What's new

Indian Navy News & Discussions

Germany to Upgrade Two Indian Attack Submarines

Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems signed a deal with the Indian Navy on June 29.
German defense contractor ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS) signed a $ 38.4 million contract for the modernization of two out of four Shishumar-class (Type 209/1500) diesel-electric attack submarines in service with the Indian Navy on June 29, according to Indian media reports.
The four 1,450-ton Shishumar-class SSKs form the Indian Navy’s 10th submarine squadron based in Mumbai. Two Shishumar-class submarines were assembled at the Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft (HDW) at Kiel in Germany, while the third and fourth vessels of the class were license-built at Mumbai’s Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Limited and commissioned in the early 1990s.
The upgrade of the two license-built SSKs, aimed at extending their operational life by ten years, will also take place in Mumbai, according to a TKMS press release. TKMS’s contract with the Indian Navy entails fitting the boats with a new weapons suite–Boeing anti-ship UGM-84L Harpoon Block encapsulated missile systems.
In detail, the new weapons package includes 12 UGM-84L Harpoon Block II Encapsulated Missiles, 10 UTM-84L Harpoon Encapsulated Training missiles, and two Encapsulated Harpoon certification training vehicles. TKMS will also offer training to support and operate the new weapon system.
The upgrades will likely only take place on the latest two license-built Shishummar-class vessels due to technical limitations. “Only these two (Shalki and Shankul) can be done because certain modifications to the firing chain for missile launch need to be incorporated, which in a ‘fitted for’ configurations had already been catered for. Only the impulse flasks etc need to be added in the firing chain as the torpedoes are in swim out mode,” an Indian Navy official told local media.
“It is a key milestone in our long-standing commitment towards India. We have the capacity to integrate any weapon system that is selected by the Indian Navy, onto our submarines. We are happy to take on this project to now integrate the harpoon missiles in two of the four SSK submarines ” Gurnad Sodhi, Managing Director of ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems India, said.
TKMS is also competing for a contract to build six new diesel-electric submarines for the Indian Navy. As I reported previously (“Germany Offers India New Stealth Submarines”), TKMS has pitched the 2,000-ton (submerged) diesel-electric Type 214 submarines fitted with an air-independent propulsion system using Siemens polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) hydrogenfuel cells.
As I noted elsewhere:
The Indian government has been deliberating over the purchase of six additional stealth submarines, capable of attacking land targets and equipped with AIP, since 2008 and is expected to make a decision by the year’s end (in a previous deal, India already opted for the purchase of six French Scorpene-class diesel-electric attack submarines the first of which was floated out in April 2015).

According to the original Project 75-I proposal, two submarines would have been be directly bought from one selected foreign shipyard with the remaining four build in India. Now, with the Modi government’s ‘Make in India’ program, all six vessels are to be built in India.

Germany’s competition in the bid will be fierce and will include DCNS (France), Navantia (Spain), Kockums (Sweden), Rubin Design Bureau-Amur Shipyard (Russia), Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Kawasaki Heavy Industries (Japan). TKMS has already exported variants of the HDW Type 214 to Greece, South Korea, and Portugal.
TKMS’s Gurnad Sodhi said that his company would be ready to integrate indigenously-developed submarine-launched BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles onto the Type 214 submarines.
“We fully support the ‘Make and Made in India’ policy which would encompass inter-alia Transfer of Technology (ToT), training and meeting all offset obligations. We are awaiting the government’s decision on the Strategic Partner chapter of the new DPP [Defense Procurement Procedure] 2016, after which we will begin our negotiations with an Indian shipyard for the P75(I)”, Sodhi said.

http://thediplomat.com/2016/07/germany-to-upgrade-two-indian-attack-submarines/
 
Agent_47 said:
The IN has specified that the range of the NGMV should be not less than 2,800nm at sustained economical speed and 1,000mm at maximum speed. Max speed of the NGMV, according to the IN, should not be less than 35 Knots, while the maximum sustained speed should not be less than 25 Knots. In addition, the NGMV must carry a minimum of 8 cruise missiles, while for air-defence, the vessel should be fitted with a SR-SAM-type point-defence missile system (PDMS) for providing credible near-360-degree anti-missile defence coverage. The PDMS should also be able to engage sea-skimming anti-ship cruise missiles with a maximum speed of Mach 3. In addition, a remotely-controlled, 15km-range 76/62 main gun within a stealthy, faceted turret and using both radar and optronic fire-control systems is also required, as is a close-in weapon system (CIWS) using similar fire-control systems for low-intensity maritime operations (LIMO). Also specified is a countermeasures dispensing system that should be capable of firing chaff in all-round direction in distraction, seduction and centroid modes. The IN will also in future install active-kill anti-torpedo systems.
Click to expand...
I would really appreciate if the term CIWS not be used for secondary gun armament, which is mainly anti-surface oriented light cannon (20-40mm). A gun based CIWS proper is something like Phalanx, Goalkeeper, Sea Guard/Zenith, Meroka, Kashtan/Palma/Palash, Type 730, Type 1130 etc, which are specifically for autonomous last ditch defensive engagement of anti ship missiles. Technically, Barak 1 is a missile based CIWS, as is SeaRAM. Autonomous meaning 'no man in the loop' + with dedicated (preferably on mount) surveillance, target tracking and engagement sensors.

This, there for, is NOT a gun CIWS.
3036_67_217-ciws-gun-system.jpg


Agent_47 said:
For the SW-ASW vessel requirement, the same hull design of the NGMV can easily be used, with the only difference being the absence of cruise missiles on the former, which in turn creates the space for accommodating a light twin-engined helicopter or a VTOL UAV, plus remote-controlled autonomous surface or underwater surveillance vehicles equipped with acoustic sensors. In addition, there is scope for both types of vessels being equipped with identical integrated masts, PDMS and CIWS suites.
Click to expand...
Here CIWS is probably again misused in the sense of secondary gun armanament This could be AK630 too.
PDMS used to be Sea Sparrow, Crotale etc. Today, its ESSM or lighter IR or AR/RF homing missiles e.g. Umkhonto, Iris-T SL, Camm/SeaCeptor.

Agent_47 said:
I'm so bumbed that we still don't have a standard PDMS and universal VLS. maitri SAM quard packed in a UVLS would have been great.[
Click to expand...
Barak-1 likely was and Barak 8 probably likely will be the IN standard 'PDMS'. The Russian UVLS (UKSK) is so long that it would not effectively be an option for smaller displament hulls. Note the smallest ship currently fitted with it is the Russian 950 ton Buyan-M and it is used for anti-ship/surface missile between 6.2 and 8.9m long. Brahmos is 8.4m. You can't go much smaller because the ship will lack the required depth to fit that launcher (note how it is fitted in Buyan-M: through the entire superstructure, because it is so long). Maitri is probably not much longer than Mica VL i.e. 3.5m. Using a 9m+ VLS for that is wasteful and hampers design options.

Project-21631-Buyan-M.jpg

Russian Buyan-m / project 21631)

Propulsion:
Speed:
  • 28 knots (52 km/h; 32 mph) (21630)
  • 26 knots (48 km/h; 30 mph) (21631)
Range:
  • 1,500 nmi (2,800 km; 1,700 mi) (21630) at ? knots
  • 2,300 nmi (4,300 km; 2,600 mi) at 12 knots (21631)
 
Last edited:
Agent_47 said:
Y
@Penguin What will be the tonnage if NGMV and SW-ASW choose to be one design ?
Click to expand...
Let me first verify:

NGMV specs
  • Complement of 11 officers, 02 trainee officers and about 80 sailors.
  • Range:
    • not less than 2,800nm at sustained economical speed
    • not less than 1,000mm at maximum speed.
  • Max speed
    • Sprint: not less than 35 Knots,
    • Sustained: not less than 25 Knots.
    • Propulsion system
    • able to provide the requisite power to weight ratio required for the ship to achieve given max speed.
    • cater for greater endurance and operations in low speed regimes during Low Intensity Maritime Operations (LIMO) or Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) patrols.
      • capable of operating at low speeds of 10 knots for at least 8 hours continuously.
    • The main engines should be capable of achieving the rated speed at 85% MCR of the engine.
    • suitably designed to meet the stealth requirements of the ship.
  • Armament
    • minimum of 8 cruise missiles (presumed anti-ship)
    • a SR-SAM-type point-defence missile system (PDMS),
      • providing credible near-360-degree anti-missile defence AMD coverage,
      • able to engage sea-skimming anti-ship cruise missiles, flying 3-5 m above sea level, up to a max speed of 3 Mach.
    • a remotely-controlled, 15km-range 76/62 main gun within a stealthy, faceted turret , capable to carry out surface to surface, surface to air and Anti Missile Defence (AMD) engagements.
    • a close-in weapon system (CIWS [read secondary gun]) using similar fire-control systems for low-intensity maritime operations (LIMO).
      • The navy stipulates that the placement of CIWS should be such that it provides near 360-degree Anti Missile Defence (AMD) protection without requirement of course alteration.
  • Sensors
    • Infra Red Search and Track (IRST) system integrated with all gun mountings with the facility to interface with the Combat Management Sytem (CMS)
    • one each surface and air surveillance radar for early warning
    • Fire Control Radars (FCR) for target indication to all its weapons.
    • all the latest navigational aids on board, including Integrated Bridge System (IBS), ECDIS, AIS, LRIT, DGPS, COTS radar with good ARPA displays etc.
    • Standard Naval IFF system
    Command and control
    • Combat Management System for network centric operations and quick response to situations at sea.
    • Ship Data Network (SDN), which should form the backbone to network all weapons, sensors, and other equipment.
    • Advanced Composite Communication Suite (ACCS) integrating all communication equipment to the communication data-bus
  • Countermeasures
    • a countermeasures dispensing system capable of firing chaff in all-round direction in distraction, seduction and centroid modes.
    • Space and weight reserve to install active-kill anti-torpedo system.
http://www.spsmai.com/exclusive/?id...ounces-ambitious-missile-corvette-requirement

Further, let me ask:

SW-ASW vessel requirement, the same hull design of the NGMV can easily be used, with the only difference being the absence of cruise missiles on the former, which in turn creates the space for accommodating a light twin-engined helicopter or a VTOL UAV, plus remote-controlled autonomous surface or underwater surveillance vehicles equipped with acoustic sensors. In addition, there is scope for both types of vessels being equipped with identical integrated masts, PDMS and CIWS suites.
Click to expand...
  • Why would a small ASW ship need to have the same speed and range (which is implied by the choice of the same hull and the only difference being absense of cruise missiles) as a Missile vessel? For ASW, it could be argued that lower top spead and greater range might be more usefull. This could translate to e.g. a different power plant. 2 instead of 4 diesels, or 1 GTU plus 2 diesels instead of 4 diesels.
  • Would deleting 8 to 16 antiship missiles yield enough space and weigh reserve for the installation of a hangar for a light heli or VTOl UAV plus ROVs or AUVs? This depends also on how and where the missiles are mounted. Consider that a - likely densely packed, centerline positioned - VL farm for such missiles is very different from 2 to 4 sets of 4 deck mounted rack launched missiles, in terms of what you gain from deleting them (what space and weight, distributed where on the ship) i.e. the necessity to redesign. For example, while the UKSK is long, and thus requiring sufficient 'tallness' from it is not particularly consuming much deck area. Deleting a pair of those might yield and empty structure that could house some of the gear mentioned above, but doesn't necessarily yield a flight deck. Deleting 4x4 SSM that are e.g. mounted behind a superstructure provides space for a heli deck but not necessarily for a hanger. But 4x4 might also be mounted forward ofthe bridge, or in 2x2 on each flank, or 4x4 centered amidship. And then what?
  • What would be the sonar and where would it go (unless relying on ROV/AUV for this? I took those for MCM gear, initially)
  • What would be the ASW armament? Just the heli/uav? Or torpeodoes too? If so, what kind (heavy 533mm or light 324mm)? Where would the tubes go? Or also RBU (which could also be used for active anti torpedo system. See UDAV anti torp system)

Aren't we dealing, in reality, with replacement on the one hand, of 4 P25 Khukri and 4 P25AKora class ships (1500 tons) with NGMV and replacement of 11x Veer (missile) and 4x Abhay (asw) classes (450-500 tons) with SW-ASW? In which the missile role is given to the larger ships, with the necessary air self defence capability (that the P25/A are totally lacking!) to complement the ASW Kamorta's, and the inshore ASW role of Abhay (Pauk) expanded by giving also to Veer (Tarantul) replacement, at the cost of coastal missile boat (who needs that with land based 300km Brahmos?)?
 
Last edited:
Abingdonboy said:
My friend @Taygibay may be able to provide more info on how low the Rafale's "footprint" is when deployed on carriers vis a vis "legacy" platforms.
Click to expand...

Hey there Abingdon, I'm sorry for the delay but I just caught the above
while updating myself on the thread.

Two-fold answer :
- Physical foot print depends on the ship used really and the ensuing operative practice.
The Rafale doesn't have folding wings, which is pretty much its only drawback, however
its size was part of the program from the onset and so its dimensions are lesser than tho
-se of the competition.
The real gain is in the footprint of its maintenance which is also lower, more than understood.
-Technological improvements shrunk the maintenance footprint both in expanded time & energy
as well as in support ( transport esp. ) but they also shrunk the toolkit of the grease monkeys.
Where a bench the size of a big road case was necessary before, something the size of a ...
big laptop does the job.
The best example might be the engine test bed. A dropped fighter engine used to be hooked
up to a bench connected by its fuel circuit and allowed to rotate a bit to prove its repair's worth.
The M-88 is simply checked by parameters and sensors by plugging to a dry bench.


tux.gif​
Of course, trying to fit a squadron of Rafales on an OPV in a 3x3x4m room behind the Sonar ...
*wink at the frigid avian" ... will certainly fail at which point we've completed our circular reasoning
and have returned to the first phrase of this answer's first part!

And good evening all, Tay.
 
Penguin said:
Aren't we dealing, in reality, with replacement on the one hand, of 4 P25 Khukri and 4 P25AKora class ships (1500 tons) with NGMV and replacement of 11x Veer (missile) and 4x Abhay (asw) classes (450-500 tons) with SW-ASW? In which the missile role is given to the larger ships, with the necessary air self defence capability (that the P25/A are totally lacking!) to complement the ASW Kamorta's, and the inshore ASW role of Abhay (Pauk) expanded by giving also to Veer (Tarantul) replacement, at the cost of coastal missile boat (who needs that with land based 300km Brahmos?)?
Click to expand...
As I have read articles in Indian media
12xGRSE ASW-SWC will replace 4xAbhay class(485 tonnes) & will add some capability in this area.
Displacement: 700 tons
Length: 70 metres (230 ft)
Beam: 10.2 metres (33 ft)
Draught: 2.7 metres (8.9 ft)
Speed: 25 knots (46 km/h)+
Range: 1,800 nautical miles (3,300 km) at 14 knots (26 km/h)
Complement: 7O 50S
The vessels will be armed with torpedoes, ASW rockets, and two 12.7 mm machine guns in remote weapon stations recently ordered from Rafael.

NGMV will replace Veer class(450 tonnes) & Khukri class(1350 tonnes)
6 is initial order number will increase to 12 in near future.
Kora class & 2xVeer class won't go anywhere before 2027 so no issue of replacing these, in place of remaining missile corvettes frigates can come.
 
Penguin said:
Let me first verify:

NGMV specs
  • Complement of 11 officers, 02 trainee officers and about 80 sailors.
  • Range:
    • not less than 2,800nm at sustained economical speed
    • not less than 1,000mm at maximum speed.
  • Max speed
    • Sprint: not less than 35 Knots,
    • Sustained: not less than 25 Knots.
    • Propulsion system
    • able to provide the requisite power to weight ratio required for the ship to achieve given max speed.
    • cater for greater endurance and operations in low speed regimes during Low Intensity Maritime Operations (LIMO) or Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) patrols.
      • capable of operating at low speeds of 10 knots for at least 8 hours continuously.
    • The main engines should be capable of achieving the rated speed at 85% MCR of the engine.
    • suitably designed to meet the stealth requirements of the ship.
  • Armament
    • minimum of 8 cruise missiles (presumed anti-ship)
    • a SR-SAM-type point-defence missile system (PDMS),
      • providing credible near-360-degree anti-missile defence AMD coverage,
      • able to engage sea-skimming anti-ship cruise missiles, flying 3-5 m above sea level, up to a max speed of 3 Mach.
    • a remotely-controlled, 15km-range 76/62 main gun within a stealthy, faceted turret , capable to carry out surface to surface, surface to air and Anti Missile Defence (AMD) engagements.
    • a close-in weapon system (CIWS [read secondary gun]) using similar fire-control systems for low-intensity maritime operations (LIMO).
      • The navy stipulates that the placement of CIWS should be such that it provides near 360-degree Anti Missile Defence (AMD) protection without requirement of course alteration.
  • Sensors
    • Infra Red Search and Track (IRST) system integrated with all gun mountings with the facility to interface with the Combat Management Sytem (CMS)
    • one each surface and air surveillance radar for early warning
    • Fire Control Radars (FCR) for target indication to all its weapons.
    • all the latest navigational aids on board, including Integrated Bridge System (IBS), ECDIS, AIS, LRIT, DGPS, COTS radar with good ARPA displays etc.
    • Standard Naval IFF system
    Command and control
    • Combat Management System for network centric operations and quick response to situations at sea.
    • Ship Data Network (SDN), which should form the backbone to network all weapons, sensors, and other equipment.
    • Advanced Composite Communication Suite (ACCS) integrating all communication equipment to the communication data-bus
  • Countermeasures
    • a countermeasures dispensing system capable of firing chaff in all-round direction in distraction, seduction and centroid modes.
    • Space and weight reserve to install active-kill anti-torpedo system.
http://www.spsmai.com/exclusive/?id...ounces-ambitious-missile-corvette-requirement

Further, let me ask:


  • Why would a small ASW ship need to have the same speed and range (which is implied by the choice of the same hull and the only difference being absense of cruise missiles) as a Missile vessel? For ASW, it could be argued that lower top spead and greater range might be more usefull. This could translate to e.g. a different power plant. 2 instead of 4 diesels, or 1 GTU plus 2 diesels instead of 4 diesels.
  • Would deleting 8 to 16 antiship missiles yield enough space and weigh reserve for the installation of a hangar for a light heli or VTOl UAV plus ROVs or AUVs? This depends also on how and where the missiles are mounted. Consider that a - likely densely packed, centerline positioned - VL farm for such missiles is very different from 2 to 4 sets of 4 deck mounted rack launched missiles, in terms of what you gain from deleting them (what space and weight, distributed where on the ship) i.e. the necessity to redesign. For example, while the UKSK is long, and thus requiring sufficient 'tallness' from it is not particularly consuming much deck area. Deleting a pair of those might yield and empty structure that could house some of the gear mentioned above, but doesn't necessarily yield a flight deck. Deleting 4x4 SSM that are e.g. mounted behind a superstructure provides space for a heli deck but not necessarily for a hanger. But 4x4 might also be mounted forward ofthe bridge, or in 2x2 on each flank, or 4x4 centered amidship. And then what?
  • What would be the sonar and where would it go (unless relying on ROV/AUV for this? I took those for MCM gear, initially)
  • What would be the ASW armament? Just the heli/uav? Or torpeodoes too? If so, what kind (heavy 533mm or light 324mm)? Where would the tubes go? Or also RBU (which could also be used for active anti torpedo system. See UDAV anti torp system)

Aren't we dealing, in reality, with replacement on the one hand, of 4 P25 Khukri and 4 P25AKora class ships (1500 tons) with NGMV and replacement of 11x Veer (missile) and 4x Abhay (asw) classes (450-500 tons) with SW-ASW? In which the missile role is given to the larger ships, with the necessary air self defence capability (that the P25/A are totally lacking!) to complement the ASW Kamorta's, and the inshore ASW role of Abhay (Pauk) expanded by giving also to Veer (Tarantul) replacement, at the cost of coastal missile boat (who needs that with land based 300km Brahmos?)?
Click to expand...
Then why can't we use freedoms class type vessels?it's having speed manuerablity etc ... but it's bit heavy.
 
INS Arihant is operationally active with multiple types of SLBMs and long range torpedoes.
 

Similar threads

A
Updates on USA elections 2024
2 3
Replies
38
Views
665
Novus ordu seclorum
N
ghazi52
Pakistan Navy Decommissioned Warships / Boats
Replies
0
Views
143
ghazi52
ghazi52
S
Negotiation status of Indian workers' employment in Taiwan or other East Asian regions
Replies
2
Views
318
Skimming
S
Maarkhoor
8 Mossad Spies of Indian Navy background sentenced to death in Qatar
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
96
Views
7K
Haldorss
Haldorss
Bill Longley
Operation Dwarka, When Pakistan Navy Gave a Strategic Surprise to Indian Navy
Replies
0
Views
401
Bill Longley
Bill Longley

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Military Forum Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom