Project 75 India Diesel-electric Submarine Programs (SSK) : Updates and Discussions

Arctic Wolf

Member
Sep 7, 2021
75
45
Odisha
No, they have officially not offered VLS to India.
Which isn't what I disputed. The current offer has no VLS. But since the parent design does have VLS, the offered design would most probably be configurable to accomodate VLS, probably in place of the "greater flexibility" and the "new features".

By the way, is our VLS supposed to fire SLBMs or just Brahmos/Nirbhay? Cuz if the design is similiar in size to the KSS-3, the K-15 would fit in (being similiar in size to the Hyunmoo 4-4). Although understandably, the Koreans put their SLBMs in SSBs out of a lack of immediate-term options, so probably the IN won't go that way.
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
3,795
3,658
Bangalore

By HI Sutton, old but relevant.

Remember Brahmos is 8.4 meters long if we talk of firing it through VLS and will need a 600+ mm torpedo tube is we don't want one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
3,795
3,658
Bangalore
First it was the sweeds, now russians.
SAAB offer was really good. Proven AIP, design with 12 VLS. That was a loss when they pulled out.

Amur1650 or its parent program is riddled with problems , no AIP and only a talk about VLS. (We should know how Russian promises turn out). Them pulling out is irrelevant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker

Hydra

Senior member
May 19, 2020
2,752
1,319
Mumbai
SAAB offer was really good. Proven AIP, design with 12 VLS. That was a loss when they pulled out.

Amur1650 or its parent program is riddled with problems , no AIP and only a talk about VLS. (We should know how Russian promises turn out). Them pulling out is irrelevant.
Yeas, Swedish pull was really an unfortunate event. Any way we ridiculed them & french in past during short range missile tender, this might hace played a role in their decision. Why would some one spend their time on something which never gonna win due to price & political reason?
 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
5,221
8,621
Bangalore

By HI Sutton, old but relevant.

Remember Brahmos is 8.4 meters long if we talk of firing it through VLS and will need a 600+ mm torpedo tube is we don't want one.
There is a seperate project called SLCM for this use case. Expecting navy to put 3 ton cruise missile on an SSK is just unrealistic fanboyism. SK reduced the scope of their offering because IN never asked for it.

SAAB offer was really good. Proven AIP, design with 12 VLS. That was a loss when they pulled out.

Amur1650 or its parent program is riddled with problems , no AIP and only a talk about VLS. (We should know how Russian promises turn out). Them pulling out is irrelevant.
Swedish is very unreliable partner to work with on such high value projects.
Well, apparently the Hyunmoo 4-4 is 10m long, so the sub design could probably accomodate size-wise.
It's a ballistic missile.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,521
10,768
India
Which isn't what I disputed. The current offer has no VLS. But since the parent design does have VLS, the offered design would most probably be configurable to accomodate VLS, probably in place of the "greater flexibility" and the "new features".

If the IN is stubborn about it, it won't win the tender then. There are no redos in tenders. MDL and L&T will have to choose between France and Spain.

Or if one of them chooses the Korean design, they will have to settle the final configuration before replying to the IN's RFP.

By the way, is our VLS supposed to fire SLBMs or just Brahmos/Nirbhay? Cuz if the design is similiar in size to the KSS-3, the K-15 would fit in (being similiar in size to the Hyunmoo 4-4). Although understandably, the Koreans put their SLBMs in SSBs out of a lack of immediate-term options, so probably the IN won't go that way.

CMs only.
 

Hydra

Senior member
May 19, 2020
2,752
1,319
Mumbai
Swedish is very unreliable partner to work with on such high value projects.
First of all they are one if the mmrca/mrfa tender contender. Secondly despite of entry in to a lucrative market like india, saab didn't dump pakistan ( and its a rogue country ) in aews deal.
They are as reliable as french, only money is governing sweeds.
 

Tatvamasi

Senior member
Jan 5, 2018
1,170
1,199
India
First of all they are one if the mmrca/mrfa tender contender. Secondly despite of entry in to a lucrative market like india, saab didn't dump pakistan ( and its a rogue country ) in aews deal.
They are as reliable as french, only money is governing sweeds.
What is the word "sweeds"? Is it something like weeds?
 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
5,221
8,621
Bangalore
Below 2 tons. But Navy will surely want capabilities to fire both.
More like ~1.5 ton. To fire brahmos from SSK? Definitely no. Brahmos-NG is a clear alternative.
First of all they are one if the mmrca/mrfa tender contender. Secondly despite of entry in to a lucrative market like india, saab didn't dump pakistan ( and its a rogue country ) in aews deal.
They are as reliable as french, only money is governing sweeds.
All qualified contenders can bid but will never win.
 

STEPHEN COHEN

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,462
4,579
IMHO, The best will be a kalveri class with DRDO AIP and tech from Baracuda subs on the same assembly line as Kalveri class.

The stand off with China has made the Capabilities to launch SLBM or SLCMs most important

In future We will have to deploy SLBM or SLCM equipped submarines , some 1500 KM away from Chinese coastline
 

A Person

Senior member
Dec 1, 2017
1,007
1,004
A Place
The requirement is for an 8m hull though.
The article from Naval News posted above by @Ankit Kumar shows that three of the four contenders were between 7.1 and 8.5 meters in hull diameter. If the requirement is really for 8m, then only the Barracuda qualifies and you have a single-bidder situation. Which, AFAIK, means that the entire tender will be scrapped and it will have to be replaced by a direct GTG purchase through the strategic partnership route.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
3,795
3,658
Bangalore
The article from Naval News posted above by @Ankit Kumar shows that three of the four contenders were between 7.1 and 8.5 meters in hull diameter. If the requirement is really for 8m, then only the Barracuda qualifies and you have a single-bidder situation. Which, AFAIK, means that the entire tender will be scrapped and it will have to be replaced by a direct GTG purchase through the strategic partnership route.
A follow on for Scorpene or P75I or a g2g, whatever they want to do, do it fast. 🥲
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,521
10,768
India
The article from Naval News posted above by @Ankit Kumar shows that three of the four contenders were between 7.1 and 8.5 meters in hull diameter. If the requirement is really for 8m, then only the Barracuda qualifies and you have a single-bidder situation. Which, AFAIK, means that the entire tender will be scrapped and it will have to be replaced by a direct GTG purchase through the strategic partnership route.

No, it's not a very specific requirement, that's up to the OEM, but it's the anticipated size of the sub to fulfill all the requirements expected. 7.6m would qualify as 8m if it meets the requirements, just not 6m of the Scorpene. "For all the stuff we need, we are expecting an 8m sub" kinda deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker