Navy identified 35 defects !. The manufacturer should fix them before inducting more. It makes perfect sense.
35 defects. Only35?
À simple house, when released, gas more than 35 defects.
It's peace of cake.
but we are not hunting down houses, so we need atleast a submarine .......35 defects if they are so usual it would not have come out from mouth of any navy brass.
Bon Plan is right in a sense. The first model of a new system is typically flawed and an acceptable risk tolerance is factored for when accepting the system. It's a trial. However, subsequent models must have their flaws fixed before induction or else the program is slowed, the contractor censured and lives and money are lost.
When I did contract work and we'd submit a system with multiple flaw it'd be sent back to safety for review and if they determined the level of risk was too high, it'd be sent back to the manufacturer for redesign. Flaws could be something as simple as a battery failing to dispense heat efficiently or as serious as "it exploded".
For submarines the level of risk acceptance is lowered because of their critical nature and the environment they operate in. Remember, we the general public don't know what these 35 defects are. It could be that machinery isn't bolted down properly or the navigation system is glitchy or the sonars are rendering too many false positives or torpedoes have a slight delay before launching. We don't know.
It took one seemingly simple and innocuous defect to sink Thresher. An inability to blow ballast tanks, with forming ice over their valves, dooming the stricken submarine. The end result of a single defect is that USS Thresher and her crew now sit 2560 meters below the Atlantic.
A single defect in one of Kursk's Type 65 torpedoes blew her clean in half.
For any system, especially the first unit of a series there is an acceptable risk acceptance. For submarines that risk acceptance threshold is even tighter.
When I did contract work and we'd submit a system with multiple flaw it'd be sent back to safety for review and if they determined the level of risk was too high, it'd be sent back to the manufacturer for redesign. Flaws could be something as simple as a battery failing to dispense heat efficiently or as serious as "it exploded".
For submarines the level of risk acceptance is lowered because of their critical nature and the environment they operate in. Remember, we the general public don't know what these 35 defects are. It could be that machinery isn't bolted down properly or the navigation system is glitchy or the sonars are rendering too many false positives or torpedoes have a slight delay before launching. We don't know.
It took one seemingly simple and innocuous defect to sink Thresher. An inability to blow ballast tanks, with forming ice over their valves, dooming the stricken submarine. The end result of a single defect is that USS Thresher and her crew now sit 2560 meters below the Atlantic.
A single defect in one of Kursk's Type 65 torpedoes blew her clean in half.
For any system, especially the first unit of a series there is an acceptable risk acceptance. For submarines that risk acceptance threshold is even tighter.
Yeah, about that...
No ASW frigates can patrol these waters, no MPAs can see through thick ice, and the conditions are brutal for sonar and wake homers due to ice cracking and shifting. Your ships can't even operate in the arctic.
Yeah, about that...
No ASW frigates can patrol these waters, no MPAs can see through thick ice, and the conditions are brutal for sonar and wake homers due to ice cracking and shifting. Your ships can't even operate in the arctic.
I guess the problem faced in Indian littorals is entirey different from the frigid artic zone. I heard the thermoclines and related attenuation in SONAR gave much trouble to Indian Navy. It was Argyaswami Paulraj who worked on a solution, as no off the shelf sonar had the ability to compenaste for this.
Now your cmparison , I feel , is an apples to oranges comparison given the thermal and ther parameters are different in artic and equatorial warm waters and hence vstol Jockey is right in claiming that Indian sonars are world class when it comes to this neck of the wood.
Naval Group, well experimented in subs, explain in the french media that it wil be corrected easily.
Overpriced? if it is like the Rafale deal (likely), the offsets automatically increase the price. It is the price of know how.....
And the French missed this basic information before signing the contract ?
Or they just lied ? Like in MMRCA
why do you think we missed this information as you said it is overpriced ?
Dassault lied in MMRCA ?.... OK.... so indian top brass are really idiots to ink a single vendor deal few years after. You perfectly know if you are not mentally ill that it was not the case. The RFI was not clear enough (probably a result of the huge and obscur bureaucraty of India) and HAL was and remain a lazy and incompetent structure.
You already won the contract then informed about how so many things are not included in the price. As you said those costs are common sense. Yet was not discussed or cleared before signing the contract. We don't know the jacked up price details to have a comparison others in the tender. Thus for ~$600 million an it's over priced SSK.
So is that a yes? HALs competency is irrelevant. If the RFI says so they will be the partner. Else you shouldn't have participating in it. Delaying and jacking up of the price after winning L1 is from old French playbook.
As for now, the sole inked contracts are for R&D effort. So it's just impossible for you to justify there was some things not included.
According to you, what are the missing parts please?
Absolutely not. It is to introduce the rest of the sentence, scratched by you...
If you father want to marry me with your sister, it's nice. But if during the talks to organize the big party I discover that your sister is already pregnant, the out will be slightly different. Isn't it?
HAL was a pregnant sister, with half a brain and with only 3 fingers remaining on ten.
why did DCNS ask for substantially more money after the contact sign? If it was so obvious.
Which was blaming the system for it.
Again, Dassualt agreed to all the conditions of RFI. Statred crying after reaching L1 and delyaed and sabotaged the whole deal.
DA and HAL never found a way to work together.
1) HAL requested 2.7 more time to built a Rafale than in France, but it's probably not the main problem because the cost per hour in India (evenin HAL...) is cheaper than in France.
2) HAL and India top brass wanted Dassault to give a full warranty on planes made in HAL WITHOUT the right to oversee what happend in HAL... Boeing, SAAB, LM, BAe would have made the same answer : no.
The risk was too huge. And don't forget that at those time Dassault needed an export deal, so they were really ready to make big concessions...
maybe because the technical level of Mazagon was not those requested and agreed.
Did India initiate legal proceedings (it's a commercial bid)? No. It's probably not for some good reasons.
Selon Naval Group, pas de problème particulier sur les Scorpène indiens
A June 15 article in the Indian Business Business newspaper claims that the Indian Navy "refused to put the Khanderi into service until all its defects and deficiencies were completely corrected." The Khanderi is the second of six Scorpene-type submarines commissioned in 2005 by India and carried out in technology transfer by the shipyard Mazagon Dock Limited of Mumbai, with the assistance of the French Naval Group, designer of these buildings.
As the seed of the program, the Kalvari was put into service in December 2017, its first sistership, the Khanderi, being launched in January of the same year. It is currently in the sea trials stage and at Naval Group, it is explained that the building does not suffer from any major problem. In particular, the Indian newspaper claims that "the most worrying problem that the navy discovered during the Khanderi sea trials was a deadly defect for a submarine: its engines and propellers emitted an excessive level of noise. ". According to a source at the French industrialist, "the Indian Navy, which is satisfied with the first building in the series, has in no way rejected the second, which is still in testing. The reality is that there are some common problems that are part of the development, these are common things and there is nothing that can not be solved quickly. The Scorpene are extremely quiet submarines, they are famous for that and that's why we sell them. " In Paris, they say they do not understand the origin of an article containing such "factual errors and exaggerations".
Perhaps this publication is a political reminiscence of recent legislative elections in India? In late May, this resulted in a bitter failure by Congress, the main opposition party, and the victory of the nationalist coalition led by Prime Minister Narenda Modi, who returned for a second five-year term.
Regarding Indian Scorpene, delivery of Khanderi is planned this year. Next Karanj, launched in January 2018, the Vela, which joined his element last month, then the Vagir and Vagsheer, under construction at MDL. All must have joined the Indian fleet by 2022.
A June 15 article in the Indian Business Business newspaper claims that the Indian Navy "refused to put the Khanderi into service until all its defects and deficiencies were completely corrected." The Khanderi is the second of six Scorpene-type submarines commissioned in 2005 by India and carried out in technology transfer by the shipyard Mazagon Dock Limited of Mumbai, with the assistance of the French Naval Group, designer of these buildings.
As the seed of the program, the Kalvari was put into service in December 2017, its first sistership, the Khanderi, being launched in January of the same year. It is currently in the sea trials stage and at Naval Group, it is explained that the building does not suffer from any major problem. In particular, the Indian newspaper claims that "the most worrying problem that the navy discovered during the Khanderi sea trials was a deadly defect for a submarine: its engines and propellers emitted an excessive level of noise. ". According to a source at the French industrialist, "the Indian Navy, which is satisfied with the first building in the series, has in no way rejected the second, which is still in testing. The reality is that there are some common problems that are part of the development, these are common things and there is nothing that can not be solved quickly. The Scorpene are extremely quiet submarines, they are famous for that and that's why we sell them. " In Paris, they say they do not understand the origin of an article containing such "factual errors and exaggerations".
Perhaps this publication is a political reminiscence of recent legislative elections in India? In late May, this resulted in a bitter failure by Congress, the main opposition party, and the victory of the nationalist coalition led by Prime Minister Narenda Modi, who returned for a second five-year term.
Regarding Indian Scorpene, delivery of Khanderi is planned this year. Next Karanj, launched in January 2018, the Vela, which joined his element last month, then the Vagir and Vagsheer, under construction at MDL. All must have joined the Indian fleet by 2022.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-new...indian-navy-do-not-reflect-facts-naval-group/
The recent reports on the second Scorpene submarine for Indian Navy do not reflect facts. It appears these reports are based on wrong inputs received in bits and pieces from unreliable sources. There has been some delays in completing trials of the second submarine due to setting to work related issues and minor dent to the propeller which occurred during trials. The propeller was replaced and all noise trials have been completed successfully with results well above past specified performances.
The recent reports on the second Scorpene submarine for Indian Navy do not reflect facts. It appears these reports are based on wrong inputs received in bits and pieces from unreliable sources. There has been some delays in completing trials of the second submarine due to setting to work related issues and minor dent to the propeller which occurred during trials. The propeller was replaced and all noise trials have been completed successfully with results well above past specified performances.
I don't know. Scorpene is a very low noise design (they used some nuclear deterence french subs technology to reduce the noise level), but at such an extent is not really known in the public sphere.