No, there's nothing related to submarines in the Rafale deal.
But there is a much bigger cooperation planned between India and France, and Rafale deal is simply a small part of it.
Project 75 India Diesel-electric Submarine Programs (SSK) : Updates and Discussions
- Thread starter Himanshu
- Start date
No, there's nothing related to submarines in the Rafale deal.
But there is a much bigger cooperation planned between India and France, and Rafale deal is simply a small part of it.
Can you elaborate on what's the bigger co operation planned? The Safran deal for Kaveri with DRDO came a cropper. It'd be real fun , if the French provide tech assistance to our attempts to build a N reactor and suddenly ask for massive price hike in between.
Yes. I meant the same. During Rafale deal a lot more projects were talked about in which a wide ranging collaboration was discussed. Nuke Subs were part of it since then.
Nuke reactor would be ours only in any case for ssn or ssbn.
Hopefully the 3rd SSBN will show our capabilities.
Hopefully the 3rd SSBN will show our capabilities.
Nuclear technology - civilian reactors mainly, both for power generation and research, like fusion reactors. There's room for SSN and carrier assistance.
Artificial intelligence, quantum computing, supercomputing - We are a massive market here.
Aerospace - Like Dassault's Falcon production line.
Space - Maritime sensors. The French need our assistance in protecting their territories in the IOR and the Pacific.
Defence - Missile R&D and production. Plus cooperation with other stuff that still haven't started, like FRCV, AMCA etc.
Renewable energy.
Sweden out, South Korea in for Rs 45,000 crore submarine project
NEW DELHI:The Rs 45,000 crore submarine project contest for the Indian Navy continues to throw up surprises with the last minute entry of a South Korean shipbuilder and the pulling out of Swedish company Saab after red flagging policy strictures that can potentially place unlimited liabilities on foreign vendors.
South Korean company Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering was extended a late invitation to place technical bids for the contract last month, weeks before a visit by defence minister Rajnath Singh to Seoul.
The company now joints the Naval Group (France), TKMS (Germany), Rosoboronexport (Russia) and Navantia (Spain) as potential foreign partners for the project to build six conventional submarines in India. This is the single largest ‘Make in India’ project.
Sources told ET that SAAB, which has been a key participant in pre-bid meetings with stakeholders over the past two years, informed the ministry in writing that it would not be able to take part in the competition. Conditions in the Strategic Partnership (SP) policy under which the contract is being processed led to this decision.
“It is a decision we have made due to the customers’ requirements regarding the time schedule and the requirements related to the SP policy with its unbalance between our possibilities to have control and our obligations and liabilities. We believe that we have a very competitive product that would suit the customer well, but after having examined the EOI, we have decided not to enter the competition due to the above reasons,” Ola Rignell, chairman & managing director at SAAB India, said in response to an ET query.
Similar concerns have been echoed by other foreign vendors in several meetings with stakeholders, ET has been informed. The primary concern of foreign companies—mandated to partner with selected Indian partners to manufacture the submarines here-—is that the conditions in the policy can potentially place unlimited liabilities in their books.
The SP policy gives the lead responsibility of the contract to the Indian vendor that has to hold at least 51% stake in the project, thus taking away control of the special purpose vehicle (SPV) that is to be formed from the foreign technology partner. This, some industry executives say, has implications as the quality and timelines required cannot be guaranteed by the foreign partner.
NEW DELHI:The Rs 45,000 crore submarine project contest for the Indian Navy continues to throw up surprises with the last minute entry of a South Korean shipbuilder and the pulling out of Swedish company Saab after red flagging policy strictures that can potentially place unlimited liabilities on foreign vendors.
South Korean company Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering was extended a late invitation to place technical bids for the contract last month, weeks before a visit by defence minister Rajnath Singh to Seoul.
The company now joints the Naval Group (France), TKMS (Germany), Rosoboronexport (Russia) and Navantia (Spain) as potential foreign partners for the project to build six conventional submarines in India. This is the single largest ‘Make in India’ project.
Sources told ET that SAAB, which has been a key participant in pre-bid meetings with stakeholders over the past two years, informed the ministry in writing that it would not be able to take part in the competition. Conditions in the Strategic Partnership (SP) policy under which the contract is being processed led to this decision.
“It is a decision we have made due to the customers’ requirements regarding the time schedule and the requirements related to the SP policy with its unbalance between our possibilities to have control and our obligations and liabilities. We believe that we have a very competitive product that would suit the customer well, but after having examined the EOI, we have decided not to enter the competition due to the above reasons,” Ola Rignell, chairman & managing director at SAAB India, said in response to an ET query.
Similar concerns have been echoed by other foreign vendors in several meetings with stakeholders, ET has been informed. The primary concern of foreign companies—mandated to partner with selected Indian partners to manufacture the submarines here-—is that the conditions in the policy can potentially place unlimited liabilities in their books.
The SP policy gives the lead responsibility of the contract to the Indian vendor that has to hold at least 51% stake in the project, thus taking away control of the special purpose vehicle (SPV) that is to be formed from the foreign technology partner. This, some industry executives say, has implications as the quality and timelines required cannot be guaranteed by the foreign partner.
South Korea is promoting a derivative of TKMS product... They have too few technical and cooperation experience. Maybe another time.
Sweden product was not mature. Not a surprise.
The deal is between France, Germany, Russia. And specially France and Germany (russian product is old. A Kilo derivativ)
Last edited:
Following The Commissioning Of INS Khanderi, What Is Naval Group’s Outlook In India?
Project 75-India is due to be the follow-on of the Kalvari-class. Six new submarines are due to be built in an Indian shipyard under Make In India, meaning that at least 50% of the added value has to be produced in India. At the origin of P75 and P75I, the Indian Navy wanted 24 conventional submarines from two different foreign manufacturers, which could have ended Naval Group’s hopes on the P75I.
But the considerable delays in submarine procurement in India offers new opportunities for the French group. Indeed, multiplication of foreign acquisitions and TOT could only help indigenous designs if the programs succeed one another in a timely fashion. When MDL started the production of the Kalvari-class, the knowledge acquired while building the Shishumar-class in the 1980s was already fading away.
Two of the four Shishumar-class Type 209-1500 undergoing maintenance and repair tasks in Mumbai late September. If two Type 209 were build at MDL, the first two of class were directly delivered from Germany in the early 1980s.
On the contrary, developing a strategic long term partnership with a single OEM could lead to a fast growing local industry and a successful indigenisation program, just like the South Korean KSS-I, KSS-II and KSS-III programs.
Last April, the Indian Navy has issued an Expression of Interest for six submarines under the P75I project. France’s Naval Group, Russsia’s Rosoboronexport, Germany’s TyssenKrupp and Sweden’s Saab are the main contenders in the tender. But the choice of the shipyard is also a major political and industrial concern in this project.
Compared to P75, the P75I submarines will have to be bigger ships, with AIP propulsion, the ability to carry a dozen cruise missiles alongside the torpedoes and anti-ship missiles. Such requirements made the Scorpène unsuitable for the P75I.
One of the nine remaining Kilo-type submarines of the Indian Navy seen at Mumbai Naval Base. Ideally, the future P75I submarines could be even bigger than the Kilo and stealthier than the Scorpène-type, with longer duration at sea and far greater weaponry.
Naval Group is therefore thinking about a whole new design for the Project 75I. As Naval News learned from Naval Group officials, “it will neither be a stretched Scorpène derivative, nor a Barracuda family derivative”.
French proposal for P75I could then be a new design displacing around 3,000 tons specifically adapted for Indian Navy needs.
While the Scorpène is a best seller in the 2,000 tons-category, the Barracuda design is in a league of its own, in the +5,000 tons-category. A new 3,000 tons ship could fill a gap in Naval Group products family and allow the French company to compete with the Russian Lada-class,Japanese Sōryū-class, Chinese Yuan-class or even Spanish S-80 Plus design.
The nuclear powered Suffren-class in France and conventional powered Attack-class in Australia are both part of the Barracuda family, which is also proposed to the Dutch Navy. Those submarines are in the 4000-5500 tons categories, too heavy for the P75I. ©Naval Group
It is still unclear if such a new design, if selected, will be made solely by Naval Group’s teams or in cooperation with Indian shipbuilders.
Nevertheless, Naval Group officials confirmed that, in order to achieve the 50% of MII, the TOT can’t focus solely on design work and mechanical production. The transfer of technology will then have to include the Combat Management System that is currently one of the key features of Naval Group submarines.
“On P75I, we are well placed to be selected by the Indian Navy. The entire P75 program went very well and we are now partnering with the Navy for the maintenance and repair of all the Kalvari-class submarines. After what was accomplished on the P75, we are the only company in the world to have demonstrate complete TOT on a major submarine program.”
Olivier de la Bourdonnaye – Director of Programs, Naval Group – met in Mumbai, September 28, 2019.
Following the commissioning of INS Khanderi, what is Naval Group's outlook in India? - Naval News
Project 75-India is due to be the follow-on of the Kalvari-class. Six new submarines are due to be built in an Indian shipyard under Make In India, meaning that at least 50% of the added value has to be produced in India. At the origin of P75 and P75I, the Indian Navy wanted 24 conventional submarines from two different foreign manufacturers, which could have ended Naval Group’s hopes on the P75I.
But the considerable delays in submarine procurement in India offers new opportunities for the French group. Indeed, multiplication of foreign acquisitions and TOT could only help indigenous designs if the programs succeed one another in a timely fashion. When MDL started the production of the Kalvari-class, the knowledge acquired while building the Shishumar-class in the 1980s was already fading away.
Two of the four Shishumar-class Type 209-1500 undergoing maintenance and repair tasks in Mumbai late September. If two Type 209 were build at MDL, the first two of class were directly delivered from Germany in the early 1980s.
On the contrary, developing a strategic long term partnership with a single OEM could lead to a fast growing local industry and a successful indigenisation program, just like the South Korean KSS-I, KSS-II and KSS-III programs.
Last April, the Indian Navy has issued an Expression of Interest for six submarines under the P75I project. France’s Naval Group, Russsia’s Rosoboronexport, Germany’s TyssenKrupp and Sweden’s Saab are the main contenders in the tender. But the choice of the shipyard is also a major political and industrial concern in this project.
Compared to P75, the P75I submarines will have to be bigger ships, with AIP propulsion, the ability to carry a dozen cruise missiles alongside the torpedoes and anti-ship missiles. Such requirements made the Scorpène unsuitable for the P75I.
One of the nine remaining Kilo-type submarines of the Indian Navy seen at Mumbai Naval Base. Ideally, the future P75I submarines could be even bigger than the Kilo and stealthier than the Scorpène-type, with longer duration at sea and far greater weaponry.
Naval Group is therefore thinking about a whole new design for the Project 75I. As Naval News learned from Naval Group officials, “it will neither be a stretched Scorpène derivative, nor a Barracuda family derivative”.
French proposal for P75I could then be a new design displacing around 3,000 tons specifically adapted for Indian Navy needs.
While the Scorpène is a best seller in the 2,000 tons-category, the Barracuda design is in a league of its own, in the +5,000 tons-category. A new 3,000 tons ship could fill a gap in Naval Group products family and allow the French company to compete with the Russian Lada-class,Japanese Sōryū-class, Chinese Yuan-class or even Spanish S-80 Plus design.
The nuclear powered Suffren-class in France and conventional powered Attack-class in Australia are both part of the Barracuda family, which is also proposed to the Dutch Navy. Those submarines are in the 4000-5500 tons categories, too heavy for the P75I. ©Naval Group
It is still unclear if such a new design, if selected, will be made solely by Naval Group’s teams or in cooperation with Indian shipbuilders.
Nevertheless, Naval Group officials confirmed that, in order to achieve the 50% of MII, the TOT can’t focus solely on design work and mechanical production. The transfer of technology will then have to include the Combat Management System that is currently one of the key features of Naval Group submarines.
“On P75I, we are well placed to be selected by the Indian Navy. The entire P75 program went very well and we are now partnering with the Navy for the maintenance and repair of all the Kalvari-class submarines. After what was accomplished on the P75, we are the only company in the world to have demonstrate complete TOT on a major submarine program.”
Olivier de la Bourdonnaye – Director of Programs, Naval Group – met in Mumbai, September 28, 2019.
Following the commissioning of INS Khanderi, what is Naval Group's outlook in India? - Naval News
An India-specific design from France is a very good idea. 'Cause the Scorpene wouldn't have won due to lower threshold of capability, and the Barracuda was weak from the price point. Something in between would be enough. Now I'm fine with Sweden's exit. At least the French offer will be competitive with the Swede offer.
This will likely be the Korean offer. Gotta see if the French design will exceed it.
The biggest version is actually a pretty big sub, should easily be over 4200T. And has space for 10 VLS. Pretty close to the 12 that we need. The current Korean design has 6 VLS at 3800T. Others are yet to come up with an equivalent design outside paper designs. So the Korean offer is the most mature.
So, as it stands today...
Sweden - Got scared away by the liabilities clause.
Russia - Their Lada is nada. They have a new next gen Project Kalina, so let's see where it goes.
Germany - Only a paper design.
France - Not even a paper design.
Korea - Already ready to induct a version that will more or less meet IN's requirements.
This will likely be the Korean offer. Gotta see if the French design will exceed it.
The biggest version is actually a pretty big sub, should easily be over 4200T. And has space for 10 VLS. Pretty close to the 12 that we need. The current Korean design has 6 VLS at 3800T. Others are yet to come up with an equivalent design outside paper designs. So the Korean offer is the most mature.
So, as it stands today...
Sweden - Got scared away by the liabilities clause.
Russia - Their Lada is nada. They have a new next gen Project Kalina, so let's see where it goes.
Germany - Only a paper design.
France - Not even a paper design.
Korea - Already ready to induct a version that will more or less meet IN's requirements.
Scorpene was developped only for export. It's a success.An India-specific design from France is a very good idea. 'Cause the Scorpene wouldn't have won due to lower threshold of capability, and the Barracuda was weak from the price point. Something in between would be enough. Now I'm fine with Sweden's exit. At least the French offer will be competitive with the Swede offer.
This will likely be the Korean offer. Gotta see if the French design will exceed it.
The biggest version is actually a pretty big sub, should easily be over 4200T. And has space for 10 VLS. Pretty close to the 12 that we need. The current Korean design has 6 VLS at 3800T. Others are yet to come up with an equivalent design outside paper designs. So the Korean offer is the most mature.
So, as it stands today...
Sweden - Got scared away by the liabilities clause.
Russia - Their Lada is nada. They have a new next gen Project Kalina, so let's see where it goes.
Germany - Only a paper design.
France - Not even a paper design.
Korea - Already ready to induct a version that will more or less meet IN's requirements.
A "Heavy Scorpene" is quite easy to studied, between legacy Scorpene and Barracuda. Naval Group has all the knowledges for that and, unlike the Korean, the experience in producing outside/ToT (and already an Indian trained partner).
As always with India, I think we have time.... so Naval Group have the possibility to fine tuned its offer.
Is the Korean design totally free to be exported? After all it's a german design derivative.
I don't think it's such a big problem with Korea. India also has a lot of expertise in submarine tech anyway.
Also, the plan is to make a second SSK shipyard, so MDL may not necessarily be an advantage for France. Personally I think MDL is only a participant, the govt will find a way to push them out. We need two shipyards because the govt wants to avoid a monopoly. That's also the logic with DRAL vs HAL.
Anyway, I thought once Sweden left, France will have no real competition, then the Koreans joined in and will now become your main competitor.
Yeah. It was jointly designed by Daewoo and Hyundai.
Creating a 2nd line is all very fine. What about the first line? The last 2 subs in the Kalvari class will be out for trials in a couple of years. Then what? There aren't any follow up orders. We've already lost our capabilities to build subs once the Sishumar class of subs hit a storm in the late 80's post which all the technical skills acquired were left to rust. Our next endeavor started 2 decades later where we literally had to re invent the wheel. All we seem to be doing is repeating the same foolishness .
MDL should have designed a new SSK/atleast a modified design of Type 209 for india from the know-how they got. India cannot keep on license produce. why they are not even trying to design.
If you take Daewoo and Hyundai, they license produced Type 209/214 and designed a modified boat from that & selling it to us.
MDL will likely get the 3 Scorpene order, likely once DRDO's AIP finishes all tests. Anyway, even if they don't, they will not lose sub expertise due to the numerous refit contracts that are going around. They will have to cut open the Scorpene to place the AIP as well, and then the Scropenes themselves will undergo refits. Plenty of work to go around.
Answer : a follow order of 3 more Scorpene....
Doesn't seem like it. After all the follow on contract should've been a mere formality. If there aren't even preliminary moves towards it, it doesn't look like it's happening. I've no clue why. Perhaps the Scorpene leak was more serious than what the IN Or Naval Group chooses to admit.
I doubt the IN will sign a follow-on contract without major configuration changes, like the AIP. So this requires a lot of work even bureaucratically.
No, the leak wasn't serious.