India's INS Chakra III Nuclear Submarine Delivery from Russia Faces Setback Due to Ukraine War, Now Expected by 2028

The Indian Navy's ambitious plan to bolster its underwater capabilities with the acquisition of the INS Chakra III, an Akula-class nuclear-powered attack submarine from Russia, has hit a significant roadblock.

Originally scheduled for delivery in 2025, the submarine is now expected to join the Indian fleet no earlier than 2028. This delay is attributed to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the resulting Western sanctions imposed on Russia.

In 2019, India and Russia inked a $3 billion deal for a 10-year lease of the Akula-1 class submarine, to be christened INS Chakra III. This agreement, following a pattern of similar collaborations between the two nations, aimed to provide the Indian Navy with access to cutting-edge SSN technology. Akula-class submarines are renowned for their stealth, speed, and deep-diving capabilities, making them a formidable force in underwater warfare.

For India, the acquisition of INS Chakra III is crucial for maintaining a credible deterrent in the increasingly complex Indo-Pacific region. The submarine was intended to fill the operational gap left by the INS Chakra II, another Akula-class submarine leased from Russia, which was returned in 2021 after completing its 10-year lease.

However, the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war has thrown a wrench in the plans. Western sanctions have impacted the availability of essential components and technologies needed to refurbish and modernize the submarine to meet India's specific requirements. This has led to a significant delay in the delivery timeline, pushing it to late 2027 or 2028.

This setback impacts India's naval preparedness at a time when it faces growing security challenges. The INS Chakra II played a vital role in enhancing India's operational experience with nuclear-powered submarines, providing valuable insights into their operation and maintenance. Its return to Russia in 2021 left a void that the INS Chakra III was expected to fill.

Before its handover to India, the INS Chakra III will undergo an extensive refit and modernization process. This includes the integration of Indian communication and sensor systems to ensure seamless interoperability with the Indian Navy's existing infrastructure and operational protocols. These customizations are essential for the submarine to effectively operate within the Indian Ocean Region and integrate into India's naval command and control structure.

While India continues to modernize its naval capabilities, this setback highlights the need for diversification and self-reliance in defence procurement to mitigate risks associated with external factors.

 

[Anant]

In all honesty, there is a fairly decent chance Chakra III isn't happening. We had a fair number of issues with Chakra II, and the Nerpa (as she was called in Russia) was pretty much a new boat when we got her.

There aren't any other new, or even new-ish, Akulas still around. Nerpa has been decommissioned and is awaiting scrapping, and the newest Akula bar her is the sole Akula III built, the Gepard, which dates back to 2001.

Moreover, the Akula-class have started seeing a fair number of issues in recent years, and their mid-life overhauls have seen massive delays. Finally, Russia has only 11-13 SSNs left in total, and of those, 8-10 are over 30 years old, and therefore near the end of their planned 35-40 year life. Russia has a stated need for a minimum of 16 SSNs + SSGNs, of which they have between 15 and 17 (depending on if one considers the Sierra II-class boats to be in service).

If we do end up getting a Chakra III, and it happens to be an Akula, chances are we'll just get another lemon SSN unless it is the Gepard (Akula III), the Vepr (Akula II), or the Samara (the last of the Improved Akula Is).

 

[ASHOK CARROL]

When the second Chakra-11 was being planned in 1999 and Russian EKM subs were being inducted , the price for the nuclear SSN was 800$ million and the govt of the day under Pm Vajpayee and Advani missed a golden opportunity to place orders for 4 with staggered delivery schedules . The navy would then have had any time two to three SSNs on patrol.

 

[Devasahayam]

At the rate it's going, our two approved SSGNs will be ready long before Chakra III ever sees Indian shores...much like we could have had Vikrant (newer) developed and fleet-inducted cheaper and sooner than we got Vikramaditya from Russia...

 

[Invi Pass]

No matter if Chakra is happening or not. Cannot blame Russia which is one country which has shared such important military assets some of their best with India. India is now returning the favor by buying Russian oil.

let's not sulk over it. Just get Russian technology and technicians to build our own SSN.

As long as we continue to buy Russian oil, they will not say NO.

 

[Kira]

In all honesty, there is a fairly decent chance Chakra III isn't happening. We had a fair number of issues with Chakra II, and the Nerpa (as she was called in Russia) was pretty much a new boat when we got her.

There aren't any other new, or even new-ish, Akulas still around. Nerpa has been decommissioned and is awaiting scrapping, and the newest Akula bar her is the sole Akula III built, the Gepard, which dates back to 2001.

Moreover, the Akula-class have started seeing a fair number of issues in recent years, and their mid-life overhauls have seen massive delays. Finally, Russia has only 11-13 SSNs left in total, and of those, 8-10 are over 30 years old, and therefore near the end of their planned 35-40 year life. Russia has a stated need for a minimum of 16 SSNs + SSGNs, of which they have between 15 and 17 (depending on if one considers the Sierra II-class boats to be in service).

If we do end up getting a Chakra III, and it happens to be an Akula, chances are we'll just get another lemon SSN unless it is the Gepard (Akula III), the Vepr (Akula II), or the Samara (the last of the Improved Akula Is).

I just dont see the logic behind getting a fairly old SSN on a 10 year lease that too with major operational restrictions for a jaw dropping $3 billion, India could instead pull in French expertise for that money, and build its own SSN in near future.
PS - I believe though that the abnormally high amount may be a fee for "compensation" for the help in developing the Arihant and its nuclear reactor.

 

[Shrujanam Syama]

I just dont see the logic behind getting a fairly old SSN on a 10 year lease that too with major operational restrictions for a jaw dropping $3 billion, India could instead pull in French expertise for that money, and build its own SSN in near future.
PS - I believe though that the abnormally high amount may be a fee for "compensation" for the help in developing the Arihant and its nuclear reactor.

The high prices are always disguised payment for something else. That is always how these deals work

 

[Kira]

The high prices are always disguised payment for something else. That is always how these deals work

This deal is very sus because the price, the lease period and terms and the Submarine itself don't make much sense.

 

[Shrujanam Syama]

This deal is very sus because the price, the lease period and terms and the Submarine itself don't make much sense.

It doesn't make sense because there are other elements involved. India is making payments to Russia indirectly. Now India can make payments to Russia in the name of coal imports or steel imports etc too and hence no need to make sketchy defence deals

 

[NSR]

Truthfully speaking, India does not need it anymore.

India should use that $3 billions of money towards Super Sukhois or additional batteries of S-400 which are easily attainable objectives.

 

[Anant]

I just dont see the logic behind getting a fairly old SSN on a 10 year lease that too with major operational restrictions for a jaw dropping $3 billion, India could instead pull in French expertise for that money, and build its own SSN in near future.
PS - I believe though that the abnormally high amount may be a fee for "compensation" for the help in developing the Arihant and its nuclear reactor.

Not disagreeing, but the entire premise is questionable, if you ask me.

That said, coming to your very valid point about this being some form of payment for help with the Arihant-class:

Again, this seems unlikely to me. Based on what information is available, Russian involvement in the Arihant-class was restricted to when they provided a detailed set of drawings for the Kilo-class and some basic drawings for the Delta-class SSBN, and were then involved in certifying both the reactor (developed entirely in India) and the Arihant design. Assuming that this was all they did, we have already paid them a fair bit.

When it comes to your theory, it was well accepted that part of the reason we leased the Nerpa was as a payment for this. In fact (and you'd probably already know this), India actually bankrolled Nerpa's completion. That was in addition to the money we paid for the lease itself. It was also reported back then that part of the payments for help with the Arihant-class would be covered by the fact that Russia would have a new-ish SSN on its books after the lease.

Combining that with the money already paid as consultation fees and the like, and I have a feeling we already had the whole thing paid off.

Now, we signed the second lease initially in 2019. That was for 3 billion USD, which is an absurd amount of money when you consider that Nerpa cost us around 1.5 billion USD (~800 million USD for completing the boat, as she was around 65% complete at the time) plus 670 million USD as the lease payment.

Now, the original agreement in 2004 included that India would bankroll Nerpa's construction, and would then lease two submarines. This was to be done for a total of 2 billion USD. At the completion of the leases, India would have the option to buy one or both submarines at 1.5 billion USD each (adjusted to inflation) plus refit costs.

That would then indicate that we were essentially buying an Akula now. However, if we are, in fact, paying some 3 billion USD for a refitted 30+ year old SSN, then we are idiots. By 2028, all boats of the class except the sole Akula III (the Gepard) will be more than 30 years old (not counting Nerpa here, as she is being sold for scrap). We simply cannot afford that. Even with refits and the like, the Akula-class is an old design, and the boats themselves are also very old.

If this deal is still on the table, it may be a far better deal for us to cancel it and use that money elsewhere.

 

[Anant]

At the rate it's going, our two approved SSGNs will be ready long before Chakra III ever sees Indian shores...much like we could have had Vikrant (newer) developed and fleet-inducted cheaper and sooner than we got Vikramaditya from Russia...

Regarding the point on Vikrant: We might have had an indigenous aircraft carrier faster if the project had moved on with the Project 71 ADS design and started construction in 2001, as originally planned. Do remember that the ship was intended to be a 28,000 ton small carrier at that point.

Of course, with revisions to the design and everything, coupled with delays in Vikrant's construction, we were not going to get the ships in service in time to replace Viraat. Regardless, had the timelines been a bit faster, I'd say we would have benefitted more from having a second, 35,000-ish carrier rather than Vikramaditya. Under the given circumstances, however, I don't see how we could have done better.

 

[Anant]

When the second Chakra-11 was being planned in 1999 and Russian EKM subs were being inducted , the price for the nuclear SSN was 800$ million and the govt of the day under Pm Vajpayee and Advani missed a golden opportunity to place orders for 4 with staggered delivery schedules . The navy would then have had any time two to three SSNs on patrol.

Sir, the Russians were never selling any SSNs. That was a big no-no even back then. Oh, and the Akula-class cost around 1.5 billion USD apiece back in 2000.

 

[ASHOK CARROL]

Sir, the Russians were never selling any SSNs. That was a big no-no even back then. Oh, and the Akula-class cost around 1.5 billion USD apiece back in 2000.

The lease was done as the country did not have nuclear reactor decommissioning facilities .Big commissions were paid . We only hear off Western arms deals of commissions . Russians were the most corrupt then and a serving chief lost his job because of his non concurrence to a junk carrier deal in which Netas and babus were knee deep in volved in taking commissions .

In 1999 the MOd files will show the russian SSN price as 800 million . A few million were spent for creating the infrastructure and training booth in India and Russia . The final price shot up to 1.5 billion in 2000 Shows the fat commissions paid .

 

[Anant]

The lease was done as the country did not have nuclear reactor decommissioning facilities .Big commissions were paid . We only hear off Western arms deals of commissions . Russians were the most corrupt then and a serving chief lost his job because of his non concurrence to a junk carrier deal in which Netas and babus were knee deep in volved in taking commissions .

Sir, even the lease of Chakra I in 1987-91 was more of a way to train crews. Indian sailors were not allowed in the reactor compartment. With Chakra II, the terms were more relaxed, and there was an option to buy the boat at the end of the lease, but even that was kept there for the sake of it.

Now, however, with the US and UK deciding to sell nuclear submarines to Australia, SSN sales may well become more common (relatively speaking).

 

[Anant]

In 1999 the MOd files will show the russian SSN price as 800 million . A few million were spent for creating the infrastructure and training booth in India and Russia . The final price shot up to 1.5 billion in 2000 Shows the fat commissions paid .

Sir, those prices were the local prices, and were low because there were a number of half-completed SSNs lying around. Once you factored in things like export margins, that cost would shoot up like anything.