Project-75I class SSK Submarines

[Zebra]

Buying new Subs is a good move but even that will take say another 2-3 years ....
Why don't IN gear up and restore its Subs which are inactive and under repair?
I think INS Sindhukirti is under repair since 2009... what are they doing for last five years?
Or is it true that the poor workmanship of the shipyard has rendered the boat unfixable ,Thats a shame.... Any updates guys....

Which ever Sub we induct Buy must be delivered at priority that should be the condition I dont mind any of the Subs mentioned above...
For Russian Subs we have alot of experience dealing with them so it will be a preffered one.... at this moment....
+
IN should tighten its grip over Scorpene manufacturing to make sure that the deadlines are met....
This delay is costing us alot.....

@Sea Eagle @Casper @Bheeshma

Better get new.

 

[Zebra]

S-80 is better than Soryu especially its propulsion system. The Indian navy wants a next generation submarine and S-80 will provide us a platform generation ahead of our neighbours.

There are issues with S-80, let them fix it first. The S-80 isn't expected until 2018 and got forced to extend the operational life of S-70. They could end up cutting the S-80 to only 3 numbers.

 

[Pulkit]

That was my first statement ... But wat about those who still have few years left...
New sub deal will not be done in a day... but they can be made operational within month if they wish to make it.....

Better get new.

 

[Zebra]

That was my first statement ... But wat about those who still have few years left...
New sub deal will not be done in a day... but they can be made operational within month if they wish to make it.....

It will be time consuming exercise though, not possible within month.

 

[Pulkit]

It will be time consuming exercise though, not possible within month.

They have been already in Ship yards for years..

One of them since 2006 ....
How much time do you think should have been taken?

 

[Zebra]

They have been already in Ship yards for years..

One of them since 2006 ....
How much time do you think should have been taken?

My friend, what can I say?

More than half of Indian subs have completed 75 % of their operational. Some are even serving beyond their maximum service life.

 

[p2prada]

^^
Mulla ki daud masjid tak.

Why can't they think for the Soryu Class?

The Japanese will likely not reply to the RFP. So, no point in bothering with them when they don't think they should sell us subs.

S-1000 is a very small sub. Better options are the larger version of Amur, the new Scorpene or the S-80, which is basically the Spanish Scorpene.

 

[Pulkit]

The one I am referring to completed in three fourth of the life in 2009 after being in ship yard for 3 years and is still there....
If we get more % of operational subs its good for us only and yes we need to acquire new subs but then if the operationability is improved we will be beneficiaries only....

Keeping Sub in Yard undermaintenance for 9 straight years is Insane....

My friend, what can I say?

More than half of Indian subs have completed 75 % of their operational. Some are even serving beyond their maximum service life.

 

[Zebra]

The Japanese will likely not reply to the RFP. So, no point in bothering with them when they don't think they should sell us subs.

S-1000 is a very small sub. Better options are the larger version of Amur, the new Scorpene or the S-80, which is basically the Spanish Scorpene.

The point of RFP arise when somebody sent it to them.

Better go FMS for Soryu class.

 

[Bheeshma]

IN is building VLF and ELF stations pretty fast. I Hope it means subs will be churned out fast.

 

[p2prada]

The point of RFP arise when somebody sent it to them.

Better go FMS for Soryu class.

Direct purchase is allowed only in two cases. One, where the product is unique. Two, when there is an emergency.

In cases where there are many products available, a tender is launched. This is done in order to get the best price for capability or else in direct purchases they add whatever cost they want.

Also as of today, Soryu is not available for any kind of purchase. You need to be an American stooge to buy Soryu.

 

[Zebra]

Direct purchase is allowed only in two cases. One, where the product is unique. Two, when there is an emergency.

In cases where there are many products available, a tender is launched. This is done in order to get the best price for capability or else in direct purchases they add whatever cost they want.

Also as of today, Soryu is not available for any kind of purchase. You need to be an American stooge to buy Soryu.

1) No one make Soryu class, only Japan makes it as of today. Who knows about future.

2)

NEW DELHI — The Indian Defence Ministry's delay in floating a tender for six conventional submarines appears to be helping Russia, as the Indian Navy is now asking the MoD to buy two Russian-built Amur-class subs to help restock the shrinking force.

That is what the situation is in IN.

Indian Navy Wants To Fast-Track Purchase of Russian Subs | Defense News | defensenews.com

3) The tender has been launched, still IN wants two of Amur class before the results come out. What if the tender goes in favor of other supplier, I wonder.

Or the match has been fixed here too!

4) Thanks, for letting me know that Indians are not allowed to buy Soryu class. Just like Indian Army not allowed to buy any other MBTs. That's why they go for Russian tanks only. Sorry I forget Indians are Russian stooge.

 

[Bheeshma]

The only advantage of Amur is getting them fast and some commonality with Kilos. Any other sub will require extensive infrastructure and training changes (other than scorpenes ofcourse).

 

[p2prada]

3) The tender has been launched, still IN wants two of Amur class before the results come out. What if the tender goes in favor of other supplier, I wonder.

Or the match has been fixed here too!

The two sub buy is an emergency buy, see point one that I made earlier. Amur is a modified Kilo class. We faced a major loss and the navy wants a replacement. Amur is the only logical choice because we already have trained crews and infrastructure.

We buy Russian because we are far closer to them than any other country, not even France and Israel. Our govt to govt deals are free of corruption and are done very quickly, unlike the long drawn tenders which takes years and years. If MoD approves the 2 sub purchase, the contract will be signed very quickly. The level of maturity between our two countries is something that we don't have with the others.

If a different supplier wins, it will be independent of the Amur deal. Amur is an attrition replacement.

4) Thanks, for letting me know that Indians are not allowed to buy Soryu class. Just like Indian Army not allowed to buy any other MBTs. That's why they go for Russian tanks only. Sorry I forget Indians are Russian stooge.

Your immaturity and butt hurt is noticeable. Japan has not exported any offensive weapons systems to date. They changed their laws only recently to allows exports and the export of Soryu to Australia is just one such contract. At best we can manage to buy the amphibious aircraft from Japan. Expecting to buy the Soryu is quite silly and for that Japan has to continue to make changes to their laws so they can sell to India. Allowing sale of offensive weapons to India is going to take a long time. We can't force them to sell to us, they will have to reply to the global RFP. Currently, they are allowing exports on a case-by-case basis.

Japan Inc. Now Exporting Weapons - WSJ

"People outside Japan think that Japan is really opening up its defense industry,'' said Yuzo Murayama, a professor and defense expert at Doshisha Business School in Kyoto. "It's not true. This will take a long time."

Read the long article and get a clue about how the system is. The govt didn't make it a free for all sale to all and sundry.

Dealing with Russia is like shopping at a supermarket. Buy whatever you want, check out and use it on anybody you want. They don't tell us how to use it, where to use it and when to use it.

Dealing with other countries is far more difficult. Like in the American FMS deal, they decide what you can buy and what you cannot. After that also you cannot decide on your own configurations, you cannot add your own equipment without the Americans checking it first and there will be restrictions in using those systems during wartime and peacetime, apart from intrusive checks that you already know of.

As for why IA cannot buy western tanks, it is more to do with common sense than some sinister conspiracy. Most of the production lines are closed and the only option is Abrams because the Germans won't sell us Leo-2 by law. They cannot sell a completely offensive system to IA because our country is at risk of war. Even they make a case by case sale of offensive weapons. They made a concession in MRCA because other countries were involved and they were desperate to keep the program alive, which they are even today. We are yet to see if the govt will approve the sale of Type-214. So who the heck wants Abrams with its export armor and unlicensed weapons, with inspections and restrictions of usage? Common sense beats nationalist pride any day.

You are an idiot if you think the Russians have bad equipment. Don't buy into silly western propaganda. We have won entire wars with Russian weapons.

And no, we are not a Russian stooge. Maybe we were like that with the Soviet Union, but that is not so with the Russians. We are slowly becoming equal partners. Eventually we may end up partnering in much larger projects than the FGFA in the future, so our relationship will continue for a very long time. At least it looks set until 2050 with the FGFA.

 

[Senior_Miguel]

Kockums was under ThyssenKrupp, but not any more. Now they are under SAAB.

Yep, but it still changes nothing. Swedish will sell the AIP technology for the Jap-Australian new sub class, just as they did for Soryu.

 

[Senior_Miguel]

You are an idiot if you think the Russians have bad equipment. Don't buy into silly western propaganda. We have won entire wars with Russian weapons.

As much I like India, I have to make a point, that many of those wars were fought against an enemy who was also using soviet/russian (or based on that design) equipment. Iraqis had soviet/russian equipment as well, but their lost in the Persian Gulf as well as in 2003, not only to US, but also to the British. And one more thing. No one in the West says that Russians make bad weaponry. It's that in many cases it's obsolete when compared to Western weapons, but still quite lethal.

 

[p2prada]

As much I like India, I have to make a point, that many of those wars were fought against an enemy who was also using soviet/russian (or based on that design) equipment. Iraqis had soviet/russian equipment as well, but their lost in the Persian Gulf as well as in 2003, not only to US, but also to the British. And one more thing. No one in the West says that Russians make bad weaponry. It's that in many cases it's obsolete when compared to Western weapons, but still quite lethal.

The western nations have always fought poorly trained and equipped forces wielding previous generation weapons. During such wars, it wasn't that the Soviet weapons lost, it was just that the countries that lost were equipped with Soviet weapons. It wouldn't have been any different if Iraq had American weapons.

 

[Senior_Miguel]

The western nations have always fought poorly trained and equipped forces wielding previous generation weapons. During such wars, it wasn't that the Soviet weapons lost, it was just that the countries that lost were equipped with Soviet weapons. It wouldn't have been any different if Iraq had American weapons.

Well I can just say, that among Polish soldiers (and Poland was a member of the Warsaw Pact, so for many decades its equipment was almost purely soviet), the Soviets had one simple rule - make it cheap, make it easy to maintain, make it easy to operate even for a low rank soldier and make a lot of it. In other words, numbers count, not quality. And in the begining of the Cold War this way of thinking was very very profitable. But time came, when Western equipment started to be more and more advanced, hence NATO nations didn't need so much of it and still were able to preserve a considerable level of military power. I have to agree with you though, that even the best equipment, when in hands of badly trained soldiers, with morale low to their feet, won't stand a chance against a determined enemy.

 

[p2prada]

Well I can just say, that among Polish soldiers (and Poland was a member of the Warsaw Pact, so for many decades its equipment was almost purely soviet), the Soviets had one simple rule - make it cheap, make it easy to maintain, make it easy to operate even for a low rank soldier and make a lot of it. In other words, numbers count, not quality. And in the begining of the Cold War this way of thinking was very very profitable. But time came, when Western equipment started to be more and more advanced, hence NATO nations didn't need so much of it and still were able to preserve a considerable level of military power. I have to agree with you though, that even the best equipment, when in hands of badly trained soldiers, with morale low to their feet, won't stand a chance against a determined enemy.

What you said is nowhere near true. While it is true that Soviet quality wasn't as good as Western quality, but the fact is for the majority of the cold war the Soviets had some major advantages over the West in many areas.

The Soviets dominated for over 20 years with the T-64. It was the first digital tank in the world, and it stayed a generation ahead for 20 years. Western tanks were not as good in both technology and capability of the tank until the Abrams was introduced in the '80s. Even then the Soviets kept up with the T-80, a heavily modified T-64. They had high end systems which were a match for any western system and a low end system which took care of numbers and were exported. T-64/T-80 were called strategic systems and were secret and were not allowed for export.

What the Soviets kept for themselves and what they exported were very different. The T-72 was their worst tank, not as good as the T-64, which gave them their numbers. But the export model was even worse. It was similar with other technologies as well. Warsaw pact managed better than export models but even these were inferior to actual Red Army systems. It was no different with aircraft and weapons too. Unlike in the American model, the Soviets made one system for themselves, one for Warsaw pact and one for export. And this model was only for low end systems. High end systems were not exported, the Americans didn't do that. What Poland had were mostly the numbers aspect to work as a bulwark against NATO. Basically, Polish soldiers, and some of the other Warsaw pact members, were expendable to the Union. (You are better off today )

Jimmy Carter, US President, tried to bring in a new export policy similar to the Soviet Union. He wanted to export downgraded models of the F-16 with 10-20% lower thrust and a downgraded radar. He had banned the export of the F-16 until Regan changed the laws a few years later.

F-16 Versions - F-16/79

It was only post-'80s that the situation began to change with the collapse of the Union. The Americans were actually preparing for war with a Soviet controlled Europe during the Cold War.

 

[Pulkit]

@Senior_Miguel @p2prada
Thread is appearing to be derailed Kindly stick to the thread....
The discussion from ,which Sub to be bought TO which country has better /provides better weapons journey was good though....