Request For Information released for 5 IN Fleet Replenishment tankers

[Abingdonboy]

Why 5 more fleet tankers ? I guess navy planning to operate more than 2 CBG's

It does not necessarily translate into that. Every Task Force on 'extended deployment' will need resupply and replenishment. Even a Destroyer or Frigate squadron with escort ships. Rather it points towards "Blue Water" requirements, where Naval Assets will be able to perform tasks far away from home bases.

That and the IN does plan to have more then 2 CBGs active at anyone time down the road.

 

[arp2041]

That and the IN does plan to have more then 2 CBGs active at anyone time down the road.

Plan is to have atleast 1 being build every time in an Indian Shipyard - You have INS Vikrant currently being build (due to be inducted around 2018), INS Viky scheduled to be inducted later this year (so by this year end IN will have 2 CBGs), than INS Vishal or IAC-2 is projected to be inducted around mid 2020s & so on.........

Read somewhere that the long term plan calls for as much as 6 CBGs, i think that can be true around 2040 or so.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Read somewhere that the long term plan calls for as much as 6 CBGs, i think that can be true around 2040 or so.

Yes I've heard this figure too, it was in a paper written my an ex-IN Viraat Captain. He said the IN had always forecast a 4-6 CBG navy but until recently finances had been the limiting factor. Now funds are no longer an issue, I don't see why these plans can't be realised.

 

[sancho]

But the fact is the IN has quite clearly

Have they made it clear? Till now it is completely unclear if they accept the LHDs that are on offer, since the RFP talks about LDPs, but the specs could include LHDs as well. Which is why even the manufacturers are confused about it, a French forumer that talked to DCNS officials about this told me, that DCNS is not sure about it either and that they will propose the Mistral class with all it's advantages, but will develop an LDP based on the Mistral class as well.
If we get both from a single manufacturer, it would benefit IN wrt to ease of operations, but also our naval industry, since the bigger order would create more in return as well.

Btw, the INS Viraat is basically a helicopter carrier, that can be used in amphibious operations in supporting roles, INS Jalashwa instead can be used only in these roles, so IN already has both extreems and therefor should understand the benefits of having both in a single LDH design.

Sancho, all tankers have been Supply Ships but carrying mainly POL; because that is the thing that gets consumed most and requires most replenishment. In that respect this class of ships being considered will be no different from any of it predecessors.
This tender specs seems to be a mirror of the Fincantieri Tankers save for larger size.

That's not correct, the Deepak class is designed as a fleet tanker with some replenishment capabilities if you want, but the Aditya class for example was designed as a Fleet Support Ship (just what the RFI is looking for), with more storage capabilities for cargo other than oil, or fluids in general and modern FSSs or JSSs, have even dedicated vehicle decks, or even a well deck with amphibious vehicles.
Here is a graphic of an evaluation of the Royal Navy, for support vessels:

It also shows 3 different class of replenishment vessels, although they all have tanker capabilities, but you have the general tanker design, the support ship which can include repair facilities like the Aditha class and a version with amphibious / logistical capabilities (basically a mix between a tanker and an LDP). So depending on what you want, you can gear these vessles in a certain direction, while maintaining the general tanker / replenishment capability.

The general specs and even the extern replenishment mast design will be similar, be it for a tanker or a FSS/JSS, but the internal space will be used differently, depending on the roles. That's why the Brave class will perfectly fit to the RFI here, but why I also expect a JSS offer of the dutch Schelde / spanish Navantia shipyards, based on their Enforcer designs.

However, I am more interested in what our Indian shipyards might offer to this competition:

Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers Ltd :-- Welcome


The Garden Reach Shipbuilders had done it before and might offer a modern design based on their experience, L&T Shipyards might form a JVs with a foreign partner too. Pipavav will for sure come with a joint proposal of DCNSs Brave class, so it will be an interesting competition.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Have they made it clear? Till now it is completely unclear if they accept the LHDs that are on offer, since the RFP talks about LDPs, but the specs could include LHDs as well. Which is why even the manufacturers are confused about it, a French forumer that talked to DCNS officials about this told me, that DCNS is not sure about it either and that they will propose the Mistral class with all it's advantages, but will develop an LDP based on the Mistral class as well.
If we get both from a single manufacturer, it would benefit IN wrt to ease of operations, but also our naval industry, since the bigger order would create more in return as well.

Btw, the INS Viraat is basically a helicopter carrier, that can be used in amphibious operations in supporting roles, INS Jalashwa instead can be used only in these roles, so IN already has both extreems and therefor should understand the benefits of having both in a single LDH design.

Lol, @sancho I meant the IN has made it clear they want a LHD/LPD class and a separate JSS class. The two procurement are entirely independent of one another. And yes I agree the IN has made the LHD/LPD issue as vague as they could. However from what I hear, this is more of a case of the IN still deciding internally what they want to go for and whether they want a mix (LHD and LPD) in this deal or just a single type (LHD OR LPD). I have heard this from my friend who specifically works in the naval arms industry and is based in India (but is British), he has some contacts in the IN (they aren't all that open with him but give him the basics and he attends many of the IN's functions and naval seminars in India and around the world so has interacted with IN personal quite a bit).

 

[black_jack]

at present we are operating 4 20000+ ton ships for refueling roles , almost each ship is less than 15 year old then why new RFI is issued.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

That's not correct, the Deepak class is designed as a fleet tanker with some replenishment capabilities if you want, but the Aditya class for example was designed as a Fleet Support Ship (just what the RFI is looking for), with more storage capabilities for cargo other than oil, or fluids in general and modern FSSs or JSSs, have even dedicated vehicle decks, or even a well deck with amphibious vehicles.
Here is a graphic of an evaluation of the Royal Navy, for support vessels:

It also shows 3 different class of replenishment vessels, although they all have tanker capabilities, but you have the general tanker design, the support ship which can include repair facilities like the Aditha class and a version with amphibious / logistical capabilities (basically a mix between a tanker and an LDP). So depending on what you want, you can gear these vessles in a certain direction, while maintaining the general tanker / replenishment capability.

The general specs and even the extern replenishment mast design will be similar, be it for a tanker or a FSS/JSS, but the internal space will be used differently, depending on the roles. That's why the Brave class will perfectly fit to the RFI here, but why I also expect a JSS offer of the dutch Schelde / spanish Navantia shipyards, based on their Enforcer designs.

However, I am more interested in what our Indian shipyards might offer to this competition:

Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers Ltd :-- Welcome


The Garden Reach Shipbuilders had done it before and might offer a modern design based on their experience, L&T Shipyards might form a JVs with a foreign partner too. Pipavav will for sure come with a joint proposal of DCNSs Brave class, so it will be an interesting competition.

@sancho; is that what is spelt out in the Appendix-A (Tech Spec for FSS) part of the RFI?


@Abingdonboy: Appendix-E (Minimum Qualifying Criteria) part of the RFI is interesting. It stands to impact Domestic yards quite adversely; on the face of it. Unless JVs will be allowed to pass muster.

 

[danger007]

BRAVE class replenishment and support ship AOR fleet oiler AOE Fast Combat Support Ship Batiment RAvitailleur d
Modular design. Can be fitted with 2 double masts allowing simultaneous operation on 4 stations. Can host mission specific containers. Double-hull tanks.
Payload

Liquid UNREP tanks, up to 9 RAS liquid tanks (16,000 cubic meters), 2 fresh water tanks
Ballast capacity
UNREP (solids) about 2,500 t
Torpedoes, missiles...
Technical support area: 1,400m²
Ammunition storage: 1,400m² / 280 t

UNREP capacity

Liquid UNREP, up to 4 masts for liquid/solid at port and starboard
Solid UNREP at port and starboard
VERTREP: 2 helicopter spots (1 mid-size + 1 heavy)

Displacement
30,000 tons
Aircraft
Spots: 2, one for heavy helicopter.
Hangar: 2 mid-size helicopters (10 tons class)
Dimensions
Length: 195 m
Breadth: 28 m
Maximum Draft: 8.7 m
Type
Multi-Mission Replenishment and Support ship
Crew
100 (+ accomodations for 100)

Performance
Top Speed: 20 kts
Range: 10,000 nm @ 18 kts
Endurance: N/A

 

[Abingdonboy]

@Abingdonboy: Appendix-E (Minimum Qualifying Criteria) part of the RFI is interesting. It stands to impact Domestic yards quite adversely; on the face of it. Unless JVs will be allowed to pass muster.

Hmm. had missed that during my cursory glance of the RFI. Yes it seems the only way Indian shipyards could be allowed to compete is if the IN accepts a JV where the foreign partner complies with APPENDIX-E (ie has built 2 such vessels in the past 5 years) and this is treated as if the Indian shipyard is on a level pegging. This seems like a stretch though.




To be fair, I can see it as a perfectly legitimate request on the IN's part. They are clearly not going to take delays anymore, and that's good, they are a fighting arm not a babysitter for Indian industries.


Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Hmm. had missed that during my cursory glance of the RFI. Yes it seems the only way Indian shipyards could be allowed to compete is if the IN accepts a JV where the foreign partner complies with APPENDIX-E (ie has built 2 such vessels in the past 5 years) and this is treated as if the Indian shipyard is on a level pegging. This seems like a stretch though.

To be fair, I can see it as a perfectly legitimate request on the IN's part. They are clearly not going to take delays anymore, and that's good, they are a fighting arm not a babysitter for Indian industries.

Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

@Abingdonboy; read Appendix-A also. It is "plain-vanilla" specs. Not very different from the present Deepak/Shakti class save tonnage. Which have been 'iterations' of previous Fleet Replenishment Ships or now as the RFI says "Fleet Support Ships'.

BTW, I'd read the Appendices yesterday; hence I was quite circumspect in adding to the excitement about the possible designs on the 'menu'.

Still early days.

 

[sancho]

Lol, @sancho I meant the IN has made it clear they want a LHD/LPD class and a separate JSS class. The two procurement are entirely independent of one another.

Seperated by time, but not necessarily by the general roles, because a fleet of JSSs could do the same as combo of LDPs and tankers. In disaster relief roles, the tankers are of no use, in supply roles the LDPs are no use, so you always have 4 or 5 vessels without a mission. Take the same number of JSSs instead and you can keep using them all the time and in both missions, basically just like with the single role IL 78 and the multi role A330 MRTT.

at present we are operating 4 20000+ ton ships for refueling roles , almost each ship is less than 15 year old then why new RFI is issued.

Not necessarily as replacements, but with 2 carriers and several subs coming in soon, that will be operated at longer distances, you need more support capabilities too. At the end these vessels will need quiet some time to reach their targets, re-supply them and then return to base and having just a few of them then will highly limit INs operations.

@sancho; is that what is spelt out in the Appendix-A (Tech Spec for FSS) part of the RFI?

As I said, the specs mentioned in the RFI fit to both a FSS like the Aditha/Brave class, or a JSS since they are basic only. If IN at the end wants a well deck is up to them of course, but that doesn't mean the manufacturers couldn't offer it to India either with or without the well deck.

This is a design that was offered to the UK:

As you can see with well deck and side doors to the vehicle deck and 4 replenishment masts, so this would fit to INs RFI as well and depending on what IN wants at the end, they will config the internal design according to their needs.