Indian Submarine Acquisitions (Conventional)

[vish]

^Nitesh: I think the above post deserves a seperate thread.

 

[Neo]

I am aware that PAF tried hard to get the E-3A's in the 80's. Im talking about the current scenario Neo. Like i said, back in the day Pakistan was the one who brought new equipment and upped the ante in South Asia. Now the times have changed, while Pakistan due to the 90's fell in a trap of debts and in political mess, India OTOH has started buying newer equipment without regard to Pakistan.

Current scenario is definitely in India's favor for sharing good relations with Russia and Israel, rapid economic growth and greater access to global market.
But this is not a guarantee that India will sustain the advantage as we've started to catch up fast., the power ratio already has declined from 4:1 to 3:1.
We too have access to global market now and money is spent wisely to keep up with India Armed Forces.

 

[vish]

Current scenario is definitely in India's favor for sharing good relations with Russia and Israel, rapid economic growth and greater access to global market.
But this is not a guarantee that India will sustain the advantage as we've started to catch up fast., the power ratio already has declined from 4:1 to 3:1.
We too have access to global market now and money is spent wisely to keep up with India Armed Forces.

The only contention I have is your power ratio remark. If the discussion will go off-topic then I suggest we refrain from having it.

There was never a power ratio of the scale that you're implying. Power ratio does not alone mean numbers. Why do you forget we also have to play tango with the PLA.

Further, clarify your comment on the power ratio.

 

[nitesh]

^Nitesh: I think the above post deserves a seperate thread.

vish, i suggest (request) to keep all the related topics in one thread. Like Navy, Army, Airforce, Missiles etc.

Although I am happy with Arjun and LCA as separate thread or else everything will mess up.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

vish, i suggest (request) to keep all the related topics in one thread. Like Navy, Army, Airforce, Missiles etc.

Although I am happy with Arjun and LCA as separate thread or else everything will mess up.

Major events or discussions- such as this one on the Indian submarine requirement, the MRCA etc. should be kept seperate.

However you can start a thread on Indian Army/Navy/AF Updates or news.

When something major occurs, you could start its own thread.

 

[Jliu]

Hey Jliu,
quite good analysis. But I read somewhere (will try to dig out the info) that VLS tubes are a must for second line of SSK's. And Amur have them. Does U-214 gives the same capability.

Yes I've read that too-or at least how newspapers write it. The reality is much simpler. All the IN requires is for the SSK to be subsurface AshM capable, VLS is a "plus" but not essential.

The first reason for that is simply because all AshMs require midcourse targeting info for final approach to the target-from either shipboard or airborne assets. An SSK CANNOT do that without sticking a EW mast from the sail-the equivalent of painting a red target on yourself. The alternative is to rely on the above assets to do that but it would be highly dangerous as the presence of those assets would likely alert hostiles to the fact that your sub is around. That is why all navies rely on a dedicated surface combatant for the LA and surface to surface role. The second reason is because the range of all Ashms that can fit into VLS tubes on an SSK (around 16) is too short (around 200km) for a clean exit from the ops area before ASW assets arrive and send the SSK to the bottom. This is especially true for the Indian Ocean as both navies have the littorals wired.

The U214 does not have VLS. Yet the reason why it is almost dead certain to be chosen for the IN's next line of SSKs (and was chosen for Greek and ROK navies) is because of all contemporary Western SSK designs it has one of the quiestest acoustic signatures around (barring the S80 and the Swedish designs). Under the surface it matters not how many VLS tubes or torps you can carry (something the Russians don't seem to understand) but just how slient you can stay.

As Ive said before, if you want any form of naval fire support-use anything but a submarine.

 

[Jliu]

As mentioned by Always Neutral for HSL.
Apart from that do explain how is L&T involved in the manufacturing of ATV directly if it doesnt satisfy the security requirements and the secrecy clauses. Again, i repeat, L&T has constantly said that THEY ARE BIDDING for manufacturing the next line of SSK's whichever India chooses.

The ATV, gentlemen, is a domestic SSBN domestically produced and manufactured.

For the new line of SSKs the IN will be purchasing/licensing the design from a foreign firm that insists on OPSEC protocols to ensure that no leakage of technology occurs to third parties.

Now if the yards in question don't meet your protocols then you don't bid. Regardless of what L&T says as in the end L&T has no say in what gets built where.

Simple as that.

 

[vish]

Jliu:

Sir, if the Mazgaon Shipyard is fully booked till 2018, and the only choice the IN has is to outsource the construction of the six new SSKs, then would it not make better sense to go in for the U-212s (and not U-214s) if full ToT is provided?

Perhaps I should ask, will full ToT be provided if the IN chooses the U-212?

Sorry if I'm being naive.

Further, if the ATV is indeed satisfactory, will it prove to be very difficult to derive an SSN from the design?

 

[Jliu]

I do realise that for such support DDG's would be better, but then again, i am NOT in the Navy, i am reiterating what they have said. And what they did say is that they are looking for good land attack capability in the new SSK and that previously Amur was the front runner as it was the best in the desired qualities. Whether it is the better of the lot or not is questionable, i repeat, i am reiterating what was said.

Do your own research instead of repeating the junk that gets spun by the papers.

I am pretty sure as well that the main competition is between the Amur and the U-214. Dont forget Russia has many strings it can pull to get the deal. The Navy is pretty pissed at Russia, but the Navy doesnt decide what it gets, the MoD does, and the IN only gets to send a recommendation, which has precedence of being ignored.

I strongly dispute that. The IN pretty much gets what it wants in regards to procurements and Russia's strings have pretty much frayed at the moment. I'm not going to discuss the details on a public forum so I'll leave it here.

If Pakistan hurries up and signs a deal to buy U-214's then it would seriously change the equations. MoD will in all probability not buy the same equipment PN has, so in that case, Amur becomes the only choice.
Do explain the bold part mate.[/QUOTE]

They're not going to hurry up with a new change of government and defence cuts. Furthermore it isn't as simple as it appears as any U214 deal is of course subject to more than just TKMS and the German government's approval. My personal opinion is that the PN will eventually have to either buy French or Chinese as the German option won't be feasible for them as final approval will never be given for a variety of reasons.

The last part is based on requirements and expectations among both Indian and Australian analysts regarding the upcoming SSK tender that could only have applied to the U214. If there is one thing the media have gotten right-its that the U214 is "silent" and I can reasonably state with confidence that the acoustic signature is several dbs quieter than the Scorpene-which is considered a very quiet design already.

 

[nitesh]

Major events or discussions- such as this one on the Indian submarine requirement, the MRCA etc. should be kept seperate.

However you can start a thread on Indian Army/Navy/AF Updates or news.

When something major occurs, you could start its own thread.

AM your point is well taken. This is exactly my request is, opening new threads for every news is not a good idea.

 

[nitesh]

Yes I've read that too-or at least how newspapers write it. The reality is much simpler. All the IN requires is for the SSK to be subsurface AshM capable, VLS is a "plus" but not essential.

The first reason for that is simply because all AshMs require midcourse targeting info for final approach to the target-from either shipboard or airborne assets. An SSK CANNOT do that without sticking a EW mast from the sail-the equivalent of painting a red target on yourself. The alternative is to rely on the above assets to do that but it would be highly dangerous as the presence of those assets would likely alert hostiles to the fact that your sub is around. That is why all navies rely on a dedicated surface combatant for the LA and surface to surface role. The second reason is because the range of all Ashms that can fit into VLS tubes on an SSK (around 16) is too short (around 200km) for a clean exit from the ops area before ASW assets arrive and send the SSK to the bottom. This is especially true for the Indian Ocean as both navies have the littorals wired.

The U214 does not have VLS. Yet the reason why it is almost dead certain to be chosen for the IN's next line of SSKs (and was chosen for Greek and ROK navies) is because of all contemporary Western SSK designs it has one of the quiestest acoustic signatures around (barring the S80 and the Swedish designs). Under the surface it matters not how many VLS tubes or torps you can carry (something the Russians don't seem to understand) but just how slient you can stay.

As Ive said before, if you want any form of naval fire support-use anything but a submarine.

I have one query. Suppose a BrahMos equipped new gen SSK, which is in the enemy territory. it takes the firinig co-ordinates from a passing satellite above, puts it in BrahMos, fires it and scoots. Now considering range of BrahMos is 300km which navy is guaranteeing 300km of risk free zone now a days.

 

[Jliu]

Jliu:

Sir, if the Mazgaon Shipyard is fully booked till 2018, and the only choice the IN has is to outsource the construction of the six new SSKs, then would it not make better sense to go in for the U-212s (and not U-214s) if full ToT is provided?

Perhaps I should ask, will full ToT be provided if the IN chooses the U-212?

No- the U212 is a new joint Italo-German project and as such contains several "classified" technologies outlined in the joint MoU that are not for export (except if both partners agree of course and then until better versions ahve been developed). For example the "full" ISUS90 tactical combat system (the 'brains' of the sub) considered to be the best sub combat system outside of the US/UK, the "non magnetic coated hull" and other even more "black" technologies. Please excuse my predictions from earlier posts if I raised your hopes for the export of the U212-that would be assuming if the Germans craved overwhelming market share by supplying both sides which the German gov is not prepared to do.

The U214 on the other hand is actually a different design of SSK designed as an export replacement for the highly successful Type 209. The U214 is based off the U209 and is reflected in the hull of the submarine. Google pictures of both subs and you'll see what I mean-especially the planes near the propellers. Where everyone gets confused is that the U214 incorporates several technologies found in the U212-such as a derivative of the ISUS90 and some sonar and sensor fits-downgraded quite a bit of course and also lacks the "black tech". To add to the confusion the U214 actually outperforms the 212 in some parameters such as diving depth. But the 212 was designed primarily for littoral combat (although fully blue water capable) and most importantly is MUCH quieter than the 214-and stealth is king underwater. In any case the IN if it went for a German design would recieve the 214. It appears now that the IN is shifting production of domestic Frigate and DD construction to other shipyards to free up Mazagoan due to supplier concerns about tech leakage. That said I believe German yards would build 2-3 boats with Mazagoan (or other yards when they get certified) buidling the rest under license.

To answer your ToT question you have to remember that every SSK configuration varies according to mission fit and that export versions as always are downgraded/baseline versions of versions in service with the exporter and "full" ToT of course is a no-no, that is until you develop a superior product like the French with their Agosta90B-and even then they withheld the MESMA AIP so there never is a "full" ToT but major ToT would be right.

Further, if the ATV is indeed satisfactory, will it prove to be very difficult to derive an SSN from the design?

Not really. The French actually built SSBNs before SSNs and based their SSNs (Rubis class) from a modified version of their Redoubtable SSBNs. Essentially the IN would be following that particular evolution of design.

 

[nitesh]

Jliu:

Sir, if the Mazgaon Shipyard is fully booked till 2018, and the only choice the IN has is to outsource the construction of the six new SSKs, then would it not make better sense to go in for the U-212s (and not U-214s) if full ToT is provided?

Perhaps I should ask, will full ToT be provided if the IN chooses the U-212?

Sorry if I'm being naive.

Further, if the ATV is indeed satisfactory, will it prove to be very difficult to derive an SSN from the design?

I don't think India will be going with separate designs for SSN and SSBN as the cost will be too much to maintain these subs. I think ATV will be fulfilling both the roles.

 

[Jliu]

I have one query. Suppose a BrahMos equipped new gen SSK, which is in the enemy territory. it takes the firinig co-ordinates from a passing satellite above, puts it in BrahMos, fires it and scoots. Now considering range of BrahMos is 300km which navy is guaranteeing 300km of risk free zone now a days.

That would not be fire support-that would be comprise a undersea strike capability comparable to the USN's UGM Tomahawks with or w/o nuclear warhead. Possible if the IN accesses GLONASS/GPS milgrade coverage for a TERCOM variant Brahmos. All the same, you have to make sure the SSK can scoot somewhere safe as it does not have an SSN's speed or acoustic dampening performance at those speeds. The only other navy with that capability is the Israeli Navy with their Dolphin/Popeye Turbo combination and they aren't saying anything although I'm pretty sure they will give the IN "hints" on sub survivability. So your point is totally valid.

 

[Jliu]

I don't think India will be going with separate designs for SSN and SSBN as the cost will be too much to maintain these subs. I think ATV will be fulfilling both the roles.

Impossible. Different roles, different designs.

Can you even begin to imagine the ruckus if a theoretical "joint" SSBN/SSN ATV was sunk? That's a few SLBMs on the seabed and radiation in your seafood!