Second Scorpene class submarine to be launched on January 12

Discussion in 'Indian Navy' started by R!CK, Jan 9, 2017.

  1. Gessler
    Offline

    Gessler Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Messages:
    8,723
    Likes Received:
    6,111
    Country Flag:
    India
    All this is based on the premise that Aridhaman & future Arihant-class vessels will be bigger than the S-2 (pennant S73). Something I don't believe is the case.

    Also, you seem to be assuming there will be more than 3 Arihant-class boats. :angel:

    Either way, I've already said what I had to say about this matter previously - and the only way one of us can be proven wrong is when we see actual pictures/official info releases about the Aridhaman. So let's just wait. :biggthumpup:

    The thing is P-75 and P-75I are separate tenders. The information collected in one does not necessarily influence the selection of the other. If at all an improved Scorpene has to be selected, it's best done Govt-to-Govt which can be concluded within a single FY. No need of a separate tendering process which could drag on for 5+ years. And when I say improved Scorpene, I don't necessarily mean the Navantia-origin "Super Scorpene" (which previously ran into some problems), I mean the same basic DCNS-origin Kalvari-class SSKs we're building, but fitted with AIP as mandatory and given the time-frame, possibly incorporate an improved CMS, a Photonics mast fitment, and a far-fetched possibility being the addition of a pump-jet propeller (which is available on Shortfin Barracuda and PERHAPS can be installed on Scorpene).

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    As many have already pointed out, it's better to have MDL take care of all the SSKs - a parallel production line can be developed to fabricate bulkheads, within the indoor yard. Efforts are already underway. However, a private yard having a 2nd Scorpene line in India won't be detrimental - as long as they get to build at least 8 boats. And as long as it doesn't take the focus away from the SSN project - which is arguably a far more important undertaking when we keep future prospects in mind...like providing effective defence/escort for SSBNs & CBGs...and giving PLAN a run for it's money in IOR. Private sector participation and a Greenfield shipyard are assets that are better made use of in building SSNs.

    Problem is, the more types of SSK we build, the higher the costs and logistical issues. If we select, say, the U214 in P-75I, we'd be the only Navy in the world to operate 4 different types of diesel-electric SSK in recent times (U209, Kilo, Scorpene, U214), it's an unnecessary duplication of effort and even then a U214/any other SSK is unlikely to offer anything but a marginally higher capability than Scorpene.

    The VLS offer on Amur-950 was made on an individual basis. Amur without VLS is available. When competing for the tender, if VLS is not mandatory, I don't think it will be entered in the tender.

    Why? Because the VLS module is an additional cost and adds weight.

    That said, I've scarcely even seen an Amur offer that comes with AIP+VLS modules. While it's not entirely unfeasible (planned variants exist)....it's surely going to drive the cost up considerably. And if the Russians had not actually prepared a model for this configuration yet, it's gonna take a lot of time to re-design the CoG and of course, let's not forget Amur is only a paper design at this point. No actual boat of this class was ever built so we're taking a HUUUGE risk if we fall for the Amur VLS bait - especially when we didn't even ask for it!

    [​IMG]


    Additionally...I've still not yet heard a convincing lobby about WHY we need an SSK-based VLS? What surface or land target is it that our present & future surface combatants cannot effectively neutralize from standoff ranges?

    I don't like how all 6 boats were to be built in India. I think that's one of the prime reasons why the whole thing was delayed so much while in the meantime, IN submarines were sinking & running aground. At least the first 2 should have been delivered from France. MDL workers & coordinators should have been present at the site in order to gain hands-on experience with building the type and then this workforce should have carried out construction at MDL - and before they go out, trained the new workers to continue building the type.

    @Abingdonboy @vstol jockey @randomradio @PARIKRAMA
     
  2. randomradio
    Offline

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Messages:
    7,949
    Likes Received:
    2,400
    After the Scorpene leak, all news about the P-75I has dried up. No point discussing about it, we will only get false news. We have to rely only on named govt sources.
     
    GSLV Mk III and Gessler like this.
  3. R!CK
    Offline

    R!CK 2nd Lieutant THINK TANK

    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    1,068
    Country Flag:
    India
    Nope, I can never say Aridhaman is bigger than Arihant. Because she is not. And no I don't assume to have more than 2 Arihant class boats, just so it's clear. And maybe I'm not assuming, or am I? ;) But yes we should all just wait and find out. It's not out in the open for a reason, and let's leave it there. But rest assured, our SSBN project is miles ahead of people's imagination. :)

    Good Day!
     
    Hellfire, Pundrick and GSLV Mk III like this.
  4. ranadd
    Offline

    ranadd FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    23
    Country Flag:
    India
    Arindhaman IS bigger than Arihant.
     
    Hellfire likes this.
  5. lca-fan
    Online

    lca-fan 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    266
    Country Flag:
    India
    Arihant could itself be bigger with 8 launch tubes. What we were shown in videos and photos could be test submarine S1 with no name Arihant is S2 and could be with 8 tubes and so maybe S3 & S4. From S5 onwards Avinash class with 12 to 16 tubes post 2035.
     
  6. Grevion
    Online

    Grevion Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    520
    Likes Received:
    792
    Country Flag:
    India
    After p75 we should order additional 3 scorpenes out of which 2 should be made in DCNS yard. P75i is taking more time then we thought and our current fleet of 14 subs is not getting any younger India should order 2-3 additional kilos directly from Russia to counter this.
    Either we should officially scrap p75i or make it quick on the fast track basis. Maybe a govt to govt deal where scorpenes would be preferred.

    Our further resources and efforts should be focused on indigenous SSN and SSBN projects with atleast 16 SSNs for our CBG and countering China in the IR region and for increasing our footprints in the SCS region and atleast 8 SSBNs deployed in operations at any given time with 2 in maintenance yard.
    All this is achievable by 2040 if IN truly wants to be a blue water navy.
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2017
    Pundrick, Levina and PARIKRAMA like this.
  7. GSLV Mk III
    Offline

    GSLV Mk III FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    201
    Country Flag:
    India
    8 ? There was an year old newspaper article suggesting that.

    Is that L&T Sir?
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2017
    Hellfire and R!CK like this.
  8. Ankit Kumar 001
    Offline

    Ankit Kumar 001 Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    910
    Likes Received:
    1,933
    Country Flag:
    India
    S2 and S3 are " sister boats " , with 100% same weapons payload.
     
    Levina, Gessler and PARIKRAMA like this.
  9. R!CK
    Offline

    R!CK 2nd Lieutant THINK TANK

    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    1,068
    Country Flag:
    India
    S1 is an old hull from the 90s. It never set sail and no-one had seen it past 2005. S1 had a foreign language written all over it. ;) S2 and S3 are smaller than your estimate. :rolleyes:

    Something I admire about current administration, the public might never know any updates about out boomers. Contrary to how our media was able to gain weekly updates during the old regime. But regardless, the project is alot ahead of everyone's estimate and I hope the current regime maintains that momentum. Hopefully, the SSN project follows the same path and not end up in public domain like P75.

    :)

    L&T? Maybe yes..... L&T Shipyard? Maybe no.....;)

    Good Day!
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2017
  10. Ved Mishra
    Offline

    Ved Mishra Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    742
    Likes Received:
    89
    L&T made major contributions to the design and construction of India's first nuclear-powered submarine, Arihant.
    L&T's Submarine Design Centre effectively used CATIA design software, virtual reality software, PLM tools and intelligent modelling.
     
  11. ranadd
    Offline

    ranadd FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    23
    Country Flag:
    India
    That is true.

    Arihant is S1. The ones with pictures out. I guarantee it. ;)

    Aridhaman follow on class is S2 and S3.
     
  12. ranadd
    Offline

    ranadd FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    23
    Country Flag:
    India
    Both. Yes.
     
  13. Ankit Kumar 001
    Offline

    Ankit Kumar 001 Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    910
    Likes Received:
    1,933
    Country Flag:
    India
    Arihant is S1?

    Then S1 andb S2 are Sister vessels , with " 100 % same weapons payload ".
     
  14. ranadd
    Offline

    ranadd FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    23
    Country Flag:
    India
    Arihant S1, the one out and about. Call it S2 if you wish to.

    Aridhaman, S2 or S3 if you wish to, is different. With very very different payloads. More tubes.
    Oh yea, the reactor is different. I was not able to understand how though. It is not two reactor or anything.

    Navy is following their tried and tested method of ship building into submarine as well.

    Follow on ones, Will have "similar" payload as of now. However the construction technique, systems are generation apart.
    AFAIK, few key systems underwent redesign. More automated systems, if it was not clear.
     
  15. Gessler
    Offline

    Gessler Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Messages:
    8,723
    Likes Received:
    6,111
    Country Flag:
    India
    What you're implying is practically unfeasible to build even for China. You cannot change design on the fly between different boats of the same class - especially when we haven't built anything like it before.

    S1 is a static hull that serves as a shore-based test rig. The PWR design was validated on this test-hull. It does not move anywhere.

    S2 hull is Arihant - which is already inducted and has received the pennant number S-73 (IN designation).

    Aridhaman is S3. The last hull, S4 has not been named yet.

    While changing the hull design itself is unfeasible, from where is the 'new reactor' narrative coming? When was this PWR built? On what was it validated? The S1?

    I would like to know where you picked up this information.
     

Share This Page