Project-75I class SSK Submarines

[uoftotaku]

Why isn't the scorpene class being extended? It would not only provide commonality for training, maintenance and SOP, but also use already existing workforce to amalgamize all knowhow due to a long run, probably even start serial production. What is it with Indian Babus wanting to create a zoo of different classes of weapons in each service?

Arrey yaar...babus also like diversity for their evening entertainment on foreign junket trips. So many years they only had russian item maal, then new fashion of yehudi maal came, recent trend has been french maal...latest trend them seem to have realised korean maal is also quite nice after a few soju shots

 

[WolfPack86]

There’s big upheaval in India’s ₹45,000 crore P75-India submarine build program:

 

[WolfPack86]

Ok so
@livefist
reports that A-26 of Sweden no more will compete in P-75I , South Korea has offered Changho class . Project obviously now may be delayed. IMO , big blow as A-26 leaves competetion. I think Shortfin Barracuda (Attack) Class will be directly offered now.

 

[uoftotaku]

Ok so
@livefist
reports that A-26 of Sweden no more will compete in P-75I , South Korea has offered Changho class . Project obviously now may be delayed. IMO , big blow as A-26 leaves competetion. I think Shortfin Barracuda (Attack) Class will be directly offered now.

A-26 was never going to qualify. Neither will Shortfin Baracudda or Type 216. One of the big glaring conditions of the RFQ is that offered design MUST be in service somewhere in the world.

Once again I do say this whole exercise is a waste of time

 

[power_monger]

Ok so
@livefist
reports that A-26 of Sweden no more will compete in P-75I , South Korea has offered Changho class . Project obviously now may be delayed. IMO , big blow as A-26 leaves competetion. I think Shortfin Barracuda (Attack) Class will be directly offered now.

Why is navy not ordering additional scorpenes which is most cheapest and logical option. I think navy is not impressed with French for some reasons. I doubt short fin barracuda will be accepted even if offered.

 

[Bhurki]

Why is navy not ordering additional scorpenes which is most cheapest and logical option. I think navy is not impressed with French for some reasons. I doubt short fin barracuda will be accepted even if offered.

Even if its offered, the price will be prohibitive.. Australians are paying $3B for each, while MoD has actually revised its estimate down from 53k cr to 45k cr ie $1.08B for each.

 

[Bleh]

Actually France can offer a nuclear Shortfin Barracuda as the LEU used in our reactors is commercial grade.

It depends. What are the exact requirements of P75I ?

Is it just an improvement over P75 or a big leap in perf ?
In the first case an improved Scorpene with AIP and Scalp Naval (or an indian Nirhbay) is enough, in the other a derivative of SF Barracuda.

If the project 75 I goes through then it is not scorpene class for sure. Barracuda is too expensive and doesn't fit into the allocated budget
It will be created to meet TOT requirement which they didn't get from French. Germany is the next best option though Korea may surprise us.

I would have preferred to go with Scorpene route and then increasing the indigenous content in it step by step and eventually indigenous designed submarine.

^^ Naval group were proposing SMX 3.0 - a 3000 tonn successor of Scorpene.

I wouldn't mind S80 class with all TOT after all its Scorpene.

Ok so
@livefist
reports that A-26 of Sweden no more will compete in P-75I , South Korea has offered Changho class . Project obviously now may be delayed. IMO , big blow as A-26 leaves competetion. I think Shortfin Barracuda (Attack) Class will be directly offered now.

A-26 was never going to qualify. Neither will Shortfin Baracudda or Type 216. One of the big glaring conditions of the RFQ is that offered design MUST be in service somewhere in the world.

Once again I do say this whole exercise is a waste of time

Why is navy not ordering additional scorpenes which is most cheapest and logical option. I think navy is not impressed with French for some reasons. I doubt short fin barracuda will be accepted even if offered.

Even if its offered, the price will be prohibitive.. Australians are paying $3B for each, while MoD has actually revised its estimate down from 53k cr to 45k cr ie $1.08B for each.

https://www.business-standard.com/a...s-project-75-i-stake-rise-119092900005_1.html

Quote:
"Type 218 is also reputedly the most silent design. However, it is probably the most expensive of the three.
The Shortfin Barracuda would be significantly cheaper, with the infrastructure having already been set up in MDL for building six Scorpenes. However, since the French Navy operates only nuclear-powered submarines, Naval Group builds conventionally powered and AIP submarines only as a commercial ploy to keep its submarine line active. The submarines themselves, like the Scorpenes, are less than cutting-edge."

Opinions on the above statement? ...Could the Shortfin Barracuda, originally a SSN, be a jugaad SSK inferior to the top dogs?

 

[Bleh]

....................................

 

[Armand2REP]

Opinions on the above statement? ...Could the Shortfin Barracuda, originally a SSN, be a jugaad SSK inferior to the top dogs?

If it doesn't use a pump jet then it wouldn't be the most silent.

 

[uoftotaku]

Type 218 is a custom design for Singapore which has been designed in collaboration with ST Engineering. It is NOT available for sale to other customers. The HDW proposal for P75i is called Type 216 which currently only exists on paper hence will be disqualified under the RFQ conditions. If they submit Type 214 it also is disqualified as it has no VLS and endurance is short of requirement,

Shortfin Barracuda as proposed to Australia is also (so far) a paper proposal hence disqualified. Also does not have VLS.

See a trend emerging? See why I keep saying P75i is a farce?

 

[Armand2REP]

See a trend emerging? See why I keep saying P75i is a farce?

Possibly, but also keep in mind they could be delaying until the first Barracuda is accepted into service to meet that requirement.

 

[uoftotaku]

Possibly, but also keep in mind they could be delaying until the first Barracuda is accepted into service to meet that requirement.

That will be a LOOOOOONG wait since the Australians still haven't signed an actual production contract. Still the issue with VLS remains since neither Shortfin or Suffren have a VLS module (although SMX Ocean concept planned for it)

 

[BON PLAN]

Type 218 is a custom design for Singapore which has been designed in collaboration with ST Engineering. It is NOT available for sale to other customers. The HDW proposal for P75i is called Type 216 which currently only exists on paper hence will be disqualified under the RFQ conditions. If they submit Type 214 it also is disqualified as it has no VLS and endurance is short of requirement,

Shortfin Barracuda as proposed to Australia is also (so far) a paper proposal hence disqualified. Also does not have VLS.

See a trend emerging? See why I keep saying P75i is a farce?

See the spain S80 : it is a steched version of Scorpene (for bad reasons) up to 3000T.

Imagine now a smart engineered (ie not studied by Navantia ) stretched Scorpene, up to 3000T, with more battery, an AIP, even some more weapons.... It's a low risk nice solution.

 

[BON PLAN]

That will be a LOOOOOONG wait since the Australians still haven't signed an actual production contract. If you're talking the actual Suffren, even THAT is not compliant to P75i FYI since it doesn't have a VLS either

Is there now an operationnal and up to date SSK with VLS on the market ? (up to date = not a Kilo, or Agosta or...)

 

[uoftotaku]

See the spain S80 : it is a steched version of Scorpene (for bad reasons) up to 3000T.

Imagine now a smart engineered (ie not studied by Navantia ) stretched Scorpene, up to 3000T, with more battery, an AIP, even some more weapons.... It's a low risk nice solution.

Indeed would be a nice solution. However, as is put front and center in the RFQ requirements:

- All submissions MUST be an existing design ALREADY built and in service somewhere.

So all these speculative paper proposals like what you mention will not qualify. In fact, looking around the world, there is NO solution available unless we count the Korean KSS-III that actually conforms to the technical specifications laid out, let alone the requirement for being In-Service.

Hence again, my assertion that the whole exercise is A FARCE

 

[BON PLAN]

Indeed would be a nice solution. However, as is put front and center in the RFQ requirements:

- All submissions MUST be an existing design ALREADY built and in service somewhere.

So all these speculative paper proposals like what you mention will not qualify. In fact, looking around the world, there is NO solution available unless we count the Korean KSS-III that actually conforms to the technical specifications laid out, let alone the requirement for being In-Service.

Hence again, my assertion that the whole exercise is A FARCE

Why doing a farce ? to hide a potential add on order for actual scorpene ?

 

[Bleh]

See the spain S80 : it is a steched version of Scorpene (for bad reasons) up to 3000T.

Imagine now a smart engineered (ie not studied by Navantia ) stretched Scorpene, up to 3000T, with more battery, an AIP, even some more weapons.... It's a low risk nice solution.

That is actually the most prudent thing to do now... India gained the experience & expertise in building Scorpenes, with the deal allowing us to produce more submarines and do whatever modifications or upgradations we require.

 

[Armand2REP]

Hence again, my assertion that the whole exercise is A FARCE

You are right... it is a farce one you read the actual RFI.

 

[Assassin 2.0]

Overview of INS Kalvari /scorpion class subs

 

[Bhurki]

Overview of INS Kalvari /scorpion class subs

Why does commodore say "it'll be atleast 10 years before the 1st P75I is commissioned, if all goes well"?
Isn't the timeline expected by IN require the 1st sub in water by 2025?