The Soaring Cost of Navy's Upcoming 3 Kalvari-Class Scorpene Submarines

The Indian Navy is set to significantly bolster its submarine fleet with talks advancing to acquire three more Kalvari-class (Scorpène) submarines. State-owned Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Limited (MDL) is reportedly in the final stages of negotiation for a deal estimated at a substantial ₹35,000 crore (US$4.19 billion).

While the final price remains subject to negotiations, the projected cost per submarine falls between $1.2 billion and $1.3 billion. This marks a substantial 62% increase compared to the previous six Kalvari-class submarines procured at ₹23,652 crore (US$4.1 billion in 2023).

The new submarines are expected to feature upgraded equipment and sensors, positioning them at the forefront of technological advancements. However, this significant cost increase has raised concerns.

Despite constructing six Kalvari-class submarines in the past, MDL has been unable to boost indigenous content beyond 60%. The reliance on French original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) for critical components remains a major factor driving up the cost.

An upcoming price negotiation committee meeting offers a glimmer of hope for reducing the overall cost. However, the considerable price hike underscores the challenges India confronts in achieving self-reliance in its defense manufacturing sector.

Despite the cost concerns, these upgraded Kalvari-class submarines will substantially enhance India's underwater deterrence capabilities. The Navy's focus on acquiring these modern platforms highlights its commitment to maintaining a robust maritime defense posture in a geopolitically complex region.

 

[Parthasarathi DasGupta]

My suggestion, ask quotation immediately for P75I. L1 should get all 6 to built. L2 will built 3 if they can't reduce price equal to L1. And 6 if they reduce price equal to L1

 

[Sandeep]

The current government's indecision has led to a significant cost escalation. Despite many voices of reason calling for it, they have ignored pleas to place repeat orders for 3 submarines. It's an absolute waste of taxpayer's money! They need to get at least one thing right by incorporating AIP in the production phase, not after commissioning the subs.

Explain what indecision exactly? We just about finished constructing the last Kalvari submarine and after finishing its tests and trials she will be commissioned this year. Last year an agreement was signed when the PM visited France and met Macron that we will make another 3 submarines.

Now they are taking a comprehensive look throughout the entire submarine and looking at what upgrades or technology can be replaced. Then we will agree at the amount of technology will get transferred to us along with the amount of production we make in India. Then we will negotiate a final price and it will take a bit of time but not too long as this is just a repeat order of the original contract for the first 6 submarines.

 

[Sandeep]

Any contract signed in 2005 for the first 6 submarines will be lower than the price they agree in 2024 which will cost more.

Now they are taking a comprehensive look throughout the entire submarine and looking at what upgrades or technology can be replaced or transferred to us. Then we will agree at the amount of technology that will get transferred to us along with the amount that we can make in India. One crucial aspect that we want is for them to transfer and we can make the critical technology like the engines, sonar, sensors, instruments etc rather than manufacturing common and easily made in India.

Now we can negotiate a final price and it will take a bit of time but not too long as this is just a repeat order of the original contract for the first 6 submarines.

 

[NSR]

There is a fairly critical fighter shortage for the Navy. The Navy needs, ideally speaking and at a minimum, a grand total of two carrier air wings, which works out to between 44 and 52 fighters in total. We have 40 MiG-29Ks today. The Navy has also said on occasion that the MiG-29K does face serviceability problems every now and then, and factoring in usual availability rates, we have around 30-32 MiG-29Ks ready at any given time. That is critically low.

Moreover, with IAC-II on the way, if TEDBF ends up getting delayed for some reason and we cancel the DBMRF procurement (Rafale M as presently sanctioned), we may end up in a scenario of having 35-40 MiG-29Ks against a requirement of 66-78 carrier-based fighters, at which point one or even two of our carriers will be little more than glorified helicopter carriers.

That is to say nothing of the fact that the Navy also wants two to four squadrons' worth of fighters (again, around 50-100 fighters including spares and trainers) in the dedicated maritime strike role. For now, we have eight venerable Jaguars operated by the IAF working in this role, with plans to replace them with a dozen or so Su-30MKIs.

I have long been a proponent of the idea that once the TEDBF does come in numbers, and if we assume the Rafale Ms can be modified to make them suitable for proper ground-based operations, the Navy could potentially transfer the Rafale Ms to the IAF. Alternatively, the Rafale Ms could be set up as one of the shore squadrons. In any case, the TEDBF production run could, at this point, be around 200 fighters (78-80 for three carrier air wings + 100 for shore squadrons + 20-22 spares).

Anant, instead of throwing out billions on Rafale-M, I would personally go with deploying 16 Mig-29Ks to each carriers and plow all the money into TEDBF to get it developed and produced quickly.
We are not a Blue water world travelling A/C dependent power player like USA so I think 16 Mig-29K fighters per each A/C would be enough.

Rafale-M is an entirely new system with its own armaments and logistics to take care of.
Instead of one Mig-29Ks armaments and logistics for two carriers, we will have two different systems and it will be nightmare which you only understand when you get chance to visit the Belly of aircraft carrier.

Too speak frankly and succinctly, it is all bad planning and execution on parts of GoI, MoD, and Indian Navy in equipping the A/Cs.

God bless India and its Indian Navy.

 

[Ajath Shri]

What is wrong with more cost? Well, it does not help the deal at all, when there is also project 76, and 75i are cheaper.

Inflation cost need to be factored. Every year real estate value goes up. Will the raw material cost not go up ?

 

[Pad UwU]

What’s to rebut? 60% escalation in 2 decades. That’s the price escalation we have seen in the last 7-8 years alone. This is a friends and family discount.

I would love Frenchies NAVAL GROUP if they help it go for 70~80% ToT's to win more orders but if they can't give more yummy 😋 offers it's up to Indian Navy to find deals that appealing for us especially if it's bundle with AIP technology kakakakak 😹😹😹

 

[Pad UwU]

30% inflation after 2 decades? Prices have increased by 30% since 2021 itself. He is giving us a massive friends and family discount here.

Well if the French deal has AIP or pump jet propulsion tech it's acceptable price considering the inflation 😺... Look out of all western design countries small subs German and French design are quite good. But nothing beats the dang Japanese weeboos diesel electric subs IMHO

 

[Anant]

I have not proposed but HAL did for navy, but it would be better for air force as Tejas is made air-force and TEDBF for Navy. So if they plan to build it would be good for airforce. on 25/05/2024 Defence.in and wrote "to-counter-ada-hal-had-pitched-its-ownTo Counter ADA, HAL had Pitched its own Twin-Engine LCA".

HAL's proposal was only a sketch drawing and maybe some simulations with statistics and data. That is maybe 0.25% of the work required to actually get the full design ready.

Just because they did that small bit of work doesn't mean they can handle 100% of the work in a short span of time.

 

[Anant]

Anant, instead of throwing out billions on Rafale-M, I would personally go with deploying 16 Mig-29Ks to each carriers and plow all the money into TEDBF to get it developed and produced quickly.
We are not a Blue water world travelling A/C dependent power player like USA so I think 16 Mig-29K fighters per each A/C would be enough.

Rafale-M is an entirely new system with its own armaments and logistics to take care of.
Instead of one Mig-29Ks armaments and logistics for two carriers, we will have two different systems and it will be nightmare which you only understand when you get chance to visit the Belly of aircraft carrier.

Too speak frankly and succinctly, it is all bad planning and execution on parts of GoI, MoD, and Indian Navy in equipping the A/Cs.

God bless India and its Indian Navy.

God bless India and the Indian Navy, and the Armed Forces at large. No two ways about that.

That said, boss, with all due respect, we can of course deploy 16-20 MiG-29Ks to each carrier and call it a day. However, that would hamper operations. Fighters and pilots are trained to operate in a number of groups, and a given carrier air wing size has a doctrine attached to it. If we suddenly downsize the air group, that doctrine needs to be replaced by a new one, which is very time-consuming. Moreover, 16-20 fighters would hamper the effectiveness of the carriers massively.

But, alright. Let's assume for a minute we cancel the Rafale M acquisition and send that money HAL and ADE's way for the TEDBF. The TEDBF is still some time away from the CDR, which is required to sanction funds. With the funds now available, let's assume that CCS approval is received the day after CDR is completed.

Let's also assume that with the extra funding, HAL can get tooling and stuff ready by the time TEDBF prototypes complete preliminary flight testing. These two things are about as much cost crashing as you can bring into the project. Having more funding isn't going to help hasten development in any noticeable manner beyond these.

Now for the pitfalls. HAL and ADE are already working on two aircraft projects with fairly large delays. Adding a third project will only increase that workload, and lead to more delays on all three projects. Secondly, there is no guarantee that the reduction in time will be less than any delays caused. In other words, there is a chance that the delays caused by having three projects going simultaneously will be more than the time savings you get.

There is also the fact that of you decide to deploy 16-20 MiG-29Ks per carrier, you will have to do a lot of training work and the like, which will eat into the remaining life of the jets, which potentially brings their retirement a year or two ahead, from 2038-40 down to 2036-39. Any delays in TEDBF, therefore, could prove to be catastrophic.

Finally, with IAC-II poised to enter service with 2035 or so, if we cancel the Rafale M acquisition and move forward with the TEDBF, production rates mean we won't have three complete air wings until the late 2030s at the very least.

Don't get me wrong. I am very much concerned with how much the Rafale Ms are going to cost us. However, as the timelines stand, I do not see any other options.

 

[Anant]

there is a fighter shortage in the navy, no doubt. But it is not that big of a concern. Since naval fighters are not the primary fighting force of the navy. Those would be the destroyers firgates, corvettes, submarines etc. So even if fighters are in short supply, navy can still fight a war quite well. Navy does not rely on its fighters.

Similar situation would be army's AH fleet. Army can still function quite well even if it does not have its AH. they are not its primary force.

In stark contrast, fighters are the primary force of IAF. IAF is severly affected if fighters are old, unserviceable or in short supply.

My point is, that we can wait for the TEDBF, if navy does not procure rafale marine. It would not be that big a deal. I believe it is worth it to delay naval fighter induction by 5 years for TEDBF instead of paying twice as much for rafale marine.

Fighters and naval aviation are a fairly crucial part of Naval operations, especially in our sphere of operations. The fighter shortage is a crucial concern for the Navy. However, as you pointed out, it is not as crucial a concern for the Navy as it is for the Air Force.

That said, however, the shortage of fighters is a critical problem, especially considering that availability rates will only go down as time marches on.

But, for the sake or argument, let's assume we cancel Rafale M procurement and wait for the TEDBF. I'll also assume the funding saved is diverted towards quicker clearances and the like. In doing so, the earliest you can get TEDBF into enter production is still 2032-33, as opposed to the present 2034-35 target. Factor in production rates, and getting two complete air wings will take you atleast until 2039-40, and that is if one assumes HAL can achieve 100% production efficiency on 12 aircraft per year. Three carrier air wings will take until 2042-43, which potentially leaves IAC-II without aircraft for the first 7-8 years of her service.

The other issue here is that we would be putting too much faith into ADE and HAL. As it is, present programs are highly delayed. There is absolutely no reason that suggests the same wouldn't happen here. If TEDBF starts getting delayed (which is quite probably will), then we have a situation in the late 2030s where the TEDBF is still in testing, and the MiG-29Ks are at the end of their time. That means all three carriers would be confined to staying home without aircraft for years, or just become glorified helicopter carriers.

The problem here is that there is no guarantee that cancelling Rafale M procurement and funneling that money into TEDBF will guarantee getting TEDBF five or so years later (nominally). If it's five years later, well and good. If it's eight years later, eh, we'll manage. If it's ten years later, we are in trouble. If it's more than that, we just shot ourselves in the foot.

 

[PKPRS]

That can always happen. But it has been proven that Rafale meets all the requirements and Rafale is the L1.

Everybody knows that can’t fit in the elevator or can accommodate 2 pilots, because of Madi’s bad emotions we had to shed $10Bln to buy only 36 Rafale’s, to fix that one time blunder the military is forced to go for 1.5 more squadron and put a permanent full stop to that nonsense, but the budget is not working out for that also.

 

[ramdas]

Explain what indecision exactly? We just about finished constructing the last Kalvari submarine and after finishing its tests and trials she will be commissioned this year. Last year an agreement was signed when the PM visited France and met Macron that we will make another 3 submarines.

Now they are taking a comprehensive look throughout the entire submarine and looking at what upgrades or technology can be replaced. Then we will agree at the amount of technology will get transferred to us along with the amount of production we make in India. Then we will negotiate a final price and it will take a bit of time but not too long as this is just a repeat order of the original contract for the first 6 submarines.

I think you are mistaken. There was a possibility of placing a follow-up order at the same price which was built into the contract, but government indecisiveness has escalated the costs

 

[Akshat]

Everybody knows that can’t fit in the elevator or can accommodate 2 pilots, because of Madi’s bad emotions we had to shed $10Bln to buy only 36 Rafale’s, to fix that one time blunder the military is forced to go for 1.5 more squadron and put a permanent full stop to that nonsense, but the budget is not working out for that also.

I know you hate India. That’s why spreading these lies like 10 billion for 36 planes and all. But your lies won’t work. Our military just loves the plane. So keep daydreaming.

 

[Akshat]

Well if the French deal has AIP or pump jet propulsion tech it's acceptable price considering the inflation 😺... Look out of all western design countries small subs German and French design are quite good. But nothing beats the dang Japanese weeboos diesel electric subs IMHO

Oh they are just overhyped. They competed directly with the French in Australia and lost the deal. And Germans are said to be even better than French in this field.

 

[Akshat]

I would love Frenchies NAVAL GROUP if they help it go for 70~80% ToT's to win more orders but if they can't give more yummy 😋 offers it's up to Indian Navy to find deals that appealing for us especially if it's bundle with AIP technology kakakakak 😹😹😹

No one can give better deals bro. Remember the original Scorpene deal? France had signed for 0 indigenization. So they charged nothing for it. But then gave 40%. MDL chief is on record saying this. So they gave it for free. Try doing that with anyone else.

 

[Apocalypse gupta]

Fighters and naval aviation are a fairly crucial part of Naval operations, especially in our sphere of operations. The fighter shortage is a crucial concern for the Navy. However, as you pointed out, it is not as crucial a concern for the Navy as it is for the Air Force.

That said, however, the shortage of fighters is a critical problem, especially considering that availability rates will only go down as time marches on.

But, for the sake or argument, let's assume we cancel Rafale M procurement and wait for the TEDBF. I'll also assume the funding saved is diverted towards quicker clearances and the like. In doing so, the earliest you can get TEDBF into enter production is still 2032-33, as opposed to the present 2034-35 target. Factor in production rates, and getting two complete air wings will take you atleast until 2039-40, and that is if one assumes HAL can achieve 100% production efficiency on 12 aircraft per year. Three carrier air wings will take until 2042-43, which potentially leaves IAC-II without aircraft for the first 7-8 years of her service.

The other issue here is that we would be putting too much faith into ADE and HAL. As it is, present programs are highly delayed. There is absolutely no reason that suggests the same wouldn't happen here. If TEDBF starts getting delayed (which is quite probably will), then we have a situation in the late 2030s where the TEDBF is still in testing, and the MiG-29Ks are at the end of their time. That means all three carriers would be confined to staying home without aircraft for years, or just become glorified helicopter carriers.

The problem here is that there is no guarantee that cancelling Rafale M procurement and funneling that money into TEDBF will guarantee getting TEDBF five or so years later (nominally). If it's five years later, well and good. If it's eight years later, eh, we'll manage. If it's ten years later, we are in trouble. If it's more than that, we just shot ourselves in the foot.

I agree with what you said.
I have a question. If we sign rafale marine order today, when do you think we get delivery? I dont think ww get delivery before 2030. There is already severe backlog in rafale delivery.

You yourself said that if we concentrate on tedbf instead of rafale marine, then we get them in 2032-2033. That is a delay of 2-3 years.

I believe that if we dont buy rafale marine, we can spend that money to set up 1 extra production line of tedbf. So our naval fighter deman will be satisfied 2-3 years later, if we dont buy rafales.

Even if there is some delay, it would be 5 years in worst case. And combined with the point regarding criticality, and cost, i believe it makes sense in bigger picture to delay by 5 years but go full steam on tedbf.

Regarding HAL, it would already be full throttle on Tejas mk1a and tejas mk2 by that point. I dont think it will make production delays any more.

 

[Anant]

I agree with what you said.
I have a question. If we sign rafale marine order today, when do you think we get delivery? I dont think ww get delivery before 2030. There is already severe backlog in rafale delivery.

You yourself said that if we concentrate on tedbf instead of rafale marine, then we get them in 2032-2033. That is a delay of 2-3 years.

I believe that if we dont buy rafale marine, we can spend that money to set up 1 extra production line of tedbf. So our naval fighter deman will be satisfied 2-3 years later, if we dont buy rafales.

Even if there is some delay, it would be 5 years in worst case. And combined with the point regarding criticality, and cost, i believe it makes sense in bigger picture to delay by 5 years but go full steam on tedbf.

Regarding HAL, it would already be full throttle on Tejas mk1a and tejas mk2 by that point. I dont think it will make production delays any more.

Boss, if we sign up for the Rafale M today, I have a feeling deliveries would start by 2029-30. As for TEDBF, I am saying that the earliest it can enter production is 2032-33. That has a number of assumptions underlying it, such as the project completing CDR within 6-9 months from now, testing being done quickly, no delays, no problems in testing, etc. Even then, if TEDBF does start production in 2032-33, the first full air wing will take until 2036-37 to arrive (again, very optimistically speaking), the second won't be in until 2040 or so, and the third air wing will come into the picture in 2043-44 only.

Now, by this point, the MiG-29Ks would have to be retired a few years back (2040 at the latest), which still means that we do end up with practically two carriers sitting without aircraft from the second half to the 2030s to the early-ish 2040s. The only saving grace here is that since Vikramaditya would nominally retire around 2043-44, she could, atleast in theory, do without a full air wing in the last 5 or so years of her life.

However, you would have noted that these timelines, which just about fit, are the best case scenario. If anything goes wrong (and believe me when I say it will), we are in trouble.

 

[Apocalypse gupta]

Boss, if we sign up for the Rafale M today, I have a feeling deliveries would start by 2029-30. As for TEDBF, I am saying that the earliest it can enter production is 2032-33. That has a number of assumptions underlying it, such as the project completing CDR within 6-9 months from now, testing being done quickly, no delays, no problems in testing, etc. Even then, if TEDBF does start production in 2032-33, the first full air wing will take until 2036-37 to arrive (again, very optimistically speaking), the second won't be in until 2040 or so, and the third air wing will come into the picture in 2043-44 only.

Now, by this point, the MiG-29Ks would have to be retired a few years back (2040 at the latest), which still means that we do end up with practically two carriers sitting without aircraft from the second half to the 2030s to the early-ish 2040s. The only saving grace here is that since Vikramaditya would nominally retire around 2043-44, she could, atleast in theory, do without a full air wing in the last 5 or so years of her life.

However, you would have noted that these timelines, which just about fit, are the best case scenario. If anything goes wrong (and believe me when I say it will), we are in trouble.

Yki failntonn factir in the fact, that if mwe cancel the rafale marine, that huge amount of money will go into tedbf. The rate of production can be doubled.

The engines in tedbf are gef414, which we will be producing in india. Many subsystems are shared between AMCA, Tejasmk2. Production, parts, maintenance will be very simple.

Also, tanishq bafile told me that he is sure that private company will be building tedbf. That dude is reliable. That takes out HAL from equation, which you are most concerned about

 

[abhinav srivastava]

Def Min will bring down price perhaps to 900 mils usd per sub from 1.3 Billions now asking prices... Must get 6 subs right away as these will have latest AIP, pumpjet propulsions and stealth tech's and other fancy automation features too!

I was not knowing that they are going with pumpjet tech that's great. BTW they are late again. They should have executed this contract when 3rd or 4th sub was constructed in MDL.

 

[wallisk]

If our DPSUs r unable to absorb technology even after building so many subs, if unable to exceed 60% indegenisarion, if we r unable to take timely decssions, if we have a shitful burocratic acquision process , than does IN has any other option in face of galloping maritime threats?

This 1st order for Scorpenes took last 3 decades dude.... 1 decade for talks nego's another 1 decade for placing order and, last 1 decade to build these orders... So, after 30 years costs will be more than double the first order costs per sub really!