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

Who will win the P75I program?

  • L&T and Navantia

    Votes: 7 35.0%
  • MDL and TKMS

    Votes: 6 30.0%
  • It will get canceled eventually

    Votes: 7 35.0%

  • Total voters
    20

marich01

Senior member
Aug 17, 2022
2,768
3,616
India
Taking bets now. Will Turks build a indigenous submarine before we licence build a foreign design ?


Likely as they fight war more often & actively interested in both military expansion & export opportunity. So compared to us their commitment is turning out way more absolute.
I absolutely do not understand how Govt keep losing the initiative shown after 2019, towing the Aatmanirbharta line as the only parameter & not considering time as an important factor. Lots of fund released for idex challenge etc but same high level funding should be applied to DRDO & other labs as well, those which have to cater for both research & pension in its budgets & the pension scheme takes away the research activity fund. Read a few days ago about parliament being reminded of lack of funding compared to GDP. This is the state of things.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Ginvincible

Bon Plan

Senior member
Dec 1, 2017
2,880
1,396
France
Taking bets now. Will Turks build a indigenous submarine before we licence build a foreign design ?

One main difference is that Turkey is no more a real democracy. Erdogan can use as he wants money to built weapons when his people is starving and see an official 66% inflation rate on 8 months (and unofficially more than 160%).

Another difference is the unrivaled indian bureaucraty ...
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
6,043
6,261
Bangalore
One main difference is that Turkey is no more a real democracy. Erdogan can use as he wants money to built weapons when his people is starving and see an official 66% inflation rate on 8 months (and unofficially more than 160%).

Another difference is the unrivaled indian bureaucraty ...
Let's see how long the good run of Turkey continues. We know it's one serious conflict away from getting its whole nation whopped and losing Constantinople to Greeks.
 

Ginvincible

Well-Known member
Dec 5, 2017
567
560
Ohio
Taking bets now. Will Turks build a indigenous submarine before we licence build a foreign design ?


why do you ask questions you know the answer to? India's procurement is world famous for its lethargy and corruption. Despite all the talk about Turkey's democratic backsliding, inept monetary policy and increasing social backwardness the Turks actually take defense procurement, especially indigenous ones, seriously.
 

marich01

Senior member
Aug 17, 2022
2,768
3,616
India
AIP system current status shown, ToT handed over

FfhmXKaaYAAEpCr
 

Amarante

Senior member
Jun 22, 2021
1,257
1,270
La Défense, France
Is there a curse with Germano-South Korean submarines?

Between 1/the problems with the cables and inverter modules in the propulsion system of ROKN's KSS-2 Son Won-Il (ze German Type-214 mod.), 2/and TNI-AL's Nagapasa Class, which are KSS-1 Chang Bogo (ze GermanType-209 mod.), which do not meet the technical specifications of the design brief and are not operational...

nb: DSME, with its Type-209 mod. (Chang Bogo Class) is in the running for a contract in the Philippines. In competition with NavalGroup and its Scorpene. Good Luck! :LOL:
 

Amarante

Senior member
Jun 22, 2021
1,257
1,270
La Défense, France
Exocet_SM39-submarine-launched-variant.jpg

(indomiliter (Indonesia), oct.18)
MBDA delivers Exocet MM40 Block 3c anti-ship missile, more resistant to jamming and able to sort out targets

MBDA Missile Systems, a renowned missile manufacturer based in France, is said to be delivering the first unit of its latest anti-ship missile, the Exocet MM40 Block 3c to the French Navy (Marine Nationale) in December 2022. What are its advantages?

Quoted from Navalnews.com (17/10/2022), the 2023 defence budget request document published last week states that the Exocet MM40 Block 3c missile will be delivered in December 2022. This latest generation of Exocet was originally planned to be delivered in 2021. The latest budget document shows that only 4 missiles will be delivered this year, with an additional 31 MM40 Block 3c missiles to be delivered in 2023. The total number of missiles ordered by the French Navy is 55 units.

Interestingly, the French Ministry of Armed Forces also ordered 45 units of "MM40 Block 3c kits", the first of which (four in total) will be delivered in September next year. The MM40 Block 3c kit will be used to convert the MM40 Block 3 missile into the latest MM40 Block 3c variant.

Compared to the MM40 Block 3 variant (which is also used by the Indonesian Navy), the "Block 3c" variant is equipped with a new digital RF (radio frequency) seeker produced by Thales. The "c" label on this anti-ship missile means coherent. The most important benefit of Coherent Radar Processing is the ability to distinguish relatively small speed differences (which correspond to small differences in phase).

This coherent target processing technology offers Doppler resolution/estimation and provides less interference and signal/noise benefits compared to non-coherent processing.

In principle, the Exocet MM40 Block 3c is more resistant to the latest jamming systems and may (at least on paper) even be able to recognise surface ships, thanks to the use of advanced waveforms: This means that the seeker system will potentially be able to recognise a targeted ship within a group of ships and impact a specific area of the target.

The above advantages are already achieved by modern anti-ship missiles such as LRASM (Long Range Anti-Ship Missile) and NSM (Naval Strike Missile), but both use infrared seekers.

While the Block 3 upgrade of the Exocet brings a longer range (200 Km) thanks to the turbojet engine and the ability to strike coastal targets, thanks to GPS navigation support, this battle proven missile uses the same RF seeker as the Exocet Block 2.

Similar upgrades to the air-to-surface Exocet variant AM39, are not planned so far. However, the SM39 submarine-launched variant may receive a seeker system upgrade. Both missiles have received system digitisation upgrades to the AM39 Block2 Mod2 variant standard for Rafale F3, and the SM39 Block2 Mod2 standard for Suffren Class submarines (Barracuda SSN programme). A coherent seeker upgrade could take the missile further to the SM39 Block 3c variant.

The Exocet MM40 Block 3 is powered by a NAMMO-made Turbomeca TR-40/263 turbojet with rocket booster, this 780 kg, 6 metre long missile can cruise at high subsonic speeds. This anti-ship missile can effectively strike targets at a distance of 200 Km. /deepl
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
6,043
6,261
Bangalore

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
6,043
6,261
Bangalore
The sub deal lacks competitors, but what's the problem with MRFA?
Lack of competitors is a result.

The core issue in both programs is 3 pronged

1. Failed method of procurement.
2. Un achievable goals in ToT.
3. Resulting in higher than needed funds to execute them.

Combine these 3, it brings up a lot of political capital to execute them.

And 2024 elections.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
19,302
14,033
India
Lack of competitors is a result.

The core issue in both programs is 3 pronged

1. Failed method of procurement.
2. Un achievable goals in ToT.
3. Resulting in higher than needed funds to execute them.

Combine these 3, it brings up a lot of political capital to execute them.

And 2024 elections.

I don't believe all three are a problem for MRFA though. The first one has been overhauled to include the OEM in the process, it's on par with international standards. All OEMs are offering far more than the ToT requirement. The French are offering 70%, and the Americans and Europeans are willing to match that. Cost is something we have to pay to get the capability, there's no way around it. Hence a tender to get the best price, a GTG is unrealistic here.

Only the second one is a problem for the sub deal. The procurement method is untested and risky. But we have to pay quite a lot for it, especially for 50% ToT. Quite a bit of the sub will be indigeneous.

I think the only issue is the lack of OEMs for the sub deal. MRFA has 4 viable competitors.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
19,302
14,033
India
There was France, Russia, Sweden, Germany and South Korea. Who do you think is missing?
Spain? Turkey? Those two have no functional submarines, let alone AIP.

Initial OEMs were from France, Spain, Russia, Sweden, Germany and South Korea.

All contenders have problems with unlimited liabilities and penalties, which is being fixed.

Sweden left saying they don't plan on giving 50% ToT.

France and Russia don't have an operational AIP, so they quit.

Spain may not be able to meet the AIP deadline and may be forced to quit. But they have a sub in the water.

Only Korea has a functioning AIP and can meet deadlines realistically.

Germany warned to leave saying the RFP time is too short to design a new sub, they wanted 12 months. They came back once the tender was extended. I suppose the 6-month extension wasn't enough, so it's been extended by 9 more months. It should be enough. As long as Germany is willing to participate, we will have two contenders with functioning AIPs, so the tender can proceed as usual.

If Germany withdraws, we may have to start an MRCBF type deal between Japan and Korea. Japan may start weapons exports after the war.
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
6,043
6,261
Bangalore
I don't believe all three are a problem for MRFA though. The first one has been overhauled to include the OEM in the process, it's on par with international standards. All OEMs are offering far more than the ToT requirement. The French are offering 70%, and the Americans and Europeans are willing to match that. Cost is something we have to pay to get the capability, there's no way around it. Hence a tender to get the best price, a GTG is unrealistic here.

Only the second one is a problem for the sub deal. The procurement method is untested and risky. But we have to pay quite a lot for it, especially for 50% ToT. Quite a bit of the sub will be indigeneous.

I think the only issue is the lack of OEMs for the sub deal. MRFA has 4 viable competitors.
If so, they what according to you, may be a possible timeline for RFP of MMRCA and negotiation and signing period , also for P75I.

I will just bookmark it, and if you turn out right, then you can say "I said so" or the other way round.
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
6,043
6,261
Bangalore
There was France, Russia, Sweden, Germany and South Korea. Who do you think is missing?
Spain? Turkey? Those two have no functional submarines, let alone AIP.
Why is no one questioning the very basic problem?

That is requirement of proven AIP?

We are no USA!!!!! We cannot afford two systems doing the same task!!!!

We are going to pay x amount to get DRDO AIP operational

And Y amount to get ToT/licence of a foreign AIP.

Ideally we should scrap one.

If DRDO AIP is likely to be delivered according to the promises, then why import a foreign one ?

And if its not, then why not cancel it altogether?

Which nation in the world operates two different types of AIP?

China has some 30 AIP submarines I think, all have Sterling cycle based systems.

And the moment (if DRDO AIP is as good as claimed) cancel the requirement of a foreign AIP, we get the French back on. And all the requirements, the CMS, the Cylindrical Array, pump jet, everything comes.

By the way France's 2nd gen AIP is more ahead in development than our own AIP.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Amarante