BDforever
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2013
- Messages
- 14,387
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
mekur ?Keno mekur're loy'ya submarine chorben naki??
TYPE 214 SUB VS AMUR 1650 SUB A Layman's analysis
- Thread starter DrSomnath999
- Start date
PRINCE_THE_SHOWSTOPPER
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2012
- Messages
- 386
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Mekur = cat in dhakiyamekur ?
BDforever
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2013
- Messages
- 14,387
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
ah ... i am not dhakiya
anyway mekur is afraid of water lol
DrSomnath999
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 2,428
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
German firm to offer Type 214 vessel for submarines project
New Delhi: Eyeing the Rs 50,000 crore project of Indian Navy for six submarines, German defence major
The Germans are also promising a no-hold barred transfer of technology in line with the Narendra Modi government's 'Make in India' push.
"The Indian Defence Ministry is expected to issue the P-75I RFP for which we are planning to offer the Type 214 submarine, which combines best-in-class underwater endurance and diving depth," Gurnad Sodhi, Managing Director of Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems (TKMS) (India) said here.
Claiming that the submarine is highly regarded for anti-surface and anti-submarine operations, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities, Sodhi said the HDW Class 214's "proven" fuel-cell based Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) system is the best available on the market.
While conventional diesel-electric submarines have to surface every few days to get oxygen to recharge their batteries, AIP systems will help the submarines to stay submerged for longer periods.
Apart from AIP, India wants advanced detection range, combat management systems and better sensors for optimum performance on the new submarines. The weapon system would be a mix of torpedoes and missiles.
The Request for Information for the P-75I was issued in 2008 and the company has been regularly interacting with the MoD and Indian Navy.
"Since the Indian Navy has been our customers for over 30 years, we have established a strong working relationship with them and are in a position to fully satisfy their requirements. Virtually, no shipyard in the world has more experience in designing and constructing conventional submarines than TKMS Business Unit HDW," Sodhi told PTI here.
Asked if the company has shortlisted any Indian shipyard for a tie-up, Sodhi said discussions are on and the group is awaiting the report of the special committee set up by the Defence Ministry.
Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar had set up a special committee for the project to identify the shipyards in the country that have the capability and the capacity to build the six submarines. These shipyards will then tie-up with a foreign firm.
Besides the public shipyards, the private players include L&T and Pipavav, in which Anil Ambani-led Reliance group has bought controlling stake. The committee is expected to submit the report soon.
German firm to offer Type 214 vessel for submarines project | Zee News
New Delhi: Eyeing the Rs 50,000 crore project of Indian Navy for six submarines, German defence major
The Germans are also promising a no-hold barred transfer of technology in line with the Narendra Modi government's 'Make in India' push.
"The Indian Defence Ministry is expected to issue the P-75I RFP for which we are planning to offer the Type 214 submarine, which combines best-in-class underwater endurance and diving depth," Gurnad Sodhi, Managing Director of Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems (TKMS) (India) said here.
Claiming that the submarine is highly regarded for anti-surface and anti-submarine operations, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities, Sodhi said the HDW Class 214's "proven" fuel-cell based Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) system is the best available on the market.
While conventional diesel-electric submarines have to surface every few days to get oxygen to recharge their batteries, AIP systems will help the submarines to stay submerged for longer periods.
Apart from AIP, India wants advanced detection range, combat management systems and better sensors for optimum performance on the new submarines. The weapon system would be a mix of torpedoes and missiles.
The Request for Information for the P-75I was issued in 2008 and the company has been regularly interacting with the MoD and Indian Navy.
"Since the Indian Navy has been our customers for over 30 years, we have established a strong working relationship with them and are in a position to fully satisfy their requirements. Virtually, no shipyard in the world has more experience in designing and constructing conventional submarines than TKMS Business Unit HDW," Sodhi told PTI here.
Asked if the company has shortlisted any Indian shipyard for a tie-up, Sodhi said discussions are on and the group is awaiting the report of the special committee set up by the Defence Ministry.
Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar had set up a special committee for the project to identify the shipyards in the country that have the capability and the capacity to build the six submarines. These shipyards will then tie-up with a foreign firm.
Besides the public shipyards, the private players include L&T and Pipavav, in which Anil Ambani-led Reliance group has bought controlling stake. The committee is expected to submit the report soon.
German firm to offer Type 214 vessel for submarines project | Zee News
DrSomnath999
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 2,428
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
‘Russian Submarine’ Found To Be Too Stealthy, Sweden Pulls Back As Russian Jets Spy Overhead
Sweden has found the alleged Russian submarine to be too stealthy and the Swedish military is pulling back some of its forces as Russian jets spy on them from the skies. But Sweden insists they are not giving up on the hunt for the foreign vessel.
In a related report by The Inquisitr, Sweden has deployed its military in the search for analleged Russian submarine. The situation quickly escalated and NATO nations have reported that Russian jets were intercepted near the search area. Sweden is still threatening to used armed force in order to raise the potential Russian sub, assuming they manage to find it. But finding the unknown foreign vessel is proving to be the tricky part and the Swedish military admits the alleged Russian submarine is “like Jesus.”
According to the Swedish newspaper The Local, Sweden is pulling back some of the battleships, minesweepers, helicopters and 200 troops that have been scouring the area near Stockholm since last week. They have searched an area that’s between 20 to 40 miles for the unknown foreign vessel, but now armed forces spokesman Erik Lagersten says that “Some of the ships have returned to port.” He added to reporters that Sweden considers this a “new phase” in their search and not a scaling down of the operation.
“Ground and airforce units as well as some naval units are staying in the area,” he said. “The intelligence gathering operation is continuing just as before… We still believe there is underwater activity.”
Why is Sweden having such a difficulty tracking down the underwater noise? According to Johan Wiktorin, a fellow at the Swedish Royal Academy of War Sciences, major defense cutbacks play a role in the failure to find anything.
“One is quality: that is, the lack of qualified anti-submarine helicopters, which are needed to surprise the submerged vessel with their sonars,” said Wiktorin. “Then, in quantity, we have fewer surface vessels and submarines than we used to have 25 years ago. That reduces our endurance in operations, and the possibility to carry out large parallel operations in other areas.”
Officially, Sweden has claimed it is not in the position to “confirm or deny” the unknown foreign vessel in the Baltic Seas is a Russian submarine. The local media made that connection and journalists have repeated the allegation throughout the world. Russia has officially denied they have a Russian submarine in the area and once tried to blame the situation on Holland, who denied their Dutch submarine was still in the area.
Malena Britz, an assistant professor at the Swedish National Defence College, also notes that Sweden has spotted this type of underwater activity but it only became a front page headline for two reasons.
“I think the reason the Armed Forces are actually mentioning this incident at all is because of the increased tensions between Sweden and Russia,” she said. “We have to remember that the Armed Forces have no choice but to be open about this. It’s happening too close to Stockholm to carry out a secret operation. Imagine hiding an operation like that with today’s social media. Facebook would be overloaded with pictures and speculation. Even if they wanted to be secretive they couldn’t.”
In the end, it’s believed the hunt for the alleged Russian submarine will be a catalyst for raising awareness of a Russian threat among Swedes. Britz even thinks that if Sweden finds the unknown foreign vessel, and determines it does indeed indeed belong to Russia, that Sweden may choose to not force it to the surface since “politically, it may not be the best idea.”
‘Russian Submarine’ Found To Be Too Stealthy, Sweden Pulls Back As Russian Jets Spy Overhead
Sweden has found the alleged Russian submarine to be too stealthy and the Swedish military is pulling back some of its forces as Russian jets spy on them from the skies. But Sweden insists they are not giving up on the hunt for the foreign vessel.
In a related report by The Inquisitr, Sweden has deployed its military in the search for analleged Russian submarine. The situation quickly escalated and NATO nations have reported that Russian jets were intercepted near the search area. Sweden is still threatening to used armed force in order to raise the potential Russian sub, assuming they manage to find it. But finding the unknown foreign vessel is proving to be the tricky part and the Swedish military admits the alleged Russian submarine is “like Jesus.”
According to the Swedish newspaper The Local, Sweden is pulling back some of the battleships, minesweepers, helicopters and 200 troops that have been scouring the area near Stockholm since last week. They have searched an area that’s between 20 to 40 miles for the unknown foreign vessel, but now armed forces spokesman Erik Lagersten says that “Some of the ships have returned to port.” He added to reporters that Sweden considers this a “new phase” in their search and not a scaling down of the operation.
“Ground and airforce units as well as some naval units are staying in the area,” he said. “The intelligence gathering operation is continuing just as before… We still believe there is underwater activity.”
Why is Sweden having such a difficulty tracking down the underwater noise? According to Johan Wiktorin, a fellow at the Swedish Royal Academy of War Sciences, major defense cutbacks play a role in the failure to find anything.
“One is quality: that is, the lack of qualified anti-submarine helicopters, which are needed to surprise the submerged vessel with their sonars,” said Wiktorin. “Then, in quantity, we have fewer surface vessels and submarines than we used to have 25 years ago. That reduces our endurance in operations, and the possibility to carry out large parallel operations in other areas.”
Officially, Sweden has claimed it is not in the position to “confirm or deny” the unknown foreign vessel in the Baltic Seas is a Russian submarine. The local media made that connection and journalists have repeated the allegation throughout the world. Russia has officially denied they have a Russian submarine in the area and once tried to blame the situation on Holland, who denied their Dutch submarine was still in the area.
Malena Britz, an assistant professor at the Swedish National Defence College, also notes that Sweden has spotted this type of underwater activity but it only became a front page headline for two reasons.
“I think the reason the Armed Forces are actually mentioning this incident at all is because of the increased tensions between Sweden and Russia,” she said. “We have to remember that the Armed Forces have no choice but to be open about this. It’s happening too close to Stockholm to carry out a secret operation. Imagine hiding an operation like that with today’s social media. Facebook would be overloaded with pictures and speculation. Even if they wanted to be secretive they couldn’t.”
In the end, it’s believed the hunt for the alleged Russian submarine will be a catalyst for raising awareness of a Russian threat among Swedes. Britz even thinks that if Sweden finds the unknown foreign vessel, and determines it does indeed indeed belong to Russia, that Sweden may choose to not force it to the surface since “politically, it may not be the best idea.”
‘Russian Submarine’ Found To Be Too Stealthy, Sweden Pulls Back As Russian Jets Spy Overhead
DrSomnath999
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 2,428
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
Let's get the facts right on submarines Australia may buy
False information from the Defence Department to Parliament is ruling out German submarines in favour of Japanese, writes Brian Toohey.
by Brian Toohey
Vice Admiral Tim Barrett, the navy chief, told a Senate committee last week he was "professionally embarrassed" by a written answer Defence gave to a parliamentary question about the capability of German submarines. Much more than embarrassment is at stake. Defence relied on false information that would rule out the world's biggest exporter of subs as a contender in Australia's most expensive military purchase ever.
In its recent answer to the independent South Australian senator Nic Xenophon's question, Defence said it "is not aware of any German-design submarines that carry US weapons". Publicly available material shows six navies, including Israel and South Korea, operate German-designed subs carrying US weapons using the German combat system ISUS90. Germany also exports subs to other countries that chose different weapons.
At Wednesday's Senate committee hearing, Xenophon gave Barrett examples of why Defence should have been aware that its written answer was incorrect. Barrett conceded he was "alarmed" and "professionally embarrassed" by the error.
The error matters because Defence wants Australia's new subs to carry US torpedoes and missiles. The level of incompetence Defence revealed strongly suggests that – despite an abundance of staff – it is not up to the job of providing an objective assessment of the subs on offer from Germany, France and Japan. Despite its shoddy treatment by Defence, Germany has exported 100 subs since World War II, France 20 and Japan none.
There are also other concerns about Defence's familiarity with subs produced by the three competing manufacturers, following a written answer Xenophon received to another question on February 9. Defence said Australian submariners had not gone on an underwater trip on French-designed subs since 2001, but had done so on German-designed ones on a number of occasions, most recently in 2014. It said no "sea rides" had been conducted on Japanese subs. This did not stop the Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, strongly indicating to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe last April that Australia would buy Japan's Soryu subs, without a test drive, let alone a proper study of the alternatives.
Many politicians wrongly assume Australia must install a US combat system on its next sub to be interoperable with US forces. In fact, the US operates closely with many military forces that have differing combat systems, including those of South Korea, Japan, the UK, Germany and Australia.
The initial US combat system on the existing Collins Class subs was an expensive flop. Now the US AN/BYG-1 has been retrofitted to five of the six Collins in a protracted process over the past 12 years. The system is not used in any other conventional subs and there is no good reason to use it in Australia's new ones.
Abbott wants the Soryu, partly to signal to China that he wants to boost Japan's military status. The only criteria should be what's the best sub for Australia. Defence considers the 12,000 kilometre range for the 4200 tonne Soryu to be inferior. A new design may change this. Singapore is buying an upgraded German Type 214 whose official range is 19,000 km. Unlike the Soryu, it's equipped with missiles to attack anti-submarine helicopters, planes and ships from underwater. Despite regularly "sinking" US warships in exercises, Defence says an upgraded Type 214 is too small at 2000 tonnes.
The French are offering Australia a conventional version of their Barracuda nuclear sub that is not yet operational. Nor is the Germans' offer – a 4000-tonne Type 216 with vertical air lock to launch underwater drones or 22 special forces troops. It only needs a crew of 34 compared to the Soryu's 65.
Given the increasing burden of keeping the Collins going, a decision on its replacement is needed urgently, unless an interim lease on existing subs is adopted. Treasury and Finance, plus outside specialists, must be involved in defining what's really needed and in assessing the options. Neither Defence nor Abbott can be left to make an ill-informed pick.
Let's get the facts right on submarines Australia may buy | afr.com
False information from the Defence Department to Parliament is ruling out German submarines in favour of Japanese, writes Brian Toohey.
by Brian Toohey
Vice Admiral Tim Barrett, the navy chief, told a Senate committee last week he was "professionally embarrassed" by a written answer Defence gave to a parliamentary question about the capability of German submarines. Much more than embarrassment is at stake. Defence relied on false information that would rule out the world's biggest exporter of subs as a contender in Australia's most expensive military purchase ever.
In its recent answer to the independent South Australian senator Nic Xenophon's question, Defence said it "is not aware of any German-design submarines that carry US weapons". Publicly available material shows six navies, including Israel and South Korea, operate German-designed subs carrying US weapons using the German combat system ISUS90. Germany also exports subs to other countries that chose different weapons.
At Wednesday's Senate committee hearing, Xenophon gave Barrett examples of why Defence should have been aware that its written answer was incorrect. Barrett conceded he was "alarmed" and "professionally embarrassed" by the error.
The error matters because Defence wants Australia's new subs to carry US torpedoes and missiles. The level of incompetence Defence revealed strongly suggests that – despite an abundance of staff – it is not up to the job of providing an objective assessment of the subs on offer from Germany, France and Japan. Despite its shoddy treatment by Defence, Germany has exported 100 subs since World War II, France 20 and Japan none.
There are also other concerns about Defence's familiarity with subs produced by the three competing manufacturers, following a written answer Xenophon received to another question on February 9. Defence said Australian submariners had not gone on an underwater trip on French-designed subs since 2001, but had done so on German-designed ones on a number of occasions, most recently in 2014. It said no "sea rides" had been conducted on Japanese subs. This did not stop the Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, strongly indicating to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe last April that Australia would buy Japan's Soryu subs, without a test drive, let alone a proper study of the alternatives.
Many politicians wrongly assume Australia must install a US combat system on its next sub to be interoperable with US forces. In fact, the US operates closely with many military forces that have differing combat systems, including those of South Korea, Japan, the UK, Germany and Australia.
The initial US combat system on the existing Collins Class subs was an expensive flop. Now the US AN/BYG-1 has been retrofitted to five of the six Collins in a protracted process over the past 12 years. The system is not used in any other conventional subs and there is no good reason to use it in Australia's new ones.
Abbott wants the Soryu, partly to signal to China that he wants to boost Japan's military status. The only criteria should be what's the best sub for Australia. Defence considers the 12,000 kilometre range for the 4200 tonne Soryu to be inferior. A new design may change this. Singapore is buying an upgraded German Type 214 whose official range is 19,000 km. Unlike the Soryu, it's equipped with missiles to attack anti-submarine helicopters, planes and ships from underwater. Despite regularly "sinking" US warships in exercises, Defence says an upgraded Type 214 is too small at 2000 tonnes.
The French are offering Australia a conventional version of their Barracuda nuclear sub that is not yet operational. Nor is the Germans' offer – a 4000-tonne Type 216 with vertical air lock to launch underwater drones or 22 special forces troops. It only needs a crew of 34 compared to the Soryu's 65.
Given the increasing burden of keeping the Collins going, a decision on its replacement is needed urgently, unless an interim lease on existing subs is adopted. Treasury and Finance, plus outside specialists, must be involved in defining what's really needed and in assessing the options. Neither Defence nor Abbott can be left to make an ill-informed pick.
Let's get the facts right on submarines Australia may buy | afr.com
Ind4Ever
BANNED
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2015
- Messages
- 3,579
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Let's get the facts right on submarines Australia may buy
False information from the Defence Department to Parliament is ruling out German submarines in favour of Japanese, writes Brian Toohey.
by Brian Toohey
Vice Admiral Tim Barrett, the navy chief, told a Senate committee last week he was "professionally embarrassed" by a written answer Defence gave to a parliamentary question about the capability of German submarines. Much more than embarrassment is at stake. Defence relied on false information that would rule out the world's biggest exporter of subs as a contender in Australia's most expensive military purchase ever.
In its recent answer to the independent South Australian senator Nic Xenophon's question, Defence said it "is not aware of any German-design submarines that carry US weapons". Publicly available material shows six navies, including Israel and South Korea, operate German-designed subs carrying US weapons using the German combat system ISUS90. Germany also exports subs to other countries that chose different weapons.
At Wednesday's Senate committee hearing, Xenophon gave Barrett examples of why Defence should have been aware that its written answer was incorrect. Barrett conceded he was "alarmed" and "professionally embarrassed" by the error.
The error matters because Defence wants Australia's new subs to carry US torpedoes and missiles. The level of incompetence Defence revealed strongly suggests that – despite an abundance of staff – it is not up to the job of providing an objective assessment of the subs on offer from Germany, France and Japan. Despite its shoddy treatment by Defence, Germany has exported 100 subs since World War II, France 20 and Japan none.
There are also other concerns about Defence's familiarity with subs produced by the three competing manufacturers, following a written answer Xenophon received to another question on February 9. Defence said Australian submariners had not gone on an underwater trip on French-designed subs since 2001, but had done so on German-designed ones on a number of occasions, most recently in 2014. It said no "sea rides" had been conducted on Japanese subs. This did not stop the Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, strongly indicating to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe last April that Australia would buy Japan's Soryu subs, without a test drive, let alone a proper study of the alternatives.
Many politicians wrongly assume Australia must install a US combat system on its next sub to be interoperable with US forces. In fact, the US operates closely with many military forces that have differing combat systems, including those of South Korea, Japan, the UK, Germany and Australia.
The initial US combat system on the existing Collins Class subs was an expensive flop. Now the US AN/BYG-1 has been retrofitted to five of the six Collins in a protracted process over the past 12 years. The system is not used in any other conventional subs and there is no good reason to use it in Australia's new ones.
Abbott wants the Soryu, partly to signal to China that he wants to boost Japan's military status. The only criteria should be what's the best sub for Australia. Defence considers the 12,000 kilometre range for the 4200 tonne Soryu to be inferior. A new design may change this. Singapore is buying an upgraded German Type 214 whose official range is 19,000 km. Unlike the Soryu, it's equipped with missiles to attack anti-submarine helicopters, planes and ships from underwater. Despite regularly "sinking" US warships in exercises, Defence says an upgraded Type 214 is too small at 2000 tonnes.
The French are offering Australia a conventional version of their Barracuda nuclear sub that is not yet operational. Nor is the Germans' offer – a 4000-tonne Type 216 with vertical air lock to launch underwater drones or 22 special forces troops. It only needs a crew of 34 compared to the Soryu's 65.
Given the increasing burden of keeping the Collins going, a decision on its replacement is needed urgently, unless an interim lease on existing subs is adopted. Treasury and Finance, plus outside specialists, must be involved in defining what's really needed and in assessing the options. Neither Defence nor Abbott can be left to make an ill-informed pick.
Let's get the facts right on submarines Australia may buy | afr.com
#SoryusforIndia
DrSomnath999
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 2,428
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
India might do Govt-to-govt deal on Project-75I With Germans on submarines
India has sounded out Germany for a direct government-to-government deal to buy six submarines, bypassing a competitive bidding process in what could be New Delhi’s costliest military acquisitions programme.
The Indian Navy is now in the middle of finalising the specifications for and choosing a shipyard for its P75i programme to acquire six conventional submarines. The submarines must be capable of firing missiles to attack targets on land and must have air independent propulsion (AIP) that gives them more endurance to stay underwater.
The total cost of the project could top $11 billion (approximately Rs 66,000 crore).The enquiry to the Germans was made at delegation-level talks last evening, a source in the defence ministry said today. The German defence minister, Ursula Von Der Leyen, is currently visiting India.
The Indian Navy currently operates a fleet of 13 conventional diesel-electric submarines after its INS Sindhurakshak sank in Mumbai in August 2013. Four of the submarines are of German-origin.
“We asked them what they would offer if we went for the submarines in a direct government-to-government deal,” said the official.
German conglomerate, Thyssenkrupp, the original builders of the U-Boat of Hitler’s navy in World War II, currently owns HDW from which the Indian Navy sourced its Type 209 Shishumar-class submarines (INS Shishumar, Shankush, Shalki and Shankul) between 1986 and 1994 before the deal was hit by allegations of bribery and suspended.
Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems is now contracted to upgrade the four submarines. The upgradation involves equipping them with capability to fire Harpoon missiles.
The Project 75i programme is designed to assist the navy in beefing up its undersurface power after a three-year submarine-building project drafted in the 1990s went askew. The navy wanted 24 submarines by 2024; it now effectively has 13 with two or three constantly under refit.
Last year, the government decided to select an Indian shipyard for P75i for which a committee headed by the navy’s chief of design, vice-admiral Ashok Subhedar, has been tasked.
A defence official said the Modi government was closer to a policy in which all purchases of “strategic equipment” would be made through government-to-government deals. He cited the example of the decision to buy 36 Rafale fighter jets from France.
An official statement from the ministry said the talks between Manohar Parrikar and the visiting German minister focused on “partnering of Germany in the Make-in-India initiative in the defence sector and supply of state-of-the-art equipmentechnology”.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Germany last month. German chancellor Angela Merkel is slated to visit India later in the year. The German defence minister will be visiting the Western Naval Command in Mumbai tomorrow.
India might do Govt-to-govt deal on Project-75I With Germans on Submarines | idrw.org
India has sounded out Germany for a direct government-to-government deal to buy six submarines, bypassing a competitive bidding process in what could be New Delhi’s costliest military acquisitions programme.
The Indian Navy is now in the middle of finalising the specifications for and choosing a shipyard for its P75i programme to acquire six conventional submarines. The submarines must be capable of firing missiles to attack targets on land and must have air independent propulsion (AIP) that gives them more endurance to stay underwater.
The total cost of the project could top $11 billion (approximately Rs 66,000 crore).The enquiry to the Germans was made at delegation-level talks last evening, a source in the defence ministry said today. The German defence minister, Ursula Von Der Leyen, is currently visiting India.
The Indian Navy currently operates a fleet of 13 conventional diesel-electric submarines after its INS Sindhurakshak sank in Mumbai in August 2013. Four of the submarines are of German-origin.
“We asked them what they would offer if we went for the submarines in a direct government-to-government deal,” said the official.
German conglomerate, Thyssenkrupp, the original builders of the U-Boat of Hitler’s navy in World War II, currently owns HDW from which the Indian Navy sourced its Type 209 Shishumar-class submarines (INS Shishumar, Shankush, Shalki and Shankul) between 1986 and 1994 before the deal was hit by allegations of bribery and suspended.
Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems is now contracted to upgrade the four submarines. The upgradation involves equipping them with capability to fire Harpoon missiles.
The Project 75i programme is designed to assist the navy in beefing up its undersurface power after a three-year submarine-building project drafted in the 1990s went askew. The navy wanted 24 submarines by 2024; it now effectively has 13 with two or three constantly under refit.
Last year, the government decided to select an Indian shipyard for P75i for which a committee headed by the navy’s chief of design, vice-admiral Ashok Subhedar, has been tasked.
A defence official said the Modi government was closer to a policy in which all purchases of “strategic equipment” would be made through government-to-government deals. He cited the example of the decision to buy 36 Rafale fighter jets from France.
An official statement from the ministry said the talks between Manohar Parrikar and the visiting German minister focused on “partnering of Germany in the Make-in-India initiative in the defence sector and supply of state-of-the-art equipmentechnology”.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Germany last month. German chancellor Angela Merkel is slated to visit India later in the year. The German defence minister will be visiting the Western Naval Command in Mumbai tomorrow.
India might do Govt-to-govt deal on Project-75I With Germans on Submarines | idrw.org
Similar threads
