Spain Proposes Custom-Built Amphibious Ships to India, Includes Technology Transfer

The Indian Navy's pursuit of bolstering its fleet capabilities could receive a significant boost with a proposal from Spain.

Navantia, Spain's prominent state-owned shipyard, has expressed interest in supplying the Indian Navy with its latest offering – the multi-purpose amphibious assault ship of the Juan Carlos I class.

This development aligns with the Indian Navy's goal of acquiring new Landing Platform Docks (LPDs).

Spain's commitment goes beyond simply offering the LPDs. Amparo Valcarce, Spain's Secretary of State for Defence, has confirmed a technology transfer (ToT) agreement accompanying the sale.

This agreement falls in line with the "Make in India" initiative, fostering a strategic collaboration that would see the construction of a 26,000-ton LDP within a selected Indian shipyard. This move would significantly strengthen India's domestic shipbuilding capabilities.

The inherent flexibility of the Juan Carlos I design is of particular interest to India. Valcarce highlights how these LDPs offer customization possibilities, aligning them perfectly with the Indian Navy's specific operational requirements.

India's efforts to acquire LDPs have spanned over a decade, unfortunately marked by previous cancellations.

These versatile vessels are crucial assets, serving multiple purposes that include:

• Military Operations: Transporting of troops, equipment, and crucial supplies.
• Humanitarian and Disaster Relief Efforts: Delivering aid in times of crisis.

Navantia's proposal, with its emphasis on domestic production and customization, presents the Indian Navy with a unique and attractive opportunity.

Acquiring modern LPDs through this agreement has the potential to significantly enhance India's naval reach and contribute to regional maritime security.

As negotiations move forward, this potential collaboration between Spain and India could prove to be a major step forward for both nations.

 

[Pink Panther]

These are Mini aircraft carriers with ski jump unlike French Mistral which is a helicopter carrier , but Mistral is more advanced, I think DCNS already signed a deal with L&T to make 4 amphibious ships based on Mistral, with L&T as a partner this project would be really good, again we should not be in a single vendor situation.

 

[Apocalypse gupta]

These are Mini aircraft carriers with ski jump unlike French Mistral which is a helicopter carrier , but Mistral is more advanced, I think DCNS already signed a deal with L&T to make 4 amphibious ships based on Mistral, with L&T as a partner this project would be really good, again we should not be in a single vendor situation.

I think this project will take shape similar to P75I. Foreign OEM with Indian partner competing with other partnerships. This hopefully moves much quicker since we have experience of making such deals

 

[Superpower Bharat]

My bet is this other than Mistral.. I think French won't allow to install our system like Radar, EW, CIWS , missile (anti air & anti ship) and other system in there LPD but Spain will allow ..

 

[Ramsses CDXX]

• Already 4 ships are in service of various navies – Juan Carlos, Canberra, Adelaide, Anadolu. Adopt their 🇪🇸 design.....save time & money otherwise it will take a decade to commision first of the class.
• Even French 🇫🇷 design is fine since 5 ships are already built – as long as proven & capable, unlike indigenous 📣🥁.
• Waise bhi there is NO INDIGENOUS SOLUTION for NMRH, LCAC, LCU, MGT, IEP, diesel engine, alternator, IPMS, ATS, PAR, nav radar, MFSTAR, aviation & cargo lifts, aviation deck system, RO system,....

 

[The_rED_dEVIL]

These are Mini aircraft carriers with ski jump unlike French Mistral which is a helicopter carrier , but Mistral is more advanced, I think DCNS already signed a deal with L&T to make 4 amphibious ships based on Mistral, with L&T as a partner this project would be really good, again we should not be in a single vendor situation.

India needs Spanish Juan Carlos class design under LPD programme and S-80+ class under P75I submarine programme.

Navy's subsurface and amphibious components needs improvement. Navy also needs more indegenous Jalashwa like design ships, LST (Shardul class follow on) and LCU (Mk IV class follow on).

 

[War is good for business]

These are Mini aircraft carriers with ski jump unlike French Mistral which is a helicopter carrier , but Mistral is more advanced, I think DCNS already signed a deal with L&T to make 4 amphibious ships based on Mistral, with L&T as a partner this project would be really good, again we should not be in a single vendor situation.

How it it any less advanced than the mistral?

 

[Frank]

Why cant MDSL or GSRE or LT for that matter develop LPDs???

 

[Anant]

India needs Spanish Juan Carlos class design under LPD programme and S-80+ class under P75I submarine programme.

Navy's subsurface and amphibious components needs improvement. Navy also needs more indegenous Jalashwa like design ships, LST (Shardul class follow on) and LCU (Mk IV class follow on).

We already build indigenously designed LSTs and LCUs. Our LSTs so far (the Magar- and Shardul-classes) take design inspiration from the British Round Table-class, but are an indigenous design. As for LCUs, we have been building those indigenously since the Mk. I LCU in the late 1970s. We have since built the Mk. II LCU, the Mk. III LCU, and the in-service Mk. IV LCU, with a new Mk. V LCU planned.

 

[Anant]

Why cant MDSL or GSRE or LT for that matter develop LPDs???

In theory, we can develop LPDs. The old Peoject 71 ADS designs for Vikrant (dating back to the early 1990s when she was planned to be a 25,000 ton carrier can be dusted off, modernised, and modified to give a LPD.

However, my concern with this would be the timelines involved in this entire pre-construction phase. Jalahswa is giving good service, but her age is starting to show. Do remember that she dates all the way back to 1971.

A good proposal may be to go for two LPDs derived from a foreign design while our local shipyards look to develop a variant based on the ADS designs. If that endeavour is successful, we could go for 2 more LPDs to this design (maybe even 4, who knows?). If not, we can just end up building 2 more LPDs to the first design.

 

[Frank]

A good proposal may be to go for two LPDs derived from a foreign design while our local shipyards look to develop a variant based on the ADS designs. If that endeavour is successful, we could go for 2 more LPDs to this design (maybe even 4, who knows?). If not, we can just end up building 2 more LPDs to the first design.

I think we should revive project 71 and totally go for local

 

[GMR]

How come we can design & build ACs and need imported LPDs? I think this is a proposal only from Navantia.. our IN has the self-drive to go for indigenous design with little foreign help here & there..

 

[amerjit johal]

Navantia doing a HAL. Offering things that have not been requested.

 

[Sandeep]

India needs more larger LPD which can deploy a large amount of troops, equipment, tanks, IFV, helicopters and essential supplies as we only have one large LPD called Jalashwa that we bought from the USA.

Currently there is no major or desperate requirement to buy and make several large foreign LPD in India because we already have a variety of medium to small types in the navy. Our islands are close to the mainland so they have a lot of defence weapons and bases to prevent any enemy from capturing them but we can also use them to keep our military supplied or reinforced with troops, weapons or supplies. Currently the LPD is mainly used to transport a lot of cargo, equipment, food, medicine or critical supplies wherever its needed. We also use it to give any critical supplies to friendly countries nearby who might have suffered from a natural disaster and need help.

Currently India should scrap this foreign contract entirely. We should develop our own indigenous version which is possible as we have built our own aircraft carrier so we don't lack the knowledge or capability to build our own LPD. As we don't need the LPD urgently now is the ideal time to design and develop it as it will take at least 8 years or more before it enters service as this will be the first time we ever build such a large LPD ship with the required technology and equipment so it will need to go through a lot of vigorous tests which will take a few years to certify it.

Another option is to buy a older LPD from the USA or any other European country which still has some service life left in them. We can always upgrade the technology and capabilities along with giving a midlife refit to the exterior and to improve its sailing ability.

Also Israel should arm it's nuclear weapon and be ready for any future attacks and it won't give back any land taken. We should also give them our own reply which is that the indigenous transfer of technology and local production given with a clear benefit to us. We should quickly complete the formalities and start production and consumption when they allow normal current to pass.

 

[Anant]

I think we should revive project 71 and totally go for local

Reviving Project 71 as-is wouldn't work. It would have to be modified.

Regardless, while I am in favour of the WDB conducting a study into converting the Project 71 designs into a LHD, we would need 1-2 LHDs in the interim, since modifying the design, modernising it, conducting necessary validation tests, and then actually constructing it would take atleast a decade.

That said, I feel the 2+2 approach or a 2+4 approach would work well.

 

[Anant]

Another option is to buy a older LPD from the USA or any other European country which still has some service life left in them. We can always upgrade the technology and capabilities along with giving a midlife refit to the exterior and to improve its sailing ability.

Older LPDs from the USA are out of the question. The only LPDs they have that are worth anything are the new San Antonio-class, none of which are for sale. The other LPDs still floating around in America are Jalashwa's older sister ships, which are completely stripped out, rusted through, and awaiting scrapping.

As for European LPDs, that is an interesting idea. The problem there is that older LPDs in the size bracket we need (20,000 tons or higher) are not available for sale second-hand, and won't be available for sale anytime soon. There are some smaller (sub-10,000 ton) LPDs which may come up for sale in a few years, but getting those ships would make no sense for us (even if they were in good shape).

That said, I have felt a 2+2 or a 2+3 or a 2+4 approach would work well for our LHDs. Let me explain:

Let the Navy get 2 LHDs of a foreign design built in India. The WDB would still be having the designs of the old Project 71 Air Defence Ship (ADS), which was INS Vikrant's original design (a small 20,000 ton carrier). We could theoretically modify and modernise that design into a LHD (using similar equipment as that used in the first two LHDs for sake of streamlined maintenance and lower costs) and build 2, 3, or 4 more, as the case might be.

 

[Anant]

Navantia doing a HAL. Offering things that have not been requested.

Technically, LHDs have been requested. A RfI was released long back, but with more recent acquisition plans for IAC-II and Project 75I, the MRSV project is on the back-burner. Even when it was at a higher priority, the three main contenders were France (with the Mistral-class), Spain (with the Juan Carlos I-class), and South Korea (with the Dokdo-class).

 

[Anant]

• Already 4 ships are in service of various navies – Juan Carlos, Canberra, Adelaide, Anadolu. Adopt their 🇪🇸 design.....save time & money otherwise it will take a decade to commision first of the class.
• Even French 🇫🇷 design is fine since 5 ships are already built – as long as proven & capable, unlike indigenous 📣🥁.
• Waise bhi there is NO INDIGENOUS SOLUTION for NMRH, LCAC, LCU, MGT, IEP, diesel engine, alternator, IPMS, ATS, PAR, nav radar, MFSTAR, aviation & cargo lifts, aviation deck system, RO system,....

Um, the Mk. IV LCUs are an indigenous design, though they use MTU engines. We have never imported LCUs. All 16 LCUs we have ever operated (two each of the Mk. I and Mk. II LCUs, four Mk. III LCUs, and eight Mk. IV LCUs) have been Indian-designed and Indian-built. The same is planned for the 12-16 Mk. V LCUs in the late 2020s or early 2030s.

 

[Frank]

Reviving Project 71 as-is wouldn't work. It would have to be modified.

Regardless, while I am in favour of the WDB conducting a study into converting the Project 71 designs into a LHD, we would need 1-2 LHDs in the interim, since modifying the design, modernising it, conducting necessary validation tests, and then actually constructing it would take atleast a decade.

That said, I feel the 2+2 approach or a 2+4 approach would work well.

LPDs are not that important... we need SSK and SSN ASAP

we should have

30 SSK (20 AIP +VLS, 10 Scorpene)
10 SSN (190MW)
8 SSBN (k4, k5)

We should have by 2035...

China will have 90 Subs by then...

AC is a liability..

have you not seen how ukraine is sinking russian war ships...

and houthis is sinking UK war ships...using cheap drones.

 

[Anant]

LPDs are not that important... we need SSK and SSN ASAP

we should have

30 SSK (20 AIP +VLS, 10 Scorpene)
10 SSN (190MW)
8 SSBN (k4, k5)

We should have by 2035...

China will have 90 Subs by then...

AC is a liability..

have you not seen how ukraine is sinking russian war ships...

and houthis is sinking UK war ships...using cheap drones.

Exactly why UK warship has been sunk, pray tell? It's one thing to sink undefended merchant ships, but it is another thing to sink an armed warship.

Now, as for Russia in the Black Sea, they have not adapted well to Ukraine's use of USVs. They didn't expect Ukraine to come up with the idea so quickly, and they did not put measures in place to counter this. Now, other Navies and learning from this an developing systems and procedures to stop this from happening.

Now, regarding your point about submarines: We are already planning those submarines, and acquisition programs are underway. By 2035, we will have some 25 or so SSKs (9 Scorpene, 6 Project 75I, 4-6 Project 76, and 3-5 older SSKs), of which 20 or so will be AIP-equipped. We will also have 1-2 SSNs (the first tranche of Project 75A), and 4 SSBNs. We will have another 6-8 SSKs, 4-5 SSNs, and 3 SSBNs on the way.

There really isn't much scope of changing this program much. You are not going to be able to increase the speed of design or construction of a submarine by cancelling the carrier, and more money for more submarines of these (as of now) in-progress designs isn't going to come.