Navy accepts DRDO’s Submarine Escape Set

doesn’t prudence suggest we just built six more scorpènes? bad idea to buy amurs or class 214 u-boats. but let’s have a debate on this.

doesn’t prudence suggest we just built six more scorpènes? bad idea to buy amurs or class 214 u-boats. but let’s have a debate on this.

———————————–
if our scientists trying to produce why can’t the try for diesel sub first

not a single try

china is trying with it’s yuan copy of kilo and song class types

we need more subs and our idiot GOVT. LEADERS closed the production line of TYPE 209 (GHOTALA)otherwise today we could be submarine producing country and now we have to pay billions to buy submarines

good thing the scorpenes are not in contention. bloody frenchies nicely lined pranab mukherjee’s pocket. that’s the story that has done the rounds ever since the deal was signed. and anyway, scorpene has become too much of an inconvenient hot potato. and now another bunch of billions could keep going to paris for the smx-21. let that oaf sarkozy keep busy with his trophy wife. we should buy german u-boats. our shishumar-class boats have served exceptionally well.

Iran has developed and indigenous diesel sub and here we are still aspiring to build an atv after so many decades. btw, why isnt ATV building experience enough?

you call that a sub ? ughh !
more like 2 bathtubs joined one over the other. and it is made with noko technology.

This suit is straight out of GiJoe! (Cobra actually!)

TO SHIV

can u provide some inside pictures of upgraded KILO submarines of navy

To [email protected]: Kindly bear with me for another 48 hours and you will get the full story. Regarding the S-800 and S-1000 SSKs from Fincantieri, kindly visit the company's website where the SSK's design/performance characterirsics are detailed.
Regarding the ATV Project, it is inconceivable that Russia has in any way helped through transfer of SSGN designs/structural components as this will be a direct violation of the NPT. Instead, when asked for its help on the ATV's PWR reactor, Russia did not supply any PWRs meant for submarines, but instead supplied design data originally meant for the PWRs on-board commercial ice-breaker ships. As for Larsen & Toubro has had industrial tie-ups with Italian naval shipbuilders and naval systems manufacturers since the late 1980s and has to date supplied a KOSMOS-type mini-submarine prototype for the DRDO, which is now undergoing sea trials. This type of mini-submarine is primarily meant for special operations. In fact, a scale-model of this mini-submarine and L & T's extensive industrial tie-ups with Italian companies like RIVA CALZONI were highlighted during DEFEXPO'08.

TO SENGUPTA

S 1000 LOOKS same as of amur1650 but the torpedo room is below the sonar

but russia already has lada class in commission our navy can also check how this sub performs on the other hand s1000 still not in commision

but PRICE WILL BE THE BIGGEST PLAYER

To: [email protected]: It is not me that's saying that Russia isn't helping India make the ATV, but both the govts of Russia and India officially stating this. And Russia is not giving India the Akula-2 SSGN. It is dry-leasing the SSGN and eventually India will return this SSGN after the lease period is over. Russia is NOT supplying steel for the ATV. It is Jindal Steel and SAIL that are the steel suppliers. I never said anything about any Italian company making nuclear-powered submarines. All I said was that Italian components/sub-systems suppliers are involved in tie-ups with L & T for the ATV project. Items like non-hull penetrating masts, combat management systems, transmission shafts, propellers, integrated platform management systems and ship automation systems are what we call common-user items that can be used on both conventional SSKs and nuclear-powered SSBNs, as well on board principal surface combatants.

Regarding the Amur 1650/Lada SSK versus the S-1000/S-800, it was Rubin/Rosoboronexport's decision to allow Fincantieri to take the marketing lead in India. In fact, that's the reason two years ago the Indian Navy's HQ shut down the Amur Project Evaluation Team, which was set up in 2001. Therefore, it is no longer an issue of the S-800 versus the Amur 1650/Lada. The Russians in consultation with the Italians have unanimously decided to offer the S-800 against the ARMARIS-designed SMX-21. But in terms of capability and sophistication the SMX-21 appears to be far more revolutionary.

To Anon @12.58AM:
1) The Type 877EKM and Type 636 Kilo-class SSKs were built for usage in the 1980s and 1990s and have outlived their operational usefulness. If you really want to know how stark the differences are, just go inside a Kilo and a Class 209/Type 1500 SSK of the Indian Navy and you will reach the same conclusions as I have.
2) Recently the Indonesian Navy did competitive evaluations between the Amur 1650 and Class 209/Type 1200 SSKs (the latter offered by South Korea) and in every performance category, the Amur 1650 lost out.
3) If you require any information on the SMX-21, you will find it all in the website of ARMARIS and DCN International.
4) Price is never an issue at all as high procurement costs can always be defrayed by direct/indirect offset packages.
5) The last three Scorpenes will not be replaced by the SMX-21. But the Indian Navy has been offered the option by ARMARIS to equip each of the last three Scorpenes with 8-cell BrahMos UVLMs and the MESMA AIP module.
6) The Spanish S-80 is the same as the Scorpene as far as the hull goes, but the combat management system is not from THALES, but from Lockheed Martin.
7) India’s experience with retrofitting systems of non-Russia origin on board Russia-built platforms have been highly disastrous to date. Let me give you an example: the Navy in the early 1990s wanted a common integrated platform management system (IPMS) for both its first three Project 1135.6 Talwar-class frigates and the six Project 17 Shivalik-class frigates. So, Navy HQ told Canada-based L-3 MAPPS to negotiate directly with Rosoboronexport to come on board as a non-Russia vendor. When L-3 MAPPS did so, it found out that Rosoboronexport had hiked the price of this IPMS by 100% without any justification, while not revealing to the Indian Navy why it did so. The result was that the three Talwar-class frigates (and the follow-on three frigates now being built in Kaliningrad) have the Russian IPMS, while the six Talwar-class frigates have the IPMS supplied by L-3 MAPPS which, by the way, has an excellent office in Bangalore from where it has supplied locally-developed applications software packages for other IPMS modules supplied by L-3 MAPPS to the navies of Malaysia and South Korea.

I never said anything about any Italian company making nuclear-powered submarines. All I said was that Italian components/sub-systems suppliers are involved in tie-ups with L & T for the ATV project. Items like non-hull penetrating masts, combat management systems, transmission shafts, propellers, integrated platform management systems and ship automation systems are what we call common-user items that can be used on both conventional SSKs and nuclear-powered SSBNs, as well on board principal surface combatants.

dude, what nonsense, as if you can buy off the shelf propellers and transmission shafts. go spend some time actually working in the business, you tailor shafts to dynamic loads and exact power-torque combos expected from the powerplant which are never shared for such sensitive powerplants and nor is propeller technology and fabrication available off the shelf.

India’s experience with retrofitting systems of non-Russia origin on board Russia-built platforms have been highly disastrous to date.

again this is all bakwaas, go to the navy design team and ask them about the umpteen stuff they have got and fitted into russkie platform. its all about willpower and funding, you make such a mountain out of molehills.

to sengupta

any info whether scorpenes will hav non hull penetrating masts