French Naval Group Enters Race for Indian Navy's Mine Countermeasures Contract

Naval Group, a leading French defense contractor, has thrown its hat into the ring for a major Indian Navy contract. The company is offering its advanced M940 Oostende mine countermeasures vessel (MCMV) in collaboration with an Indian shipyard, aiming to secure a deal to build 12 such vessels domestically.

This move from Naval Group comes as India seeks to urgently bolster its mine warfare capabilities after multiple unsuccessful attempts to procure MCMVs in the past. The Indian Navy's renewed effort highlights the importance of modernizing its fleet to protect the country's extensive coastline.

Naval Group is proposing a partnership model, combining its technological expertise with Indian shipbuilding prowess. While the potential Indian partner is yet to be revealed, top contenders like Goa Shipyard Limited, L&T Shipbuilding, and Mazagon Dock Limited are likely in the running.

The M940 Oostende stands out with its cutting-edge drone integration. It's designed to deploy a mix of surface, underwater, and aerial drones for autonomous mine detection, classification, and destruction, reducing risk to naval personnel.

The vessel is built for survivability, with features to withstand explosions and minimize its own detectable signatures.

Key Specifications of the M940 Oostende:​

• Length: 82.6 meters
• Width: 17 meters
• Displacement: 2,800 tons
• Maximum Speed: 15.3 knots
• Range: Over 3,500 nautical miles
• Crew: 63 (base crew: 33)

The core of the M940 is the Naval Group Polaris combat system, alongside a suite of specialized mine countermeasure systems and vehicles from Exail and others.

Naval Group's entry, with its emphasis on technology and collaboration, adds a compelling option to India's quest for advanced mine countermeasures. The outcome of this contract will be crucial for modernizing the Indian Navy's capabilities in safeguarding its maritime borders.

 

[Anant]

The RFI issued by the Navy is tailored to these City-class MCMVs. Just start negotiations and conclude contract asap, so we can have these MCMVs entering service in another 5-6 years. We haven't had MCMVs for 5 years now, and every single additional day is an issue.

 

[Frank]

We can't even make mine sweepers???

 

[k2b2]

inke bajaye hame helicopter carrier par jyada tezi se kaam karna chahiye..ye sabhi feachers heli carrier mai samvist ho jayenga...

 

[Bharat007]

With vast oceans surrounding, India lacks mine sweepers.

 

[Arz786]

Mine sweeping vessels will come as unmanned ones in future. We should also remember that.

 

[Anant]

Mine sweeping vessels will come as unmanned ones in future. We should also remember that.

Unmanned drones, yes. However, we would still be needing motherships for these drones, besides having a small number on them on larger warships.

 

[Anant]

We can't even make mine sweepers???

Not particularly. We don't have minesweeping drones or a towed array sonar ready for deployment.

 

[Anant]

inke bajaye hame helicopter carrier par jyada tezi se kaam karna chahiye..ye sabhi feachers heli carrier mai samvist ho jayenga...

Nope. We need MCMVs as well, and very urgently at that. We haven't had non-helicopter MCM capability since 2019. In another 8-10 years, we would simply lose the capability entirely if we don't get new MCMVs.

 

[PARTHAJIT JANA]

inke bajaye hame helicopter carrier par jyada tezi se kaam karna chahiye..ye sabhi feachers heli carrier mai samvist ho jayenga...

This is a very basic requirement for any navy which should have been cleared long time ago, korean deal was canceled because of cost i think. This is much more important than heli carriers.

 

[Pink Panther]

The RFI issued by the Navy is tailored to these City-class MCMVs. Just start negotiations and conclude contract asap, so we can have these MCMVs entering service in another 5-6 years. We haven't had MCMVs for 5 years now, and every single additional day is an issue.

The sooner they decide on this, it is better, for many years they have been going back and forth dragging this procurement, they should also decide fast on Amphibious assault Ships and fuel tankers.

 

[Frank]

Not particularly. We don't have minesweeping drones or a towed array sonar ready for deployment.

Hang screw driver Kings Tata Adani Ambani Mahindra Lt on India gate...

Shame for 1 billion people

 

[Anant]

Hang screw driver Kings Tata Adani Ambani Mahindra Lt on India gate...

Shame for 1 billion people

Started your rant again? Calm down, for heaven's sake!

Towed array sonars aren't easy to develop, and our first attempt has failed. A project is now underway, but it will take several years to materialise. As for minesweeping drones, some work seems to have been started on these, but these are also a long way away.

In the meantime, the Navy has Jo MCM capability that doesn't involve helicopters or crew members trying to shoot at mines (the latter of which is a 1930s tactic). We cannot ket our MCM capabilities atrophy away, hence these ships are needed.

 

[kumar]

Earlier RFIs, they were trying for fiber hull. Not sure, how much signature management they are able to achieve.

 

[Anant]

The sooner they decide on this, it is better, for many years they have been going back and forth dragging this procurement, they should also decide fast on Amphibious assault Ships and fuel tankers.

Fuel tankers? Um, the HSL-class replenishment oilers have started construction.

Coming to MCMVs, we have had rather bad luck. The first deal with Kangnam Corporation of South Korea failed over disagreements over ToT and local production.

Then, the Navy decided to investigate leasing a few MCMVs from Russia while a long-term solution was worked upon. The plan called for leasing 6 Sonya-class MCMVs, but that plan fell apart after Russia decided to invade Ukraine.

Finally, the Navy decided to go for the local option and build MCMVs. The tender released last year calls for 12 MCMVs, and is tailored to the Franco-Belgian-Dutch City-class MCMVs, since these would sit well in our strategic needs. Of course, the plan is to later build 18 more MCMVs locally to reach the target of 30.

Coming to amphibious assault ships, I believe the Navy should simply get on with the idea and either propose co-developmeny of a successor to the Mistral-class with France (which will come up for replacement in the mid-2030s), or simply go for a modified Juan Carlos I-class, or maybe even just get modified Mistrals. Waiting for other designs is kind of pointless, and we should ideally be going for LHDs rather than LPDs.

 

[Anant]

This is a very basic requirement for any navy which should have been cleared long time ago, korean deal was canceled because of cost i think. This is much more important than heli carriers.

No, that deal was cancelled due to disagreements over ToT and local production, atleast based on what information is openly available.