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

Who will win the P75I program?

  • L&T and Navantia

    Votes: 13 37.1%
  • MDL and TKMS

    Votes: 9 25.7%
  • It will get canceled eventually

    Votes: 13 37.1%

  • Total voters
    35
Seems big news, was P-76 related stuff being posted here ?

Germany pushes for inter-governmental agreement for submarine deal with India


They can push all they want. It won’t happen in next 3-4 years. If the tender fails like MMRCA then there can be a G2G deal.
 
First Kalvari class will enter refit next year.

Screenshot 2024-02-22 at 10.54.03 PM.png
 

It would be great if they can include indian AIP on it. Best part is that their SP partner is the one actually manufacturing the DRDO AIP system.

Parallelly, focus on Project 76 SSK.
 

It would be great if they can include indian AIP on it. Best part is that their SP partner is the one actually manufacturing the DRDO AIP system.

Parallelly, focus on Project 76 SSK.

Nothing surprising about it. L&T building our next batch is a good thing.

And yeah, if MDL is pushed out of the running, they will start pressuring the govt to begin P76 earlier. They will get a contract for 3 more Scorpenes anyway.
 

It would be great if they can include indian AIP on it. Best part is that their SP partner is the one actually manufacturing the DRDO AIP system.

Parallelly, focus on Project 76 SSK.
I still feel that now we have signed the production orders for AIP of 1st Scorpene, we should drop the necessity of AIP from the RFP.

This will allow France to participate. That will solve a multitude of problems.

Type 216 derivative will be costly and difficult to negotiate and S80 has been marred with problems and uses a different kind of Fuel cell.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Amarante and Ashwin
I still feel that now we have signed the production orders for AIP of 1st Scorpene, we should drop the necessity of AIP from the RFP.

This will allow France to participate. That will solve a multitude of problems.

Type 216 derivative will be costly and difficult to negotiate and S80 has been marred with problems and uses a different kind of Fuel cell.

The navy would have already discussed that and still decided to go for AIP. It's probably because they don't want to rely on unproven tech yet. And the point of P-75I is to de-risk the submarine program and rely only on proven tech. Hence the focus on a proven AIP design.

As for S-80 problems, it will be possible to rectify it before we build our own. That's the advantage with a design that's already being built. The Type 216 refresh and the unproven French design will be marred with even more problems that we will have to pay to fix. The latter being even more problematic.
 
The navy would have already discussed that and still decided to go for AIP. It's probably because they don't want to rely on unproven tech yet. And the point of P-75I is to de-risk the submarine program and rely only on proven tech. Hence the focus on a proven AIP design.

As for S-80 problems, it will be possible to rectify it before we build our own. That's the advantage with a design that's already being built. The Type 216 refresh and the unproven French design will be marred with even more problems that we will have to pay to fix. The latter being even more problematic.
Only the German Fuel cell or Swedish sterling cycle is proven. I would stop short of saying that the Spanish Fuel cell is as reliable/safe/proven as the 1st two.
Regarding Type 216, we have seen it's derivatives getting into service in Singapore & Israel. So more or less it can be said that the basic design of the platform is mature enough.

Although yes teething/integration issues will remain a concern on German platform's localisation.
 
Only the German Fuel cell or Swedish sterling cycle is proven. I would stop short of saying that the Spanish Fuel cell is as reliable/safe/proven as the 1st two.
Regarding Type 216, we have seen it's derivatives getting into service in Singapore & Israel. So more or less it can be said that the basic design of the platform is mature enough.

Although yes teething/integration issues will remain a concern on German platform's localisation.

While the S-80's AIP is gonna take a bit more time, the entire sub will be proven when we sign a contract. Otoh, a Type 216 derivative can actually face problems regardless of its previous successes 'cause it's being redesigned for Indian requirements. So it will face more than teething issues.

We already have an SSN program that will deliver faster than this one. So we are not looking at top end capabilities that a new gen French sub can provide, the kind Indonesia is being offered. What the IN needs is an already operational system that is a step up over the Kilo and Scorpene and can be introduced very quickly with the least amount of hassle.

We will follow P-75I up with P-76 which will introduce even more advanced tech.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YoungWolf
S-80 in only "plus" because they made a miscalculation....
It is heavier, so badly powered.
It is over budget.
It is fitted with US weapon system so delivered with a choke collar.
The worst choice at all.
They have something to offer of that class. Which US weapon system exactly?
 
They have something to offer of that class. Which US weapon system exactly?
The combat system is US. That means all new wepon, all modification as a sonar improvement has to be implemented under a US approval. This is a choke collar.
The torpedo is german (ask Saudi Arabia what they think of germans), the cruise missile and anti ship missile are all US.

So it is a kind of "submarine Gripen" : decisiv parts are not of a free use.
 
The combat system is US. That means all new wepon, all modification as a sonar improvement has to be implemented under a US approval. This is a choke collar.
The torpedo is german (ask Saudi Arabia what they think of germans), the cruise missile and anti ship missile are all US.

So it is a kind of "submarine Gripen" : decisiv parts are not of a free use.
Interesting point about US company involvement.
Navantia has finally launched the first S-80 Plus AIP submarine last April after a troubled and over a decade late development and construction programme, further complicated by the pandemic. The programme includes the delivery of four boats alongside a training centre with both tactical and platform simulators. Designed and built by Navantia with the support of US General Dynamics Electric Boat to conduct a wide range of operations, including ASuW with selective land attack capabilities, ASW, Special Forces operations support, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) and mine-laying, the new long-range AIP submarine is characterized by a modular design, allowing to be customized according to potential customers requirements. With a surface and submerged displacement of respectively 2,695 and 2,965 tonnes, an overall length and beam of respectively 81 and 11.68 meters, the S-80 Plus features a propulsion system characterized by the new BEST (BioEthanol Stealth Technologies) Navantia AIP to be installed from the third boat and retrofitted to the first two boats. It is centred on an Abengoa Ethanol reformer plus Collins PEM fuel cells providing up to three weeks of underwater endurance, and its usage up to the maximum submarine operating depth of over 300 meters. The new submarine is equipped with a PMS developed by Navantia Sistemas alongside the steering and diving control system developed by Avio Aero and the S-80 Plus Integrated Combat System Core (ICSC), developed by General

Dynamics together with Navantia Sistemas. These two highly automated systems allow for a reduced crew of 32 sailors with additional eight accommodations for Special Forces operators. Based on the latest version of the SUBICS (SUBmarine Integrated Combat System) suite by Lockheed Martin, the ICSC allows the combat system’s sensors and weapons to be highly integrated to ensure optimal management of both information and command and control centres. It also manages the submarine sensors and weapons suite including the sonar complex provided by Lockheed Martin and Spanish SAES, the latter also providing the towed array sonar, the surface surveillance suite including Kollmorgen Electro-Optical (today L3Harris KEO) optronic non-penetrating mast (Model 2010 OS) and attack periscope (Model 2010 AP) with universal modular masts by L3Harris Calzoni, the Indra Pegaso RESM suite and the Aries-S radar. The communications suite includes Tecnobit’s Linpro processor to manage tactical data Link 11/22 and SATCOM links. The S-80 Plus is equipped with six torpedo launch systems capable to launch a Spanish Navy-selected weapon inventory including Atlas Elektronik DM2A4 Seehect/ SeaHake Mod 4 HWTs, Boeing UGM-84 SubHarpoon Block II and mines, while the platform is fitted for Raytheon UGM-109 Tomahawk cruise missiles. According to Navantia, the first sailing is scheduled for early 2022 and the delivery to the Spanish Navy is planned for early 2023. The S-80 Plus is being proposed on the international market, namely in India for the P-75I programme among others, thanks to its modular design and advanced AIP, allowing the crew accommodation to be moved from the forward to the central hull area thanks to the use of non-penetrating masts alongside new hull sections insertion for enhanced capabilities.

That being said, i dont think thats such a big issue. Considering the other option being german. This is way more preferred IMO.
 
A weapon is not something you call choke collar. Its an addon equipment which can be replaced with ease. We will be using SLCM for this sub, which has already started testing.
Absolutely. We anyways use Harpoons with the P8Is. As long as we can integrate our weapons with it, this should not be a problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion