India's state-run GRSE to supply two light frigates to Philippine Navy

[sudhir007]

why not saryu class OPV
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saryu-class_patrol_vessel

somebody know what are price of these opv

 

[Penguin]

I know , what i am saying is new Karmata class will cost at least $200million (half of previous price)
Now Philippines is spending $160.5 million, surely downgrade version of Karmata class.

The price of the iniitial Kamorta class ships surely includes a fair chunk of the development cost, as separate from the actualy cost to build and equip.

why not saryu class OPV
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saryu-class_patrol_vessel

somebody know what are price of these opv

To replace the old ww2 era minsweepers used as patrol vessels/ 'corvettes' that would be a great option. But PN may be getting more ex-RoKN Pohang class of similar displacement, at least one this year. Qualitatively a huge step forward.

From

To

 

[MKC]

why not saryu class OPV
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saryu-class_patrol_vessel

somebody know what are price of these opv

Thank god, you are not sticky to Sukanya class but Saryu class OPV.
You should consider Pipavav NOPV Class which is follow on of Saryu class OPV & better.
In June 2010, Pipavav shipyard secured a contract worth ₹ 2,600 crore ($553.5 million) or $110.7 million from the Indian Ministry of Defence (MoD) to build five naval offshore patrol vessels (NOPVs) for the Indian Navy.
Today that is $388.136 million or $77.6 million.

 

[Gen Padmanabhan]

For the first 4 Kamorta Class ASW corvettes the IN is paying just over $400m apiece, this includes total project costs, each subsequent P-28 would be considerably cheaper.

The first 2 ship also include R&D cost.

I know , what i am saying is new Karmata class will cost at least $200million (half of previous price)
Now Philippines is spending $160.5 million, surely downgrade version of Karmata class.

This is possible indeed.

Further it seems weapon procurement is part of different tender

Separate Acquisition of Ammunition:
The absence of the ammunition requirements in the SBB as opposed to the previous TS means that they would be acquired in a different program and timeline, as they require shorter period of time to produce and deliver and will be supplied by different manufacturers. But nonetheless, they should be ready before the ship is launched to avoid a disaster similar to what the Philippine Air Force's FA-50PH fleet experienced. Once the ships are ready, it is only a matter of time before the live ammunitions are required for training, familiarity, and readiness to any unwanted or unexpected situations.
Since the proponents will be the one doing the offer for specific guns and launchers, the acquisition of ammunition may not need undergo tender process, except for the primary, secondary, and machine gun ammunition. If the PN is already decided in acquiring the Blue Shark torpedo for the ASW helicopters, it could also mean they might have already been decided in using the Blue Shark for the frigates too.

http://maxdefense.blogspot.in/2016/02/the-philippine-navys-frigate.html

The Indian firm GRSE till now has only been declared the lowest bidder.

Post Qualification Checks and then negotiations for price and weapon systems will happen if PH is satisfied with post qualification.


That will only happen if GRSE fails post qualification checks as it has been declared the lowest bidder.



The Indian shipyard has been only declared the lowest bidder. Post Qualification Checks are gonna happen. Concerns are over weaponry as PH wants weapons from a country with which it has defence agreements. So Russian CIWS and RBU6000 are out , adding NATO systems will spike the cost, which may create problems.

There are geopolitical aspects too.

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

Thank god, you are not sticky to Sukanya class but Saryu class OPV.
You should consider Pipavav NOPV Class which is follow on of Saryu class OPV & better.
In June 2010, Pipavav shipyard secured a contract worth ₹ 2,600 crore ($553.5 million) or $110.7 million from the Indian Ministry of Defence (MoD) to build five naval offshore patrol vessels (NOPVs) for the Indian Navy.
Today that is $388.136 million or $77.6 million.

We need to remember it's GRSE bidding not all Indian Shipyards as one.

And GRSE will not offer a vessel it doesn't make.

There are geopolitical aspects too.

But at the present scenario untill and unless GRSE itself doesn't do something wrong , PH cannot give this to the 2nd lowest bidder which is asking 15 million USD more.

 

[MKC]

We need to remember it's GRSE bidding not all Indian Shipyards as one.

And GRSE will not offer a vessel it doesn't make.

I was not talking about GRSE or GSL but Indian shipyards capability of exporting ship

But at the present scenario untill and unless GRSE itself doesn't do something wrong , PH cannot give this to the 2nd lowest bidder which is asking 70 million USD more.

It's not $70 million more but may be PhP70 million more about 1.5 million more, I think your figure is wrong difference was about 15 million dollar.

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

I was not talking about GRSE or GSL but Indian shipyards capability of exporting ship

It's not $70 million more but may be PhP70 million more about 1.5 million more, I think your figure is wrong difference was about 15 million dollar.

Thanks, correction made. Its near, 15 million USD.

 

[RISING SUN]

First commissioned 15 July 1963, that makes her 53 years old. She was acquired 2001. She suffered an engine room explosion and fire in 2004 and spent 2005-2010 in 'extended maintenance'. She suffered another major fire in 2012 and in 2014 she was still undergoing repairs. From 2015, the aircraft carrier will undergo a PMM (Modernization Program Environment) planned to last until 2019. With this modernization, the ship will have its extended life for another 20 years until 2039. By that time, she'll ....76. (But who see's her history can't help but wonder if she'll survive that long)

INS Vikrant decommed after 36 years, but was kept around as (potential) museumpiece for another 17 yeas before finally being scrapped, at which time she was 53 years old. That is, if you not count the period 1946-1961 after she got launched but construction was halted. Include that and she was technically almost 68 at the time of her scrapping.

INS Viraat, scheduled to finally decommisison June 2016, is 57.

Gripen for Brazil: On December 18, 2013, after more than ten years of discussion, President Dilma Rousseff decided to purchase these fighter jets to the FAB. The package 36 aircraft would cost $ 4.5 billion. The new aircraft would be assembled in Brazil from the fifth unit, with six other countries participaiting in the provision of the various components. In October 2014, the deal was formally signed the Saab's contract with the Brazilian government. The supply would be 28 units of the Gripen NG single seater and 8 two seaters. The transaction amount was around US $ 5.4 billion (R $ 13.4 billion reais), an increase of one billion. The increase was justified by technical components that the Brazilian military demanded. [note: one can wonder what those are, but likely include use of Brazilian made weaponry such as MAR-1 ARM and MAA-1A/B Piranha SRAAM), possibly this could include provisions for a carrier version down the line]. About 15 of these aircraft would be assembled in Brazil, but Brazilian would be involved in all stages of the construction of 36 fighters.
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/JAS_39_Gripen


From what I gather from the description of individual ship in wiki, there is only mention of 3M54 (Club) AShm in the third ship. Since that is the only vessel where this is mentioned, and others consistently do no list any AShm, I'm consireding that an incorrect wiki entry untill such time as I see a picture which actually proves that third ship - INS Kiltan - has AShM.

For SAM, if listed at all, it is listed as 16 Barak (2x8), possibly 2x16, and accompanied by the remark "fitted for but not with". I'm taking this to mean the original Barak, not Barak 8. Alternative, the class been said to be slated to receive SR-SAM / Maitri. That is a development from the French MICA.

First on BARAK 8, IN had officially confirmed on BARAK-8 installation on Kamorta class. Further IN is moving away from BARAK one to BARAK-8 and MICA based short range SAM. Second reason being 3rd ship onwards weights 3000 ton instead of 3300 tons in full load on 1st & 2nd Kamorta boats. And it also proves that Kamorta has sufficient place for Anti Surface warfare missiles which may include Bramhos if PN requests for it and if feasible. Hope I have cleared some gray areas.

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

First on BARAK 8, IN had officially confirmed on BARAK-8 installation on Kamorta class. Further IN is moving away from BARAK one to BARAK-8 and MICA based short range SAM. Second reason being 3rd ship onwards weights 3000 ton instead of 3300 tons in full load on 1st & 2nd Kamorta boats. And it also proves that Kamorta has sufficient place for Anti Surface warfare missiles which may include Bramhos if PN requests for it and if feasible. Hope I have cleared some gray areas.

Any link supporting the notion that IN has officially said that it's B8 for Kamorta class ?

 

[RISING SUN]

Any link supporting the notion that IN has officially said that it's B8 for Kamorta class ?

Please read wiki where there is news link provided or just type Kamorta BARAK, you will get the link in browser.

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

Please read wiki where there is news link provided or just type Kamorta BARAK, you will get the link in browser.

Yes found that http://wap.business-standard.com/ar...ile-developed-with-israel-115122900967_1.html , but the question is without a radar similar to MF STAR, will Kamorta using its on board systems use the B8 to its full potential ?

 

[RISING SUN]

Yes found that http://wap.business-standard.com/ar...ile-developed-with-israel-115122900967_1.html , but the question is without a radar similar to MF STAR, will Kamorta using its on board systems use the B8 to its full potential ?

India today 30.12.2015 is another link. Global security is another one of the site's reporting it. If your point is that MF Star can't be installed on Kamorta, let me categorically state that it's very much possible depending on customer requirements. Even smaller boats can have MF Star. And BARAK 8 and MF Star are not integral part of a system.

 

[Ankit Kumar 002]

India today 30.12.2015 is another link. Global security is another one of the site's reporting it. If your point is that MF Star can't be installed on Kamorta, let metegorically state that it's very much possible depending on customer requirements. Even smaller boats can have MF Star. And BARAK 8 and MF Star are not integral part of a system.

1. It can very well be installed.
But my point is that means additional costs. And I don't see it happening.

2. Yes it can be said. To utilise B8 properly a system similar to MF STAR is needed.Even Israel is adding MF STAR in its Saar 5 ships to operate B8.

 

[RISING SUN]

1. It can very well be installed.
But my point is that means additional costs. And I don't see it happening.

2. Yes it can be said. To utilise B8 properly a system similar to MF STAR is needed.Even Israel is adding MF STAR in its Saar 5 ships to operate B8.

FYI all it takes is 25 million dollars to operationalize a naval BARAK-8 battery. So it's not expensive at all and it does give you 3 in one weapon types package. CIWS, short range and long range SAM. VLSAM will come online in some time. MF Star is only one piece of equipment individually however if paired with all subsystems it becomes the very heart of the ship. So it depends on customer how do they want it. And yes RADAR is bit costly. And it's not Mandatory to have MFStar to perform BARAK-8 it's best, but testing needs to be done with other radars.

 

[Penguin]

First on BARAK 8, IN had officially confirmed on BARAK-8 installation on Kamorta class. Further IN is moving away from BARAK one to BARAK-8 and MICA based short range SAM. Second reason being 3rd ship onwards weights 3000 ton instead of 3300 tons in full load on 1st & 2nd Kamorta boats. And it also proves that Kamorta has sufficient place for Anti Surface warfare missiles which may include Bramhos if PN requests for it and if feasible. Hope I have cleared some gray areas.

Maybe so, but I see no evidence of the 3rd or the 4th ship actually being different. The 3000 tons listed for the thrid ship in e.g. Wiki may just be the same in long tonnes rather than short, which implies no real difference in displacement.

One tonne is equivalent to:

• Metric/SI: 1 megagram (Mg) (by definition). Equal to 1000000 grams (g) or 1000 kilograms (kg).
  • Megagram, Mg, is the official SI unit. Mg is distinct from mg, milligram.
• Pounds (lb): Exactly 1000/0.453 592 37 lb (by definition of the pound), or approximately 2204.622622 lb (10 s.f.).
• US/Short tons (ST): Exactly 1/0.907 184 74 short tons, or approximately 1.102311311 ST (10 s.f.).
  • One short ton is exactly 0.90718474 t.
• Imperial/Long tons (LT): Exactly 1/1.016 046 9088 long tons, or approximately 0.9842065276 LT (10 s.f.).
  • One long ton is exactly 1.0160469088 t.

3 000 ton [long, UK] = 3 360 ton [short, US]
3 000 ton [metric] = 3 306.933 932 8 ton [short, US]

This would explain the relationship between displacements listed in Wiki for the third and the fourth ships, respectively 3000 and 3300, as kompared to 3400 for the first pair.

Assuming they are all in metric tons, what is the explanation for the 2 (not 1) differences: 3400 versus 3000 and 3400 versus 3300? Why is the fourth back at 3300 whereas the third is down at 3000?

Also, while Barak-8 on Kormorta for Vietnam was mentioned with source (though not yet confirmed fro multiple indipendent sources), there is no mention anywhere ( that I know of, but please feel free to provide source reference) that states that IN P28 ships will be getting Barak-8: that is a whole new discussion.

Maitri (a MICA based Indian SR-Sam will be just over 3m long, not 4.5m like Barak-8 and that is a significant difference, considering Barak has a length of 2.1. One can accommodate the Maitri by using the same underdeck volume as Barak-1 and having the launcher stick up 'above deck'. For Barak-8 you will definitely need to penetrate into and occupy another deck below where the current below deck space is reserved for a VL missile (Barak-1).