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

Who will win the P75I program?

  • L&T and Navantia

    Votes: 16 36.4%
  • MDL and TKMS

    Votes: 11 25.0%
  • It will get canceled eventually

    Votes: 17 38.6%

  • Total voters
    44
  • Poll closed .

India’s ambitious $6 billion submarine building plan stalls after sea tests

India’s $6 billion plan to build submarines has stalled because of contractor complaints over whether proper procedures were followed during tests at sea, delaying the navy’s efforts to bolster its capabilities as China expands its presence in the Indian Ocean.

The South Asian nation’s bid to build six conventional diesel-electric subs is now delayed by a year and further delays are expected, according to two senior officials direct aware of the situation who asked not be identified because the information isn’t public.

The development is more than a setback to India’s efforts to upgrade its military: The project also represents a test of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s new defense acquisition policy. That policy requires foreign manufacturers to partner and provide local firms with technology to build military hardware in India, the world’s largest weapons importer.

German defense manufacturer ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems, in partnership with India’s state shipyard Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Ltd., and private shipbuilder Larsen & Toubro Ltd. with Spain’s Navantia SA, are competing for the project.

About a half-dozen objections were raised by local contractors as the navy came close to picking a winner following crucial field trials in June of some of the key technologies needed for the subs, the people said, without naming the companies involved. Each objection will need to be investigated before the process can proceed.

Complaints ranged from alleged violations of proper procedures to unclear guidance about how to conduct the sea trials, the people said. The nature and timing of the complaints raise questions about whether contractors are trying to stall the project because they fear losing out, the people added.

The Indian Navy and Mazagon didn’t respond to emails seeking comments.

“The field trial evaluation process is ongoing at the Ministry of Defense, it would be inappropriate for us to comment on it in any manner at this stage,” L&T said in response to an email seeking details about the objections raised.

India’s Ministry of Defense has formed a committee to evaluate both proposals and advise the government on a final decision, the people said.

Leading a country long dependent on Russian weapon systems, Modi not only wants to wean India’s reliance on imported hardware but also build up the nation’s ability to export weapons.

Nuclear-Powered Subs​

There’s little doubt that India’s fleet is showing its age. Half of its conventional submarines — comprising about 16 Russian and German-made vessels — have undergone multiple upgrades and retrofits over the last three decades, but are now nearing the end of their productive lives.
The first of the six new submarines were scheduled to join the fleet by early next decade as the decommissioning of older Indian vessels gathered pace. India also plans to build two nuclear-powered submarines carrying conventional weapons.

A successful submarine construction program would also boost India’s appeal as an alternate low-cost manufacturing hub for weapon platforms just as demand for military hardware soars in Europe on the back of Russia’s war in Ukraine.

In addition, India has strengthened ties with several Western allies, including through the Quad bloc with the US, Australia and Japan, and is expected to play a key role in countering China’s presence in the Indo-Pacific

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez visited India in quick succession in October, meetings in which defense issues — including Modi’s efforts to build up domestic capacity — featured prominently, according to readouts of the separate talks.

“Both sides committed to supporting strategic exports to India and encouraged co-development, co-production and joint research between the respective defence industries,” India and Germany said in a joint statement Oct. 25.
 
If we are paying to integrate EHWT, i assume that it's close to being ready.

And as long as EHWT is better than SUT and our Soviet era torpedos, i say no need for F21 too.

EHWT in the interim and thereafter future developments.
F21 is ready and operational. It may be seen as a stop gap for your navy because EHWT real status is unclear, and the integration on Scorpene tactical system not made. It's not a question of weeks or months, but more probably a couple of years.
 
"Proven AIP" was euphesm for Non-DRDO AIP.

The procurement issue is that if we take 15 years to procure a system, it is already out of date by the time it enters service another 10 years later. Arguably DRDO AIP could be inducted, proven and possibly even better than Spanish BEST but decisions are taken 25 years ago.


No AIP in the world was meeting the requirements of IN. That is why DRDO has to develop its own AIP. However, it took more than the stipulated time and missed many deadlines as usual.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
A decade of drama for nothing! Now we will have to redo the tender or deal with germans.

Looking at the DAP, there is no mention of single vendor case in strategic partnership. But, under "buy and make" its listed as below

1737608657587.png


Post technical evaluation single vendor cases

1737608979933.png


So, i dont think it will be cancelled because its single vendor.
 
A decade of drama for nothing! Now we will have to cancel or deal with germans.

Looking at the DAP, there is no mention of single vendor case in strategic partnership. But, under "buy and make" its listed as below

View attachment 39834

Post technical evaluation single vendor cases

View attachment 39836

So, i dont think it will be cancelled because its single vendor.

If TKMS is offering something on the lines of Type 218 or the Dolphin 2, they can still work with Siemens. It's the 212cd where they are making their own AIP. That will again be problematic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
If TKMS is offering something on the lines of Type 218 or the Dolphin 2, they can still work with Siemens. It's the 212cd where they are making their own AIP. That will again be problematic.
Yes, they don't have a frozen design as of now. Few years delay will be there because of this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
I anticipate Navantia moving the courts. As far as it being a single vendor situation , the question doesn't arise as the RFPs were issued in 2021 itself & all proposals recieved.

The only issue is the validity of the offer & the fact that given this is a single vendor situation , ze Germans will not budge on the price.

First month of the new year & one prediction has already failed by you know who . Hope the rest of the year is better for him . Amen !
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
Finally 😌..... Heil
Seems to me another set of delay drama will happen & likely won't be a solution there.
Also, if the offer is adequate, why a new design? kinda suggests offer was old version or something that navy wants but was not on the table hence a compromise ? AIP related tech/design/integration/operation etc knowledge handover first, actual sub design part is of secondary importance here ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
Both Israel and Singapore chose a more conservative approach, basing their respective boats on the proven Type-214 template (apart from superficial changes like elongated sail, X-rudder, etc) If we're going with a completely new 3000t design (Type-218?), the dev risk is going to be high, even with an experienced manufacturer like TKMS. Makes me think that Type-212C/D non-magnetic hull tech may be restricted for export like the original Type-212/As.
 
Seems to me another set of delay drama will happen & likely won't be a solution there.
Also, if the offer is adequate, why a new design? kinda suggests offer was old version or something that navy wants but was not on the table hence a compromise ? AIP related tech/design/integration/operation etc knowledge handover first, actual sub design part is of secondary importance here ?
The offer is for this new, immature design based on an already operational submarine. We need a larger displacement to meet mission requirements. So, There will be a delay in the delivery of the submarine.

If it's indeed the Type-212CD, then it is a mature design with good orders. However, it is unlikely.