleet.Apart from MCMs for dealing with sub laid mines,the smaller patrol craft can be fitted with ASW VDS sonars as in the Pauk class.The Russians standardised upon one sonar for their ASW helos and smaller patrol craft/Grisha corvettes,giving them during the Cold War an excellent combined capability.There will be an increase in usage of UUVs in the future and we should be able to equip all patrol craft larger than 500t with small sonars and lightweight TTs.The increase in planned naval bases will impose a larger task for littoral ASW for the IN and a cost effective way to achieve this is to design multi-role smaller craft.The P-28s dedicated ASW corvettes/lt.frigates,will be too few and too costly to sanitise our coastline and a far greater number of multi-role helos are required.If our Kora/Khukri class ,which has a helo deck,had an ASW sonar fitted on its stern like the smaller Pauks,plus lt.weight TTs,along with 8 instead of 16 SSMs,they could've been formidable multirole corvettes.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Jul 2010 17:38

Philip wrote:Aus,Amur according to manufacturers Rubin is cheaper than Kilo (perhaps being single-hulled) and has a far better sonar pefromance,but I agree with you that the "Kilo" delivers a "ton" of capability!

I do not know what version of Amur Rubin claims is cheaper then Kilo there are available in range of displacement from Amur 950 to 1850(Russian Lada )

As SNaik was mentioning on another board "the comparative trials have shown them to be 6-8 times (that's 7.7 - 9 dB) quieter than late 877/636"

A double hull or single hull wont affect the prices as much as the equipment and system that make a submarine and make her silent ,the last bit on silencing any sub cost much more then all combined together.

May be SNaik can shed some light on the cost

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 12 Jul 2010 18:28

Indian Aircraft Carrier construction on schedule: CSL

In the latest report of Cochin Shipyard Limited, it mentions that the prestigious IAC project is proceeding on schedule with the company completing a large portion of hull block fabrication and erection in the building dock during 2009-10.

-----

50 ships were repaired in the year 2009-10, major works among them being normal refit of INS ‘VIRAAT’, extended short refit of INS ‘TARANGINI”, conversion of Research vessel ‘Sindhu Sankalp’, Medium refit of INS “Nireekshak” and short refit of “INS Jyothi”.

------
The yard commissioned a Small Ship Division in the year 2009-10 for concurrent construction of small commercial ships during the pendency of the Aircraft Carrier construction.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Jul 2010 18:31

Larger surface area,larger anechoic tile costs,extra tonnage,reduced speed,eqpt. costs being more or less the same,will bring down costs nevertheless.

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 12 Jul 2010 19:13

Austin wrote: A double hull or single hull wont affect the prices as much as the equipment and system that make a submarine and make her silent ,the last bit on silencing any sub cost much more then all combined together.

May be SNaik can shed some light on the cost

That's true, that a very significant portion of the costs of a modern sub will be comprized of the costs for equipment and weapons, nevertheless, Kilo displaces app. 30% more than Lada, which is a significant cost reducer as well.

Nevertheless, 6 subs of Pr.636 cost Vietnam 350 million USD a piece. I really doubt that Amur is going for much lower price.

vic · Post by **vic** » 12 Jul 2010 20:12

I say scrap the second line of 75I and go in for more ATVs

kit · Post by **kit** » 12 Jul 2010 21:23

I suppose the 50K crore estimate includes infrastructure costs as well.The details should be interesting since IN is the most 'indigenised' of the three services

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 12 Jul 2010 21:44

PHOTO: Underwater Launch Canister For K-15 Sagarika Missile - LIVEFIST

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 13 Jul 2010 11:36

Cost and time taken to build ATV N-subs would be far longer and more difficult than acquiring AIP conventional subs of far smaller size.However,the "6 years" estimate before the first sub is commissioned is just far too long.The crucial years are going to the next 4 years,where the US/NATO get shafted in Af-Pak,forced to withdraw "without success" as one western military expert said,just as it did in Vietnam.The need of the hour is immediate remedial measures to beef up our conventional forces to meet possible joint Sino-Pak adventurism,timed to happen when "engineered" internal chaos takes place in J&K and in Naxal dominated states.Since we have just 4 U-209s,upgrading them while acquiring a few more U-214s,perhaps the ones Greece can't pay for and Pak can't get,is one option,while a new line of Brahmos/LR cruise missile equipped AIP subs on a new Russian platform,perhaps Amur,culd be the second line.We would then have the best of French,German and Russian conventional subs in service and then later on design our own design taking the best features of the lot in a new design.Until then,we should focus indigenous development upon perfecting our N-sub capability with the ATV/SSBN and SSGN derivativs as planned.

Here is one interesting report on our future sub p-lans.

Excerpts:
http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/612/

India's Defence Acquisitions Council approves $11 billion for six new submarines

Now the superlative for the country’s biggest defence programme is attributed to Project-75 India (P-75I) which is to provide the Navy with six next generation diesel-electric submarines. For this purpose, the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) , chaired by Defence Minister A K Antony, recently approved the allocation of Rs 50,000 crore, equalling $11 billion. While according to the DAC, three of the six submarines will be constructed at the Mazagon Docks (MDL) in Mumbai and one at Hindustan Shipyard Ltd (HSL) in Visakhapatnam, the “Times of India” yesterday reported that the two remaining submarines will either be imported or directly or constructed at a private shipyard in India. All work is to be assisted by a foreign collaborator.

There is no specific timeline for the programme, yet. However the programme will be subject to a certain time pressure, as it is estimated that in 2015 the Navy will only be able to operate half of its current fleet of 15 ageing diesel-electric submarines. An Indian official told the “Times of India” that he hopes, the navy will receive its first submarine under P-75I in six to seven years. In light of an almost three-year delay and increasing costs in the ongoing Project-75 for six French Scorpene-class submarines, to be constructed at the MDL shipyard, it remains to be seen if this is an ambitious schedule.

India’s next-generation conventionally powered submarines are planned to feature improved stealthy and land-attack capabilities. This will include the integration of an air-independent propulsion (AIP) system, allowing submarines to remain submerged for very long periods. Conventional submarines without an AIP system have to surface regularly in order to refresh the oxygen in the submarine and to recharge their batteries.

In parallel to sustaining an adequate fleet of conventionally powered submarines, India is continuing its efforts to introduce its first nuclear-powered submarine. The Russian-built Akula-II class attack submarine, dubbed K-152 Nerpa, will be leased for ten years as of October and the indigenously developed and constructed INS Arihant is scheduled to enter service by early-2012.

It is obvious that any country spending such amounts for the procurement of new defence technology will likely shift the military balance in the region. To what extent India’s next-generation submarine fleet may create such a shifting is questionable. The fact remains, that they will provide the Indian Navy with a significant range of new capabilities to the Indian Navy; a fact which worries countries having their own interests in the region, including China. Li Jie, a researcher at the Chinese Naval Research Institute of the PLA Navy, told the Global Times: “Submarines have always been the Indian Navy’s weakness. [...] Those new submarines, along with India’s aircraft carrier fleet, will boost the country’s presence in the Indian Ocean and change the military climate in Asia.” However, a lot of water will flow down the Ganges until the Indian Navy will have an operational naval fleet, as described by Li, which may shape the security-political environment of the region.

By Nicolas von Kospoth, Managing Editor

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 13 Jul 2010 17:45

Nerpa will be equiped with Okeanpribor MGK-400EM-04 digital sonar. Signal processing is based on 3 Baget 25-04.02 processors with analog-digital converter modules consisting of 48 12-bit converters each. New piezoelectric ceramics are used in elements of both passive and active array of the sonar allowing to double the number of passive elements and raise the selectivity of the array by 3 dB. The active array has it's weight reduced by 250 kg with increased power output, introducing transistor oscillators with pulse-width modulation istead of tiristor oscillators. New array for acoustic coomunication system is introduced providing for NATO standards of communication. Four HF (up to 60 kHz) acoustic signal intercepting arrays are introduced for detection of active acoustic homing torpedoes. All electro-mechanical compensators have been changed to electronic. Control console is designed around Baget 23B-07.01 with two 19-21 inch LCDs (2 consoles) and is linked to BIUS and navigation system.

Simpler versions MGK-400EM (single Baget 25 processor) and MGK-400EM-03 (two processors) for 877EKM and 636 subs respectively.

I am more than convinced that one of the series is installed on Arihant as well.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Jul 2010 18:40

Hmm thats not a good news if MGK-400EM-04 digital sonar is installed on Nerpa rather then the Skat-3 series that comes with Akula then it will be sub par performance for Nerpa

bhart · Post by **bhart** » 13 Jul 2010 19:16

1. Doesn't Arihant have USHUS? Isn't it supposed to be better than the ones on the Kilos?
2. If the Russians are installing a sonar on the Nerpa different from that on their own subs, I think this is a confirmation of sorts that the Nerpa will remain in Indian service beyond the 10 year lease they are talking about currently.

Kanan · Post by **Kanan** » 13 Jul 2010 19:24

Austin wrote:Hmm thats not a good news if MGK-400EM-04 digital sonar is installed on Nerpa rather then the Skat-3 series that comes with Akula then it will be sub par performance for Nerpa

Maybe the Russians don't want sensitive information of their own armoury to fall in western hands! So, they are giving us a different sonar!

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 13 Jul 2010 19:49

As I see it - MGK-400 has been upgraded almost to a MGK-540 standard, that's not bad at all. Anyway, I've heard that actual sonar on Nerpa may be a hybrid - using active/passive array from Skat-3 and processing and control equipment from digital MGK-400.
You'll know soon, Austin

The sonar on first Chakra was also changed to MGK-400 before lease.

kit · Post by **kit** » 13 Jul 2010 21:30

The Russians would be justified in guarding the sonar technology of their front line submarines.Any Navy worth its salt would do the same.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 13 Jul 2010 22:19

Do we have navy bases abroad or plans to build any bases? Places like Singapore, Oman etc.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 13 Jul 2010 22:22

I hope they get a base at cam ranh one day.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 14 Jul 2010 04:50

NextGen Diesel Submarines to be Built in Indian Shipyard
The Indian Express

NextGen Diesel Submarines to be Built in Indian Shipyard
Manu Pubby
Posted online: Wed July 14 2010, 23:56 hrs

New Delhi : In what will give a major boost to indigenous shipbuilding efforts, the Defence Ministry has decided to manufacture the Navy’s next generation diesel submarines at an Indian shipyard with the help of a foreign collaborator. The Navy, at present, is finalising a tender document that will be issued to leading submarine manufacturers across the world for help in the design and construction of six submarines at an Indian shipyard. The cost of the acquisition is pegged at Rs 30,000 Crore.

The recently acquired Hindustan Shipyard Limited (HSL) in Vizag is at the top of the list of Indian shipyards being considered for the order.

While private players will be roped in a major way to supply parts and components for the submarines, the final assembly is likely to be done at a government owned shipyard. Other shipyards, including the Mumbai-based Mazgaon Docks Limited (MDL), which is booked until 2018 for the Scorpene class of submarines, Are Not Available for the Order.

Sources said that MDL, which has gained the maximum expertise in submarine building within the country, will not be utilised for the next generation of submarines as its order book is full.

The order is being highly anticipated as it would not only create infrastructure at the Indian shipyard but will also provide vital technical knowhow to Indian scientists and engineers working on the project. India is also keen to share knowledge and gain expertise on Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) technology required for the next generation of submarines by the Navy. AIP helps conventional submarines to stay underwater in enemy waters for longer periods, making them a deadly and silent adversary.

Amit A · Post by **Amit A** » 14 Jul 2010 06:06

Kakarat wrote:PHOTO: Underwater Launch Canister For K-15 Sagarika Missile - LIVEFIST

Its not wise to show your subs/slbm online. It allows others to gauge/guess the range,capabilities, etc.
Navies of the world keep the subs n related things very secret.
LA class, sea wolf n Vanguard class have only recently been shown on Discovery even though they were designed in 80's. Even these videos were very sanitised.
Just my 2p.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Jul 2010 08:19

but this is just a tube. the pix of shourya are online and dimensions of arihant known by now to the experts. pix of stuff like tomahawks and pershings were released long ago.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 14 Jul 2010 09:27

This looks like a heat exchanger. Are we sure this is what it is supposed to be?

nits · Post by **nits** » 14 Jul 2010 12:29

Indian Navy chief in Sri Lanka, to talk defence ties

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 14 Jul 2010 12:56

Navy hunts for drones to operate underwater

Link - http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 164449.cms

With the Indian armed forces inducting a large number of spy drones and "killer" UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) since the 1999 Kargil conflict, the hunt has now been launched for drones to operate underwater as well.

The Navy has invited proposals from both state-owned and private companies to acquire at least 10 AUVs (autonomous underwater vehicles), which are non-tethered robotic devices driven through water by propulsion systems that are controlled and piloted by onboard computers.

AUVs can be used for MCM (mine counter-measures) operations, oceanographic surveys and specialised mapping, among other tasks.

Advanced AUVs can even be deployed to keep under surveillance protected areas like harbours as well as aid in detection of enemy submarines.

"Apart from being manoeuvrable in three dimensions, the AUVs should be able to carry variable payloads such as high-definition sonars and underwater cameras for surveillance and reconnaissance activities of the seabed," said a Navy official.

"Capable of being launched from small vessels with a maximum weight of 1.5-tonne, the AUVs should be able to operate at depths up to 500 metres for 7-8 hours," he added.

SNaik · Post by **SNaik** » 14 Jul 2010 18:12

Juggi G wrote:NextGen Diesel Submarines to be Built in Indian Shipyard

This sounds much more reasonable than before.

Kanan · Post by **Kanan** » 14 Jul 2010 19:53

The recently acquired Hindustan Shipyard Limited (HSL) in Vizag is at the top of the list of Indian shipyards being considered for the order

Wouldn't it be better if we left the HSL to specialize in what it does now, i.e build SSBNs and SSNs?

Is there any particular problem if a sub is built abroad?

We are buying their stuff and hence doesnt make sense to say we don't trust them! Austin's post is more reasonable than MOD's policies!

Austin wrote:
Since IN is already facing a sort of sub crunch with depeleting operational strength and the first P-75 program is already delayed , it would be prudent to build the first 3 subs in foreign yard and the remaining 3 in a selected private Indian Yard like L&T which has some contribution in ATV program , though they may get delayed as they do not have any experience in building conventional SSK they will certainly do a good job.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 14 Jul 2010 21:27

I think for the 2nd line of submarine we need to let private player play a leading role rather then just becoming a subcontractor to supply components to HSL for assembly.

We should let players like L&T build the entire submarine and give them complete freedom in project managing and subcontracting it.

Evolve a system of rewards and penalty where project are awarded on fixed price and fixed schedule any delay in schedule or overshooting in price should translate into severe penalties , this would induce healthy competition in the system between Private SY and MDL and results of their work would be visible within a decade.

If you involve another Govt SY then eventually it will be another MDL in making and there will be nothing to choose between HSL or MDL.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 14 Jul 2010 21:39

may be L&T is too tied up with ATV and co ? we have to understand that this 6 scorp +6 new is a little under 50% of IN's total requirements. it could be that the best performing pvt co will be given more responsibility in the next batch of orders.