Sindhughosh has already been through 2 refits, the third one was canceled. I guess this submarine will become a testbed for DRDO's P-76 program.
Putin to offer India mega undersea boost
- Thread starter Tatvamasi
- Start date
Sindhughosh has already been through 2 refits, the third one was canceled. I guess this submarine will become a testbed for DRDO's P-76 program.
Should matter less to India.
MIRVs on US and Russian SLBMs were limited due to treaties, but we are not impacted by that. Our missiles can carry more warheads.
What we need are a few dozen land-based silos.
Those Shishumar class submarines were commissioned between the mid 80s - mid 90s which makes the oldest of them 40 years old & the youngest 30 years old whereas the global trend is retire them after between 25-30 years of service.
Even with those upgrades their performance would be essentially sub par , good enough for littoral patrols not venturing into the deep seas leave aside hunting submarines & ships in Paxtan's littoral waters .
Our establishment is penny wise & pound foolish for with the amount we spend on various upgrades repeatedly with limited performance , we could go in for new ones which we aren't coz of budgetary constraints , bureaucratic red tape etc .
Russians themselves don't operate it beyond 25 years IIRC.
Let's leave SSBNs out of this.
If we begin Project 76 with or without commencing Project 75 I by the end of the decade , it'd be a huge achievement.
What you're suggesting is possibly for the second tranche of 6 submarines under Project 76 wherein the learnings from Project 75 I will then be implemented in the former.
Project 77 Alpha can't have a conventionally powerd counterpart as its displacement would be > 5000 tons. Nobody sails SSKs with that kind of displacement.
We had the design blueprints too and did nothing with them. A lost opportunity. Imo, the IN wouldn't have fitted them with tube-launched Harpoon if the hulls didn't have enough a decade plus left in them. Also, I'm no expert but by all accounts German metallurgy was way better than SU back in the day.
Some reports say the service life is 40 yrs, likely with one MLU. The Foxtrots too were used well past their prime.
If MDL is awarded a single-source contract for P-75I, delays are likely. Although they have enough spare capacity for building subs + are working on a (scalable, I hope) midget sub design already. If the order is split between MDL and L&T, P-76 could be expedited.
The trend worldwide is towards larger ocean-going SSK as LIB tech matures. Afaik, TKMS Type 216 design weighs in at over 4000t. There are indications that P-75I may feature VLS for Brahmos which, if true, would mean a heck of a big sub.
Here's I D R W
https://****/brahmos-missile-to-enh...cal-launch-capability-for-long-range-strikes/
I believe co operation was suspended given the investigation of corruption allegations into the deal & suspension of HDW . That's the reason the project folded up after 2 being fabricated at MDL instead of the original 4.
That we used the Foxtrot & the MiG -21 way past their service lives doesn't mean we keep doing it . What a heavy price the IAF paid for it ! Some 200+ MiG-21s were crashed & ~ 180 pilots perished IIRC & I'm not sure this figure includes fatalities on the ground.
If a submarine sinks that's straight away 60-80 people gone just like that.
Let's see. Order may be split if they decide to go in for 2 tranches though I doubt it'd 50:50. Most likely it'd be split in 2:1 ratio.
Yes well , IN seems to be erring on the side of caution. They aren't commiting to build a regular Scorpene class displacement submarine before the purchase agreement of Project 75 I is inked & you're actually expecting them to sign up for a conventionally powered 5000 ton displacement submarine ?
Not going to happen . They'd follow this road map : ~ 1500 ton displacement -> ~ 3000 ton displacement -> 4500 ton displacement .
As of now the last one is a bit iffy tbh. The examples you've given are of nations who aren't pursuing the SSN option for various reasons.
What's the RFI for Project 75 I in terms of displacement ? IIRC it's between 3-3500 tons displacement.
The site's banned here. They shared too many truth bombs which the owners of this site couldn't handle.
It's not too late. TKMS is developing an upgraded Type 209NG variant apparently aimed at budget buyers. Looks almost identical externally to our boats with new interiors. I'd take them over Kilo refurbs any day.
Or perhaps we could have L&T fabricate the hulls with MDL doing the combat system integration. Who knows? But it's clear we need a sub assembly line in the pvt sector.
The IN had initially decided on the 1600t Amur class from Russia for its 2nd SSK line. It was even tipped to get a VLS for Brahmos. However, in the last decade, they revised the requirement to bigger 3000t boats with greater endurance and firepower. Russia didn't have anything in that category and dropped out.
Kalvari B2 is reportedly going to be quite a bit larger than the vanilla version. P-76 will likely also be 3000t+.
And where would this fit into the IN's plans when you yourself mention that the Scorpenes we're getting are enlarged versions of what we have?
As far as the procurement of additional Kilo class refurbished submarines go there's only one guy in the whole wide world apart from the Russians pushing for it .
Sincere word of advice - don't do this to yourself . You're capable of much better.
We don't. Not unless we plan to be a major exporter with a huge fleet of SSKs like China or Russia. That's some way in the distant future after we've designed & mfgd our own indigenous submarines & it's performed spectacularly meeting all our requirements .
I'd rather we streamline our DPSU shipyards into 1 behemoth organization or 2 of them viz East Coast & West Coast Shipyards who're into everything from civilian shipping to defence from surface to sub surface from manned to unmanned.
RN these DPSU's are losing out on collaborative JVs with the South Koreans & Japanese with the exception of CSL for none of these foreign entities want to get into a JV with them for obvious reasons.
It's the same reason we ought to break up HAL into 4 individual cos otherwise they risk going the way MTNL went. Anyway I digress.
IN doctrine is to have 3 classes of submarines. One for littoral waters, one for mid seas & the last being deep ocean going submarines for true blue water capabilities .
Kalvari class submarines would fill in the first role , Project 75 I the second role & Project 77 Alpha / SSNs the third role. I see no scope for any other class for there is no scope for any other class , as per the IN doctrine.
The next Indo-Russian summit is in Sep, IIRC. A lot of surprises are in coming
Hopefully these are pleasant ones.The next Indo-Russian summit is in Sep, IIRC. A lot of surprises are in coming
Theoretically, there's nothing stopping us from restarting construction of the Type-209 since the ban on TKMS is now rescinded. In terms of sensors and weapons, this NG variant appears to be more than just a poor man's Type 214.
Plus it could be a good way to prevent a drop in numbers over the next 5-10 years. Recall how OFB dusted off forgotten old Bofors FH-77B blueprints to build the Dhanush.
If not MDL, I'm sure L&T would love to tinker around with the 209 design and come up w/a prototype. Iirc, our boats were built to an exclusive 209/1500 design. Maybe we hold the IP.
With the advent of AIP+LIB, the lines are blurring between coastal and oceanic subs. The Scorpene itself is a great example. It has evolved from a modest sub-2000t boat into a 3000t behemoth.
Imo, 3 distinct classes would make sense only if we were running a Korea-style KSS build prog. Our initial goal was for just 2 SSK lines, one each from the West and East and that too for the sake of redundancy. The SSN may have been in the works as a TD since the 1970s (via ATV) but it's only recently that it became a formal prog.
Depends on which boat the IN is looking to as inspiration for the Project 76 first tranche - the Scorpenes or the Type 209 or the Kilo class. The last thing we need is a hybrid. Moreover WDB would be responsible for the design & who so ever is selected would function as the production partner.
Unless L&T wants to buy the IPR of those designs from MoD & then start tinkering around though I doubt if the IPR is transferable.
There maybe some overlaps but as of now the IN seems to be sticking to its plans. They already have the Scorpenes in the < 2000 ton class. Project 75 I is for the 3-4000 ton class.
If your contention is the IN is going in for enlarged Scorpenes it's a function of the near 2-2.5 decades delay of the Project 75 I .
We'd know for sure if there's a change in the IN doctrine only once we see designs of the Project 76 .
We went to the west to cease being totally dependent on Russia. That's how the Jaguars & Mirages came about & that's how HDW came into the picture.
Add to it the fact we wanted to eventually design & construct our own submarines. For some reason we didn't attempt to construct the Kilo class under ToT. Wonder why ?
Incidentally RoK followed our plans to a T & emerged as an OEM bidding for our projects. Talk about adding insult to injury.
Post 2000 Russia no longer held any charm for us except in exotic tech which should explain their involvement in our SSN / SSBN & miniature N reactor programs . That's how the Scorpenes happened. Plus there was the happy episode of the INS Vikramaditya & the MiG-29Ks.
Both Project 75 & 75 I were supposed to kick off in quick succession of each other & the Russians didn't figure in either tender IIRC
There is no other foreign boat going to be acquired built in foreign shores. KILO class were Good for a period, not anymore.
We could pay for only SSN, nothing more nothing less.
Still a shit deal offered.
Which literally none of the global south countries care about. We want to somehow run our economy while west wants to antagonise Russia for no effing reason other than its ego.
Why would you like another new Russian platform when we are already have the access to Green pine RADAR and Indian long range radars? This will compromise the integrity of networking just like our military equipments currently facing the issues. It reduces the effectiveness by a lot.
We need to build in-house, now or never.
No such thing. Amur was just a Russian offer.
IN was interested in a Western sub, the same as MMRCA.
With Russia tied in via both Kilos and Arihant-related cooperation, perhaps even SSNs, we needed a Western counterweight beyond Scorpene.
Can't find a link but IN officials are on record stating they wanted P-76 to imbibe the best elements from East and West. I take that to mean Western electronics and sturdy Russian (double-hulled) hull tech. However, AIP was a key requirement and Russia's Kristal-27E was far from mature. That was the end of the road for Russia as far as participating in P-75I was concerned.
There are reports that a VLS plug is back on the table for P-75I (by I D R W so take it FWIW). That could add another ~100t to the displacement plus another ~100t for AIP, I'm guessing. If the IN also plans a swimmer delivery vehicle/lockout chamber for MARCOS that could mean a still bigger boat. The Pakistani Hangor SSK is ~3000t too so you can be sure a
Kalvari B2 will match or exceed that.
We initially wanted British Oberon class SSK but has to settle for Foxtrots after being turned down. Then came the Kilo class.
After 1971, I'd say our main priority was building SSNs. Though ideally, we should have started building SSK too.
I think Russia competed with the Amur 1650 in P-75 but was not considered for P-75I.
I'm just as critical of Israel as I am of Russia, Russia has committed bad war crimes and should be accountable
As to the ICC and Asia
"Several Asian countries are State Parties to the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the International Criminal Court (ICC). These include Cambodia, Jordan, Mongolia, Republic of Korea, Timor-Leste, Afghanistan, Japan, Cook Islands, Bangladesh, Maldives, and Palestine, among others. Notably, major countries like China, India, and Indonesia have not joined the ICC."
Just words, nothing more. It's nothing more than political messaging, indicating there's room for other countries to involve themselves in the program without need for criticism or undercutting competition for political reasons, and both sides will have to compete and work alongside each other.
Designs are centered around the capabilities required.