Indonesia Indonesian Navy, Tentara Nasional Indonesia-Angkatan Laut (TNI-AL)

[NEKO]

Waiting for detailed videos of the inside of the ship, with the well deck and vehicle storage and handling area removed there will be more area available for medical purpose.

 

[Mandala]

Credit to PT PAL.

 

[Lordimperator]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1559835108198285314

 

[JATOSINT]

Waiting for detailed videos of the inside of the ship, with the well deck and vehicle storage and handling area removed there will be more area available for medical purpose.

It has the same specs with 991

 

[Windchime]

More details have emerged about Nagapasa class batch 2 deal.

After signing the contract in April of 2019, the terms of the contract were supposed to come to effect from 30th of October 2019 and onwards, alongside the Indonesian payment. DSME on the other hand ordered several components for the sub before the Indonesian payment came/contract went into effect to meet delivery deadlines as outlined by the contract. As we know, no payment was made and the legal status of the contract remains in a limbo.

In March of this year, DSME officially registered the expenses regarding those already ordered components as a loss of $60mil, the most significant of which are the 3 sets of motors built by Siemens (€58mil). Alman Helvas was interviewed by a Korean media where he stated that there are no plans within Indonesian MoD to continue the program, to his knowledge. DSME on the other hand tried to refute these reports by saying that the contract is still alive and moreover, that there are no terms regarding the cancellation of the contract. Also, they've implied that they will find ways to recoup the expenses in case the deal officially falls through, by exporting DSME 1400 built with ordered components to other countries.

3 question remains regarding these matters :

How true are Alman Helvas' information? To me, as seen from the Indonesian stance and reports, it seems to be inline to what is happening and therefore think it is probably true. Indonesian MoD probably doesn't want to continue the program/fulfill the contract.

What exactly are the deficiencies? Alman Helvas also shared that PT PAL engineers have reported that there are deficiencies on the first and second ship of the class. As I've asked here before and got replies about, there are not much known to the public on what exactly the Indonesians are dissatisfied about, to which extent (one of the forum members told me what's known are batter issues). I would really like to know the details of the alleged shortcomings.

Lastly, the implications of the contract and its legal binding would be the most important. From the reports and DSME's allusions, it seems like the contract is not yet legally binding for the Indonesians. I'd say it was a dumb move by DSME to pre-order parts, although it is also understandable since they've done so to meet the deadlines. The Siemens motors are to be delivered on October this year, which shows the lead-time for the production for such components. On the other hand, it's undoubtedly a shitty move by TNI to sign the contract and not fulfill. They should've not signed the contract in the first place, if they were really that dissatisfied.


Considering how the Scorpène deals are going, I'd say its a shit show overall.

 

[Umigami]

What exactly are the defficiencies? Alman Helvas also shared that PT PAL engineers have reported that there are deficiencies on the first and second ship of the class. As I've asked here before and got replies about, there are not much known to the public on what exactly the Indonesians are dissatisfied about, to which extent (one of the forum members told me what's known are batter issues). I would really like to know the details of the alleged shortcomings.

Maybe you can start from here:
Leak of Nagapasa Class maintenance plan. (Sorry, looks like you need google translate to read them).

For KRI 403

For KRI 404

For KRI 405

Source:

Lembaga KERIS on Instagram: "Rencana Harwat 3 unit kapal selam Nagapasa-Class yang dioperasionalkan oleh TNI-AL KRI - Nagapasa (403) KRI - Ardadedali (404) KRI - Alugoro (405) Tahun 2022 . _________________________ Jangan lupa follow @lembagakeris

533 likes, 66 comments - lembagakerisMarch 23, 2022 on : "Rencana Harwat 3 unit kapal selam Nagapasa-Class yang dioperasionalkan oleh TNI-AL KRI - Nagapasa (403) KRI - Ardadedali (404) KRI - Alu..."

www.instagram.com

A lot of us Indonesian military enthusiasts are asking why subs that are (as far as we know) not often sailed need to replace a lot of components?

 

[Windchime]

Maybe you can start from here:
Leak of Nagapasa Class maintenance plan. (Sorry, looks like you need google translate to read them).

For KRI 403
View attachment 47032

For KRI 404
View attachment 47034

For KRI 405
View attachment 47033

Source:

Lembaga KERIS on Instagram: "Rencana Harwat 3 unit kapal selam Nagapasa-Class yang dioperasionalkan oleh TNI-AL KRI - Nagapasa (403) KRI - Ardadedali (404) KRI - Alugoro (405) Tahun 2022 . _________________________ Jangan lupa follow @lembagakeris

533 likes, 66 comments - lembagakerisMarch 23, 2022 on : "Rencana Harwat 3 unit kapal selam Nagapasa-Class yang dioperasionalkan oleh TNI-AL KRI - Nagapasa (403) KRI - Ardadedali (404) KRI - Alu..."

www.instagram.com

A lot of us Indonesian military enthusiasts are asking why subs that are (as far as we know) not often sailed need to replace a lot of components?

Thanks, it was hard for me to find anything other than the batteries since finding information is hard without knowing to read Indonesian.

 

[Windchime]

Maybe you can start from here:
Leak of Nagapasa Class maintenance plan. (Sorry, looks like you need google translate to read them).

For KRI 403
View attachment 47032

For KRI 404
View attachment 47034

For KRI 405
View attachment 47033

Source:

Lembaga KERIS on Instagram: "Rencana Harwat 3 unit kapal selam Nagapasa-Class yang dioperasionalkan oleh TNI-AL KRI - Nagapasa (403) KRI - Ardadedali (404) KRI - Alugoro (405) Tahun 2022 . _________________________ Jangan lupa follow @lembagakeris

533 likes, 66 comments - lembagakerisMarch 23, 2022 on : "Rencana Harwat 3 unit kapal selam Nagapasa-Class yang dioperasionalkan oleh TNI-AL KRI - Nagapasa (403) KRI - Ardadedali (404) KRI - Alu..."

www.instagram.com

A lot of us Indonesian military enthusiasts are asking why subs that are (as far as we know) not often sailed need to replace a lot of components?

I've just read the list you've gave me and frankly, it's hard to tell if those on the list are critical repairs. Lots of the listed maintenance items looks to be just a trivial routine maintenance work and since I'm not aware how frequently and for how long the Nagapasa subs are at sea, I cannot judge on if those trivial maintenance items are still a problem or not. You seem to imply they rarely are away from their ports, is that correct?

 

[Umigami]

You seem to imply they rarely are away from their ports, is that correct?

There were some photos that showed all of them seem just docked in the same place for a few months. But that was months ago, we don't know their status today.

 

[Gary]

most of those are routine maintenance. OTOH on my early suspicions that the battery problem is either :

1. Manufacturers fault
2. Indonesian requirement on battery power as per contracts

Turns out the battery is clearly Siemens from Germany, don't know where's the Korean fault in our submarine battery deficiency problem this like earlier finger pointing.

 

[Windchime]

There were some photos that showed all of them seem just docked in the same place for a few months. But that was months ago, we don't know their status today.

I've dug a bit deeper and apparently that was a problem regarding sonar consoles on the first two ships. Since the CMS on Nagapasa class are not Korean, I don't think that is not something to blame DSME for.

 

[Windchime]

1. Manufacturers fault
2. Indonesian requirement on battery power as per contracts

Turns out the battery is clearly Siemens from Germany, don't know where's the Korean fault in our submarine battery deficiency problem this like earlier finger pointing.

It depends on who was in charge of selecting the individual components, including the battery.

When procuring the submarines, the Indonesian side would have laid out the Requirement Item Specifications. If they've only covered the ROC in the RIS and the selection of those batteries in accordance to the ROC was up to DSME, DSME may be liable for the defect of those batteries regardless of if its built in Korea or in Germany.

Though usually, individual items are specified by the procurer, which i this case is Indonesia. If they specified the procurement of the particular battery, DSME would not be liable. I've also read an article that the said battery is now replaced and the ships are in prime condition, so I'm not sure if there are any serious problems regarding the ship atm.

 

[Windchime]

Sonar? For the main instrument of submarine navigation, that's pretty critical. Has the problem solved yet?

Does Nagapasa class still in warranty period? If the problem still there and the warranty period was up, that's pretty shitty.

No not the sonar itself but the sonar consoles, or in other words, the Kongsberg CMS consoles. Some parts of the console were replaced from what I've heard, and that took quite long for some reason.

In military procurement, it works as a contractual liability which is a bit different from your everyday warranty for consumer goods. The exact terms of the Indonesian contract are unknown, but I'd imagine that Kongsberg would be liable for a replacement of component this early on.

 

[Windchime]

This is a bit out of topic, but while we're on warranty in military procurement, what do you think will happen to the equipments for Malaysian Gowind-class that has been delivered but not fitted by the ship builder for years? Does the liability falls on the OEM or the shipbuilder if the equipment were faulty when its fitted into the ship but the warranty from OEM is already up?

Like I've said, the "warranty" really depends on the clause of the contract and type of defects and therefore we can't know if the "warranty is up" in the first place. I'm not really informed on the subject of Malay Gowinds so I can't say for sure, but if the problem was that the OEM's equipment didn't meet the Malaysian specifications, chances are that the contractor, which could either be the OEM or the shipbuilder, is liable for it.

 

[Anmdt]

No not the sonar itself but the sonar consoles, or in other words, the Kongsberg CMS consoles. Some parts of the console were replaced from what I've heard, and that took quite long for some reason.

In military procurement, it works as a contractual liability which is a bit different from your everyday warranty for consumer goods. The exact terms of the Indonesian contract are unknown, but I'd imagine that Kongsberg would be liable for a replacement of component this early on.

Liability is always on the main contractor (from buyer's perspective), which is DSME here. But only applies for the warranty term granted by the contractor, could be 6 months or 3 years. Beyond this term, it depends on how maintainance was contracted, whether contract includes any upfront payments to DSME as the maintainer of the platform, or simply the hulls are taken over to be maintained by buyer's own resources. In latter case, then the liability is on buyer to contact manufacturer, demand replacement or repairs.

Assuming this took place within the warranty term or before the delivery, it was entirely on DSME on how to solve it,legally and technically, either replacement or inspection by the OEM or third parties. For tight schedules and problematic customers the companies skip the inspection and pays for the replacement, for loyal loyal customers who doesn't mind some weeks of delay, they wait for the inspection and usually get free replacement - spares.

Looking at what you have said it is likely some parts were replaced before the delivery to ensure their status during the warranty term. Since trials took longer than expected (casual for first & second hulls).

 

[Windchime]

Liability is always on the main contractor (from buyer's perspective), which is DSME here. But only applies for the warranty term granted by the contractor, could be 6 months or 3 years. Beyond this term, it depends on how maintainance was contracted, whether contract includes any upfront payments to DSME as the maintainer of the platform, or simply the hulls are taken over to be maintained by buyer's own resources. In latter case, then the liability is on buyer to contact manufacturer, demand replacement or repairs.

Assuming this took place within the warranty term or before the delivery, it was entirely on DSME on how to solve it,legally and technically, either replacement or inspection by the OEM or third parties. For tight schedules and problematic customers the companies skip the inspection and pays for the replacement, for loyal loyal customers who doesn't mind some weeks of delay, they wait for the inspection and usually get free replacement - spares.

Looking at what you have said it is likely some parts were replaced before the delivery to ensure their status during the warranty term. Since trials took longer than expected (casual for first & second hulls).

That is generally true in most of the cases, including the point that DSME will be fixing the problems, but as I've said, individual cases depends on how the requirement item specification was outlined by the procurer, in this case the Indonesian MoD, and the exact contents of the contract. That's why I'm saying I'm not sure if the (end-)liability will fall on the main contractor or the equipment OEM. Also to clarify, said replacement happened after the delivery to the Indonesian Navy which makes matters even more complicated. Most importantly, we don't know exactly what the problem was other than that the parts of the console computer were replaced.

Anyways, since there are no public information regarding the exact details of the problems other than "there are deficiencies regarding the battery/recharge capabilities and other parts of the sub", it is really hard to judge unless they disclose what those "other problems" are. The most puzzling part in all this is that they've ordered follow on batches after 2 years of operating the ship but suddenly chose not to honour the contract 6 months thereafter, especially when, as you've said, the first hull or two could have teething issues. Deducing from the fact that their own engineers from PT PAL were assigned to inspect the ship, I suspect that the ships that were tied to the port were not only staying there due to the problems concerning the CMS but also could have been under thorough inspection. If that is the case, I'm not able to understand why they haven't waited for the results of the inspection to be drawn.

At least DSME would've learnt their lessons, one way or another and I think it's already showing, since there are rumors that they are considering to bail out from the Indian P-75I program, just like the other respondents to the program.

 

[Windchime]

What happens? Last time I read the news DSME was in the lead.

Detailed terms of that program are so fucked up that no one is really willing to bid, even DSME. Without DSME the Spanish are still there but they don't have the "operationally proven AIP" as required by the Indians (also a big reason why the French and the Russians pulled out). So it's a no-go anyways.

Germans and Swedes, as we know have noted that the terms regarding the contractual responsibilities and demands of ToT are way too much, which was also repeated by the Russians.

Lately it was announced that the Indians have made amendments regarding the scope of liability that falls on the OEM (before, the OEM was not only responsible for the designs and components they source, but also any mishaps caused by the Indian shipyards and subcontractors, which is simply ridiculous. Now they are not responsible for the latter). Even so, the risks concerning this program are still very high and in the history of procurements by the Indian Navy, there have already been several cases of them not honouring the contract properly.

From what I know, terms regarding ToT has also not been changed, since the technologies gained through P-75I program will be essential for smooth transition into P-76 - their own conventional submarine design. Add on to that, the requirement regarding an "operationally proven" AIP is also still there, which is, as I've said above, still a problem for the Spanish, French and Russians. For such reasons, it is reported that the Indians are primarily holding discussion only with the Germans and Koreans.

Then again, like I've said DSME is considering a bail-out despite the amendments so there's still a chance the program runs into another turmoil(since it would become a single-bidder situation, which would require the Indian MoD to reset the tender and restart the process). I've heard that they are delaying the selection and awarding of the contract for another half a year.

 

[ramenoodle]

Good day everyone,
I am desperately need some information about:
1. Yearly capacity of Indonesian shipyards in producing naval ships (unit)
2. From all of the KRI and KAL we have right now, how many of them are imported and local built?
3. MoD plan for naval newbuild until 2024.

Can anybody help me find a good reference/source for those Qs?

 

[Lordimperator]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1562005083700731904

Hopefully there will be a way, and x fin Scorpene doesnt have to be sacrificed...

 

[Windchime]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1562005083700731904

Hopefully there will be a way, and x fin Scorpene doesnt have to be sacrificed...

Well, according to Naval Group, those Scorpènes are a follow on order from TNI-AL separate from Nagapasa batch 2 deal, but what exactly is true is hard to be told atm.

In case those Scorpènes are actually replacing Nagapasa batch 2 ships, then I could say one thing for sure, that they should stop bitching about AUKUS lol