India to Produce 25 Submarines in Next 10 Years Worth $31 Billion to Counter China's Growing Presence

indian-navy-submarines-list.jpg


India is embarking on a significant expansion of its submarine fleet, with plans to produce 25 submarines over the next decade at an estimated cost of $31.6 billion. This ambitious undertaking highlights the country's determination to bolster its undersea capabilities in response to China's growing naval presence in the region.

A cornerstone of this expansion is the addition of two Arihant-class ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) to the Indian Navy's fleet. These submarines, equipped with enhanced missile-carrying capacity, will significantly strengthen India's sea-based nuclear deterrence.

Furthermore, India is developing six larger S5-class SSBNs, which will incorporate state-of-the-art stealth technologies and be armed with long-range submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), such as the K-5 and K-6. These advanced submarines will further solidify India's SSBN fleet as a formidable nuclear deterrent.

In addition to SSBNs, India plans to acquire three additional Kalvari-class submarines and is actively pursuing the development of six next-generation submarines under Project-75I and another six under Project-76. Additionally, the country aims to develop its own two nuclear attack submarines under Project-77.

This comprehensive investment in submarine technology reflects India's strategic vision and its commitment to maintaining a robust naval presence in the face of evolving geopolitical dynamics. As the country continues to expand its maritime interests, a modern and capable submarine fleet will be instrumental in safeguarding its security and protecting its national interests.
 
We should develop SSBNs and SSNs based on Borei and Kazan class submarines !
 
We should develop SSBNs and SSNs based on Borei and Kazan class submarines !
No. We already have produced three (so far) SSBNs independently, so we shouldn't go down that path. Remember the migraines of Chakra and those of Vikramaditya? Those are and will be the norm for it.

"Modularising" them (making them of generally similar design except for the SSGNs having VLS tubes instead of ballistic missile tubes -- at 4 VLS per replaced BM) is the way to go!
 
Very Good News, second its 6 S5 Subs of SSBNs But there is no mention of Indigenous SSN no ..??? 3 or 6 ...??
 
This investment will spill over to 2040 over 15-16 years I:e at 1.9 billion annually . from 2030 this figure need to be doubled , tripled by 2035 and five times by 2040 .For global operations by 2045 , The nation will need 24-36 SSKs , 18-24 SSNS 8-12 SSBNs and 4 SSGNs for Sea Denial ,Carrier escorts and Hunter killer operations .By 2060 The worlds 2nd Largest economy must have over 75 submarines .
 
This investment will spill over to 2040 over 15-16 years I:e at 1.9 billion annually . from 2030 this figure need to be doubled , tripled by 2035 and five times by 2040 .For global operations by 2045 , The nation will need 24-36 SSKs , 18-24 SSNS 8-12 SSBNs and 4 SSGNs for Sea Denial ,Carrier escorts and Hunter killer operations .By 2060 The worlds 2nd Largest economy must have over 75 submarines .
So, 9.5 billion USD annually on submarines by 2040? Sir, I don't quite know what economic projections you have in mind, but we are not going to reach anywhere near that level by that period.
 
Why not fund some of that spending by selling off useless entities like MDL, GRE and CSL?

As it is, these quota-infested workshops don't have much to bring to table.
 
Even then, still not enough for IO region. China and Pak will also slowly filling IOC and Arabian sea, whereas China may have special interest to deploy submarines in Bay of Bengal. By the time India inducts 25 submarines, many remaining submarines will be already out of service. Culprit is shoddy work and decision making on the part of GoI.
 
Timelines would be stretched. 8 years per sub for nuclear subs. 3 Kalavari class and 3-4 German subs would be made in next 10 years. Rest of the subs will be work in progress in next 20 years. It would be good,if they have two production lines/dry docks for nuclear subs.
 
$31.6 billions for 25 new SSKs, SSBNs, SSNs, and upgrade of Kalvari SSKs with Indian AIPs, etc submarines is rightly justified and needed in earnest.

India must keep spending even more to keep them upgraded with the latest generation sensors and armaments.

Go Indian Navy.
 
Why not fund some of that spending by selling off useless entities like MDL, GRE and CSL?

As it is, these quota-infested workshops don't have much to bring to table.
HAL is first on that list. The shipyards, while needing massive improvements, are actually far, far better.
 
Someone if they read about expansion of Chinese Submarine building capability it can surprise them. Delayed decision making has rendered our submarines designing and building capability little effective despite of TOT several times.
 
HAL is first on that list. The shipyards, while needing massive improvements, are actually far, far better.
Nopz.
Not much better than HAL
Inspite of assembling scorpene for the last 20 or so years, they still can't seem to be able to master the skills of assembling submarine of another design. This is the reason, the net content of indigenous components in the scorpene submarines has stayed around 40% when it was planned to have reached 60% by the time last of the Scorpenes were to roll out of MDL.
 
Timelines would be stretched. 8 years per sub for nuclear subs. 3 Kalavari class and 3-4 German subs would be made in next 10 years. Rest of the subs will be work in progress in next 20 years. It would be good,if they have two production lines/dry docks for nuclear subs.
They already have two production lines for nuclear submarines alone.
 
India has to quickly implement these projects but the most important are our nuclear submarines. We will have 6 Arihant submarines and need at least another 6 S5 class and 6 P75 Alpha attack submarines which will give us enough deterrence and attack capabilities. We also need a range of 700-12000km range MIRV nuclear missiles so we can ensure they get through their air defence.

At the same time we need to quickly start building 6 P75I, 3 advanced Kalvari submarines and 12 indigenous submarines. This will all take time to develop and manufacture and be very expensive to build.
 
Nopz.
Not much better than HAL
Inspite of assembling scorpene for the last 20 or so years, they still can't seem to be able to master the skills of assembling submarine of another design. This is the reason, the net content of indigenous components in the scorpene submarines has stayed around 40% when it was planned to have reached 60% by the time last of the Scorpenes were to roll out of MDL.
There is a large difference between building a submarine and designing a submarine. Warship design in India is partially under the ambit of shipyards, and partially under the WDB.

Where we really shot ourselves in the foot was when the Khan-grass party government led by Rajiv Ghandy alleged corruption in the Type 209-1500 submarine purchase, and cancelled the two options under that contract. The Type 209-1500 contract was to have two submarines built in Germany with Indian technicians observing the process, the next two boats to be built in India mostly with imported subsystems, and the last two to be built almost entirely in India, with critical subsystems being imported.

What ended up happening was that when the latter two boats were cancelled, all that was learnt could not be consolidated, and the fact that we waited two decades to start building more submarines meant all that knowledge was lost. Blame the government, not the shipyard. Two decades is more than enough time for people to move out and expertise to be lost.
 
Very Good News, second its 6 S5 Subs of SSBNs But there is no mention of Indigenous SSN no ..??? 3 or 6 ...??
But if we spend $30Bln-$40Bln for MRFA, we won’t have $31Bln to spend for Submarines..
 
So, 9.5 billion USD annually on submarines by 2040? Sir, I don't quite know what economic projections you have in mind, but we are not going to reach anywhere near that level by that period.
Wait and see the defense budget doubling to 150 billion $by 2030 , 400billion by 2040 and 800-one trillion by 2050 in line with GDP growth rates of 8to 10%annually reaching 7 trillion by 2030 ,15 trillion by 2037, 30 trillion by 2045 and may be even 55 trillion by 2050 as predicted by the Chief economic advisor of the govt .
 
Wait and see the defense budget doubling to 150 billion $by 2030 , 400billion by 2040 and 800-one trillion by 2050 in line with GDP growth rates of 8to 10%annually reaching 7 trillion by 2030 ,15 trillion by 2037, 30 trillion by 2045 and may be even 55 trillion by 2050 as predicted by the Chief economic advisor of the govt .
Sir, with all due respect, there is absolutely no way that will happen. The reason for this is rooted in economics and mathematics. GDP does not translate to spending money.

The ratio of central government expenditure to GDP in India is very low, coming in at just over 14%. For reference, in developed economies, that ratio sits at well over 35%, and for nations where the primary source of income is commodity exports, that ratio can go up to as high as 75-80%. Regardless, with the present scenario at 14%, we spend about 13% of central government expenditure on defence, which comes to around 1.9% of GDP spending on defence.

Now, growth in GDP is also faster than growth in government revenues (and by extension, government expenditures). This is simply because a lot of the government revenue comes from consumption taxes (such as the tax one pays on a car). Most consumption growth in India (and therefore a lot of the GDP growth) comes from the private sector, and so the growth in government revenue is far smaller, though somewhat proportional in terms of growth rate rather than growth.

Increasing the defence budget in India requires increasing the government expenditure, and therefore, government revenue. To increase government revenue, there is only one sustainable way: Improve the government revenue to GDP ratio.

Improving the government revenue to GDP ratio would mean bringing in more taxes. This can be done by either taxing more people (that is, increasing the number of taxpayers) or by taxing people more (that is, increasing taxes on the individual taxpayer).

In India, less than 2% of people pay non-zero income taxes, and these people contribute almost 20% of government revenues. There isn't much scope of increasing taxes, since in that case, people will only emigrate or park their wealth elsewhere or vote in a government that will bring taxes down.

Thus, the only way to do this is to increase the taxpayer base. That means increasing the income of people. This has an effect on increasing GDP as well since more income would also help people save more and stimulate more consumption. However, increasing the incomes of people is a very difficult and long-term thing to do.

The reason we are also seeing a drop in the defence spending share of GDP is because a lot of GDP growth has come from the private sector, and because we are now investing into things such as infrastructure that will be needed for improving GDP growth as well as increasing incomes for people.

My projections for India's defence budget, assuming we don't end up in a regional war, are as follows:
2030: Around 90 billion USD. 2040: Around 105 billion USD. 2047: Around 115 billion USD. 2055: Around 125 billion USD.

Reasonable GDP projections are Around 6 trillion USD by 2030, 10 trillion by 2040, and 15 trillion by 2050. That 55 trillion USD may well be the PPP figure adjusted to today.

Maintaining something like a 8% GDP growth on a 4 trillion USD base is far easier than maintaining 8% on a 12 trillion USD GDP. This is simply because the absolute incremental figure goes up that much. If one goes by China's stated figures (which are suspect), they added almost 2.5 times the economic growth of India last year to their economy. In all honesty, even 4% for China or 3.5% for USA is just as, if not more impressive, than 8% for India.
 
Sir, with all due respect, there is absolutely no way that will happen. The reason for this is rooted in economics and mathematics. GDP does not translate to spending money.

The ratio of central government expenditure to GDP in India is very low, coming in at just over 14%. For reference, in developed economies, that ratio sits at well over 35%, and for nations where the primary source of income is commodity exports, that ratio can go up to as high as 75-80%. Regardless, with the present scenario at 14%, we spend about 13% of central government expenditure on defence, which comes to around 1.9% of GDP spending on defence.

Now, growth in GDP is also faster than growth in government revenues (and by extension, government expenditures). This is simply because a lot of the government revenue comes from consumption taxes (such as the tax one pays on a car). Most consumption growth in India (and therefore a lot of the GDP growth) comes from the private sector, and so the growth in government revenue is far smaller, though somewhat proportional in terms of growth rate rather than growth.

Increasing the defence budget in India requires increasing the government expenditure, and therefore, government revenue. To increase government revenue, there is only one sustainable way: Improve the government revenue to GDP ratio.

Improving the government revenue to GDP ratio would mean bringing in more taxes. This can be done by either taxing more people (that is, increasing the number of taxpayers) or by taxing people more (that is, increasing taxes on the individual taxpayer).

In India, less than 2% of people pay non-zero income taxes, and these people contribute almost 20% of government revenues. There isn't much scope of increasing taxes, since in that case, people will only emigrate or park their wealth elsewhere or vote in a government that will bring taxes down.

Thus, the only way to do this is to increase the taxpayer base. That means increasing the income of people. This has an effect on increasing GDP as well since more income would also help people save more and stimulate more consumption. However, increasing the incomes of people is a very difficult and long-term thing to do.

The reason we are also seeing a drop in the defence spending share of GDP is because a lot of GDP growth has come from the private sector, and because we are now investing into things such as infrastructure that will be needed for improving GDP growth as well as increasing incomes for people.

My projections for India's defence budget, assuming we don't end up in a regional war, are as follows:
2030: Around 90 billion USD. 2040: Around 105 billion USD. 2047: Around 115 billion USD. 2055: Around 125 billion USD.

Reasonable GDP projections are Around 6 trillion USD by 2030, 10 trillion by 2040, and 15 trillion by 2050. That 55 trillion USD may well be the PPP figure adjusted to today.

Maintaining something like a 8% GDP growth on a 4 trillion USD base is far easier than maintaining 8% on a 12 trillion USD GDP. This is simply because the absolute incremental figure goes up that much. If one goes by China's stated figures (which are suspect), they added almost 2.5 times the economic growth of India last year to their economy. In all honesty, even 4% for China or 3.5% for USA is just as, if not more impressive, than 8% for India.

6 trillion in 2030 to 10 trillion in 2040 is a CAGR of 5%.

on what planet is that relaistic for nominal GDP growth? at 6 trillion the per capita gdp will be around ~4k.

if 5% nominal gdp growth from that base is india's "reasonable" potential (it's not) its better that we break up the country. That's absolutely abysmal and we should go our seperate ways.

also just because the base is higher doesnt automatically mean that growth will be harder to come by. economies undergo vitrous cycles where growth accelerates till it plateaus and you hit ceilings like middle income trap etc.

also, somehow in your projections defence spending inexplicably goes from 1.5% of gdp in 2030 to 0.8% of gdp in 2050. Defence spending during peacetime will stay at around 2% gdp.

"economics and mathematics" lmao.

india will be around $7.5t in 2030 around $18t in 2040 and $50t in 2050.

these are all academmic anyway as USD denomminated gdp measures will lose their meaning well before 2050. They already are in many sectors. Defence will follow as more production will inevitable by indeginized and you will judge based on items and services produced and not some us dollar value assigned to them by the international market.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
3,297
Messages
26,801
Members
1,455
Latest member
Dhimant Dungar
Back
Top