India set to ink deal with Korean yard to build minesweeping ships

[Agent_47]

The MCM vessels of the South Korean navy are (unlicensed) derivative of the ITALIAN Lerici design, with the Yangyang-class apparently an enlarged version of the Ganggyeong-class. These are minehunters, which means they use remote-operated submersibles for mine investigation and clearance. Sweeping gear, if any, is secondary ate best.

While the Lerici/Gaeta class based Finnish Katanpää-classis said to be armed with depth charges, I srtongly suspect these to be the Saab Elma ASW-600 9-tube ASW mortars, since these are also used on Rauma and Hamina class FACs. These are especially usefull in shallow waters as found in the Baltic. 'Dumb' depth charges probably less so. The latter FACs can also be used to lay mines, if at the cost of dismounting some SSMs in Rauma, and the RIB in Hamina. Their high speed and relatively comprehensive armamant makes them suitable for offensive mine laying. However, the Finnish navy operates several larger ships specifically for minelaying, so it is a secondary role for the FACs.

https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_old_pdf.cfm?ARC_ID=1713
Typically mounts forward of the main gun.

Rauma and Hamina stern, with rail (which can be used to deploy depth charges)

Hamina FAC and Katanpää MCMV sterns: in the middle of the stern of the MCMV there appears to be a rail.

Such a rail could be used both for mine laying and/or depth charges. Though I suspect that is not the primary use in either class.

Can you comment on cost?. 2000cr per 700ton ship looks very expensive.

 

[Penguin]

Can you comment on cost?. 2000cr per 700ton ship looks very expensive.

Katanpää-class mine countermeasure vessel
Builders: Intermarine S.p.A., Sarzana, Italy
Operators: Finnish Navy
€244.8 M for three vessels and a spare parts package. (About 50 % of the total cost is contracted for Finnish companies and the shipbuilding contract includes a 100 % offset agreement)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katanpää-class_mine_countermeasure_vessel
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/katanpaa-mhc-mine-hunter-coastal-vessel/

But this is a straight buy from Italy by Finland. It is not a TOT project.

Too bad India didn't pick up some ex-US Osprey's (also Lerici derived): 6 of 12 sold for scrap, the rest to Hellenic, RoC and Egyptian navies. At they time of construction, the Osprey class were the world's second largest minehunters (surpassed by the Royal Navy's 60-metre (200 ft) Hunt class minehunters)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osprey-class_minehunter

The Osprey class ships are larger than the other Lerici designs: they displace 918 tons fully loaded, are 57.3 metres (188 ft) long, 11 metres (36 ft) wide, and with a draught of 2.9 metres (9.5 ft).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lerici-class_minehunter#Osprey_class

Remember
" Mital said infrastructure was being scaled up swiftly at the shipyard to kick off the construction of the ships.

In December 2015, the defence ministry approved Rs 480 crore for infrastructure expansion to build MCMVs. Facilities are being created for construction of glass-reinforced plastic hulls. "

That's not ship cost, for starters.

"India is on the verge of closing a deal with a South Korean shipyard to build 12 minesweeping ships locally, a project that is likely to cost more than Rs 32,000 crore."

1 crore Rupees = 10 million Rupees
32,000 crore = 320,000,000,000 Rupees
= 4,793,600,000.00 USD

4,793,600,000.00 USD / 12 =
399,466,667 USD "per ship"
> That's close to the price of a (light) frigate
> Top dollar MCMVs like USN Avenger class and JMSDF Enoshima and Yaeyama classes approached that 'unit cost'. Typically, unit cost is between 200-300 million USD
There's a lot more included in that Rs 32,000 than just 12 ships, obviously.

Cost review MCMVs (no idea how trustworthy)
http://nationsdawnofanera.weebly.com/mine-warfare-vessels.html

India Seeks Global Transfer of Technology To Build MCMV
By Vivek Raghuvanshi 7:08 a.m. EDT September 28, 2015

India's Goa Shipyard Ltd. (GSL) is looking for international companies with the technology the state-owned company needs to build 12 mine countermeasures vessels (MCMVs) for the Indian Navy.

GSL, which was awarded the $5 billion noncompetitive contract in 2014, has floated a global expression of interest (EOI) from companies willing to transfer the technology to build the vessels to the Indian shipyard.

The value of the transfer of technology contract is more than $1 billion, or about 20 percent of the total value of the contract, an Indian Navy official said.

While the MCMV acquisition is delayed due to cancellation of the original tender and the GSL contract award, analysts say the absorption of technology would help in building more vessels in the future.

"Minesweepers or mine countermeasure vessels are very sophisticated technology products," said Sujeet Samaddar, a retired Indian Navy commodore. "Including hull material, acoustic and magnetic reduced signatures, mine-hunting sonars and remotely piloted vehicles, and also the design methodology are not easy. That said, it is not undoable in India, but that is like reinventing the wheel."

Anil Jai Singh, a retired Indian Navy commodore, said building the MCMV may not be exceedingly expensive. "More important will be the development of an indigenous capability to build a specialized vessel," he said. "On the choice of hull, the Navy must have taken an informed decision."

http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...lobal-tranfer-technology-build-mcmv/72730048/

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

Katanpää-class mine countermeasure vessel
Builders: Intermarine S.p.A., Sarzana, Italy
Operators: Finnish Navy
€244.8 M for three vessels and a spare parts package. (About 50 % of the total cost is contracted for Finnish companies and the shipbuilding contract includes a 100 % offset agreement)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katanpää-class_mine_countermeasure_vessel
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/katanpaa-mhc-mine-hunter-coastal-vessel/

But this is a straight buy from Italy by Finland. It is not a TOT project.

Too bad India didn't pick up some ex-US Osprey's (also Lerici derived): 6 of 12 sold for scrap, the rest to Hellenic, RoC and Egyptian navies. At they time of construction, the Osprey class were the world's second largest minehunters (surpassed by the Royal Navy's 60-metre (200 ft) Hunt class minehunters)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osprey-class_minehunter

The Osprey class ships are larger than the other Lerici designs: they displace 918 tons fully loaded, are 57.3 metres (188 ft) long, 11 metres (36 ft) wide, and with a draught of 2.9 metres (9.5 ft).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lerici-class_minehunter#Osprey_class

Remember
" Mital said infrastructure was being scaled up swiftly at the shipyard to kick off the construction of the ships.

In December 2015, the defence ministry approved Rs 480 crore for infrastructure expansion to build MCMVs. Facilities are being created for construction of glass-reinforced plastic hulls. "

That's not ship cost, for starters.

"India is on the verge of closing a deal with a South Korean shipyard to build 12 minesweeping ships locally, a project that is likely to cost more than Rs 32,000 crore."

1 crore Rupees = 10 million Rupees
32,000 crore = 320,000,000,000 Rupees
= 4,793,600,000.00 USD

4,793,600,000.00 USD / 12 =
399,466,667 USD "per ship"
> That's close to the price of a (light) frigate
> Top dollar MCMVs like USN Avenger class and JMSDF Enoshima and Yaeyama classes approached that 'unit cost'. Typically, unit cost is between 200-300 million USD
There's a lot more included in that Rs 32,000 than just 12 ships, obviously.

Cost review MCMVs (no idea how trustworthy)
http://nationsdawnofanera.weebly.com/mine-warfare-vessels.html


http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...lobal-tranfer-technology-build-mcmv/72730048/

Even if I take out 30% of the cost for TOT, importing tools/machinery and yard upgraded , the cost per ship is three times the Finnish one from Intermarine. And it does not come with a advantage over any of its kind.

I would be thankful if you are able to verify the reason that why projected 11 Mine Countermeasures vessels production of South Korea by Kangam was stopped at 3? And also when was the last time Kangam built a vessel of this caliber ?

 

[Penguin]

Even if I take out 30% of the cost for TOT, importing tools/machinery and yard upgraded , the cost per ship is three times the Finnish one from Intermarine. And it does not come with a advantage over any of its kind.

I would be thankful if you are able to verify the reason that why projected 11 Mine Countermeasures vessels production of South Korea by Kangam was stopped at 3? And also when was the last time Kangam built a vessel of this caliber ?

I think you underestimate the cost of getting a GRP shipbuilding facility built and up and running, including staffing it with competent personnel. See Sweden's difficulty in managing the ($184 million a pop at the time) Visby class project to a good end. The ships took an exceptionally long time from launch to delivery and the construction has been fraught with repeated delays.

The six Ganggyeong (Swallow) class ships of the Republic of Korea Navy are an unlicensed (as well as smaller and simpler) derivative of the Lerici class. Which suggests to me that South Korea may have still had a few things to learn about building larger GRP ships (unlike the Italians > see Osprey). Further, RoKN may have shifted priorities:

The Republic of Korea Navy mine hunter Yang Yang was operational at the beginning of 2000, and at that time seven more of the 730-ton ships were on order. By 2005 South Korea had a large mine countermeasures project under way, with up to 11 Yang Yang-class mine hunters expected to enter service in the next decade. By 2006 the navy was pushing forward with mine-clearing helicopter program by cutting back on mine-hunter acquisition, and it appeared this would mark the end of Yang Yang class construction. Indeed, by 2008, a total of only three were operational.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/rok/msh-571.htm

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

I think you underestimate the cost of getting a GRP shipbuilding facility built and up and running, including staffing it with competent personnel. See Sweden's difficulty in managing the ($184 million a pop at the time) Visby class project to a good end. The ships took an exceptionally long time from launch to delivery and the construction has been fraught with repeated delays.

The six Ganggyeong (Swallow) class ships of the Republic of Korea Navy are an unlicensed (as well as smaller and simpler) derivative of the Lerici class. Which suggests to me that South Korea may have still had a few things to learn about building larger GRP ships (unlike the Italians > see Osprey). Further, RoKN may have shifted priorities:


http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/rok/msh-571.htm

The GSL till now has proposed or went ahead on modernisation works of the shipyard not more than 120 million USD , so I think my estimate about the cost for installation of facilities for making these is more or less correct.

 

[Penguin]

"Rs 480 crore for infrastructure expansion to build MCMVs"
> 1,000,000,000 US

I suggest you read this
https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_old_pdf.cfm?ARC_ID=1761

Osprey
Funding in FY90 amounted to US$249.8 million for two units. This was followed in FY91 by US$200.6 for an additional pair of hulls, while the FY92 budget provided US$349.9 million for three ships. The program was concluded in FY93 with authorization of US$246.2 million for the final pair of ships.

So that makes $1046.5 for 9 ships. in early 1990s dollar value.... or about 120 million USD per ship about 25 years ago.

See also PROGRAM REVIEW on more cost detail. Also, at the time, there were also reports that the Intermarine yard in Savannah was incapable of handling the full construction of the ships. Congress demanded one of these ships would have to be ordered from a second-source shipyard: Avondale Industries Inc.

 

[Blue Marlin]

Note that SK is a NSG member.

what are you hinting at? nuclear powered mine sweepers?