IN should use pumpjet-propulsion for their next gen submarines and france can surely help in it!@Vergennes @Nilgiri, how many chances you see it will be barracudas conventional version ....... may be shortfin barracuda
Latest Thread
IN should use pumpjet-propulsion for their next gen submarines and france can surely help in it!@Vergennes @Nilgiri, how many chances you see it will be barracudas conventional version ....... may be shortfin barracuda
Japan will never let India touch Soryu , If India get it it will be open for Pakistani and Chinese Intelligence and Japan will lose the edge which Soryu provides .When it comes to submarines i feel like it is best to opt for conventional designs with top notch electronics. I would say new batch of Soryu, Scorpene or a Type 216/Dolphin.
If it was a surface vessel i would say it will be good to experiment on, but for India with a possible conflict in near future experimenting may not be ideal but focusing more on common, reliable and easy to maintain design.
I don't know how is the procurement method in the Indian Navy, but RAN estimated to spent $50B for all 12 subs (Barracuda SSK) , cost included maintenance cost for it's operational life, could India afford it?? also need to be put into consideration is how fast India could build those boats, like you've mentioned b4, will India get stuck trying to fix issues during the construction??? Submarines are very complex machines , and Barracuda SSK being a next gen submarine would be even more complex.Next to zero. Its too expensive for India for what you get. Even Australia (far more developed and fiscally resourced than India) is struggling to justify its selection....and look at the delays/doubts there too (and more costs on that coming up inevitably).
Barracuda only really makes sense for SSN....it ends up being over-engineered (costly) in many ways for SSK variant.
So for French contender, I would imagine it would be an evolved, larger version of scorpene, it makes the most sense....and they would likely show the economy of scale and quicker ToT that is natural segue from existing scorpene production by MDL.
What do @Anmdt and @AlphaMike think?
Japan is very unlikely to export Soryu while Germany is not the most reliable defence partner. Also, it is best to go for some French variant to maintain commonality and uniformity among our fleet. A whole new platform altogether will only create logistical & maintenance issues along with the complexity of spares procurement.When it comes to submarines i feel like it is best to opt for conventional designs with top notch electronics. I would say new batch of Soryu, Scorpene or a Type 216/Dolphin.
If it was a surface vessel i would say it will be good to experiment on, but for India with a possible conflict in near future experimenting may not be ideal but focusing more on common, reliable and easy to maintain design.
Allocating $50bn is never an option for IN. Infact, we had to put our third AC on the backburner and siphon those funds to the submarine program. The debacle RAN is going thru with Shortfin, it is very unlikely for IN to go for a conventional version of the same. As mentioned above, maybe a hybrid but we'd have to see what design DCNS pitchesI don't know how is the procurement method in the Indian Navy, but RAN estimated to spent $50B for all 12 subs (Barracuda SSK) , cost included maintenance cost for it's operational life, could India afford it?? also need to be put into consideration is how fast India could build those boats, like you've mentioned b4, will India get stuck trying to fix issues during the construction??? Submarines are very complex machines , and Barracuda SSK being a next gen submarine would be even more complex.
India is (imo) already left behind in the number game vis a vis China, and the margin is increasing fast. If this continue the PLAN could somewhat someday, be confident enough to send fleet to the Indian Ocean, knowing that the fleet disparity between IN and PLAN had grown so much bigger.
While number of hulls is not everything, but it's very unwise to trade capacity for capability altogether.
maybe, for nowIn regards to China, majority of its fleet will be allocated for SCS and Pacific since there are way too many stakeholders in that game along with the US. IN's primary objective is to decimate PN in its entirety while putting up a good defence against the PLAN to protect all three seaboards and safeguarding our shipping lanes
We should be able to ward off if its only one strike group since PLAN is expected to have 4 in total. We'd have two CBGs along with a bunch of additional subs by the end of this decademaybe, for now
at this build rate, they'll be comfortable to send a carrier strike group in the next 10 years or so, just the SSF (South Sea Fleet) is big enough to be sent to the Indian Ocean, and it's not like SouthEast Asian Navy is big enough to cause trouble while they left for the Indian Ocean.
Head wants the deal go to Mazgaon dock , heart wants it to go to L&TThere were also some rumors of DCNS pitching a hybrid design of Shortfin and Scorpene
Let it goto L&T,mazagon has caused significant delays while L&T has delivered everything ahead of scheduleHead wants the deal go to Mazgaon dock , heart wants it to go to L&T
L&T all the way...no matter what experience PSUs bring to the table, I'd opt for private firms anytime. For instance, L&T delivered K9 Vajras way in advance than what they stated in the contract.Head wants the deal go to Mazgaon dock , heart wants it to go to L&T
No chance as for now
South Korea, cant hold any strategic weight .
I don't know how is the procurement method in the Indian Navy, but RAN estimated to spent $50B for all 12 subs (Barracuda SSK) , cost included maintenance cost for it's operational life, could India afford it?? also need to be put into consideration is how fast India could build those boats, like you've mentioned b4, will India get stuck trying to fix issues during the construction??? Submarines are very complex machines , and Barracuda SSK being a next gen submarine would be even more complex.
India is (imo) already left behind in the number game vis a vis China, and the margin is increasing fast. If this continue the PLAN could somewhat someday, be confident enough to send fleet to the Indian Ocean, knowing that the fleet disparity between IN and PLAN had grown so much bigger.
While number of hulls is not everything, but it's very unwise to trade capacity for capability altogether.
The only point with Koreans is not strategic value like veto power and we already have TOT for Scorpene so the best will be to either go for SMX3.0 or short fin Barracuda ( which is too costly).Guys, I would also not write off South Koreans here, let us see how RFP downselection goes (and if they say combine an effort with Germans in some regard given how they have collaborated in proven sizeable way).
Remember South Korea has the only proven SSK design commited to, manufactured and in sea trials etc that can readily address the firepower requirement IN seems to want in this class (as far as ready-fire cruise missile capability goes being addressed by a VLS section).
South Koreans essentially took the ToT from U-214 (which they also selected earlier, and 209 before it), augmented with own RnD and added large VLS section to KS-III.
A very telling lesson in how things should have gone in Indian context (given we went for 209 as well) if you ask me....instead of the usual lilypad hopping.
The only point with Koreans is not strategic value like veto power and we already have TOT for Scorpene so the best will be to either go for SMX3.0 or short fin Barracuda ( which is too costly).
Naval Group exhibits at DEFEXPO 2020 | Naval Group
www.naval-group.com
Koreans will be the most feasible partner for light tanks and may be for new tank