TKMS and Navantia Both Fall Short of Indian Navy's AIP Requirements for P-75(I) Submarine Program: Sources

The Indian Navy's ambitious Project 75 India (P-75(I)) to acquire six advanced diesel-electric submarines with Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) has hit a snag.

Both leading contenders, Germany's ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS) and Spain's Navantia, have failed to fully meet the Navy's stringent requirements for AIP technology during field evaluation trials, according to sources within the defence establishment.

The AIP system, which allows submarines to operate submerged for extended periods, is a crucial element of the P-75(I) program.

The Navy's insistence on a proven system stems from concerns over potential delays if the indigenously developed AIP system by the DRDO is chosen. Past experience with delays in the integration of the DRDO AIP system into the Scorpene-class submarines has fueled this apprehension.

While Navantia's AIP system, utilizing Bio Ethanol Stealth Technology, comes closest to meeting the Navy's requirements, its first submarine equipped with this technology won't be operational until 2026. Although Navantia has conducted extensive testing and secured an order from the Spanish Navy, the Indian Navy remains unconvinced about its maturity.

TKMS, on the other hand, presented an AIP system smaller than the Navy's specifications. This is because the system is designed for the smaller Type 214 submarines, necessitating the development of a larger system for the Indian Navy's needs. Furthermore, the fuel cell batteries offered by TKMS differ from those used in the German Navy's submarines, requiring additional performance validation.

Despite these shortcomings, both companies remain in contention. A source indicated that while neither fully meets the RFP requirements, both are capable. Navantia appears to have an edge due to its S-80 class submarine, which is already in service with the Spanish Navy and could be adapted with minor modifications. TKMS, however, would need to design a new submarine entirely.

Adding another layer of complexity, the P-75(I) program is being pursued under the strategic partnership model, intended to boost private sector participation in defence manufacturing. However, the current situation sees state-run MDL, partnered with TKMS, as a frontrunner, raising concerns about the program's adherence to its original intent.

This development comes after several other international contenders, including Saab and Rosoboronexport, withdrew from the competition citing stringent liability clauses. Even TKMS initially hesitated but re-entered the race following German government backing and some concessions from the Indian Navy.

The P-75(I) program, first envisioned in 1998 as part of a 30-year submarine building plan, has faced numerous delays. With only six Scorpene-class submarines built so far, the need for these new submarines is critical for the Indian Navy to maintain its operational capabilities and regional influence.

The Navy now faces a difficult decision: accept a less-than-ideal AIP system or risk further delays in this crucial acquisition program.

 

[subrat beura]

Very good evaluation

 

[PKPRS]

TKMS would be a better option in my opinion, would be nice if we combine that with EF Typhoon Tranche 5 that has service ceiling of 65,000 FT and has a total engine output of 240KN thrust, there was news saying that the previous Air Force was told by the consortium that they are offering 30-40% discount on the price and moving the production line to India.

 

[sanket]

with TKMS expected to b acquired by US firm Carlyle , then Navantia offers look good , Look like TKMS want to Just win Order just to get better deal with US Firm

 

[Mithu Roy]

India should junk all these acquisition and go for nuclear attack subs.
at best India should become the hub for scorpene with AIP and lithium ion battery combination to serve navy conventional sub needs and also regional service needs

 

[Anant]

India should junk all these acquisition and go for nuclear attack subs.
at best India should become the hub for scorpene with AIP and lithium ion battery combination to serve navy conventional sub needs and also regional service needs

Um, if we do go with what you say, what do you propose we do regarding the fact that our conventional attack submarine fleet strength is now on a precipice?

 

[PARTHAJIT JANA]

Its better to go with the one which offers best tot rather than price which is needed more

 

[Manish Jha]

TKMS would be a better option in my opinion, would be nice if we combine that with EF Typhoon Tranche 5 that has service ceiling of 65,000 FT and has a total engine output of 240KN thrust, there was news saying that the previous Air Force was told by the consortium that they are offering 30-40% discount on the price and moving the production line to India.

We should never buy any defense equipment from Germany. They always comes with string attach and Germany stops the supply of critical component during critical time. They did the same thing with us when we were relying on their engine for our tank development.

 

[Anant]

The problem with price discovery is that it relies very heavily on information proliferation and having a large network of buyers and sellers. Without the former, you can have price mistaking, while the latter is important to get sufficient information.

That said, there are two aspects to this:

1a. Navantia's AIP has not been integrated on a submarine to date, and this won't happen for a while still. That does mean that a lot of field evaluation will have to be done later. Now, if we do go with Navantia, and it later turns out that the BEST AIP system needs some tweaks or modifications, this will lead to further delays for us while the system is worked on.

1b. TKMS, on the other hand, does have a seagoing AIP system, and as stated, they have delivered such systems on submarines to nations like Greece, Brazil, Singapore, Turkey, South Korea, Egypt, Portugal, and Italy. We could talk with these nations to understand their view of things. That said, however, it should also be noted that the SIP systems on these submarines apparently generate less power than what we have asked for, which means tweaks will be necessary here as well.

1c. On paper, Navantia's system is technically superior to TKMS' system. However, neither system has been tested in the configuration we require. However, TKMS does have the advantage of having multiple customers using similar systems and a lot of field data, which Navantia does not.

2. The other point is a mistake we made on our part. When the RfP for P-75I was launched, we asked for a sea-proven AIP system of the sort that had never been fielded. Refer back to Point 1b, where I have stated that the power requirements for the AIP system as we set out were higher than available systems. What this did was to essentially request a system that did not exist in the necessary form, and that played a role in having France, Russia, Germany and Spain (the latter two initially) bow out. That was a failing on our part by making unreasonable requests. We have since had to water down the requirements a bit.

All that said and done, I am personally of the opinion that the Navy should have the final technical say in the project, with price being a smaller primary consideration.

 

[Anant]

We should never buy any defense equipment from Germany. They always comes with string attach and Germany stops the supply of critical component during critical time. They did the same thing with us when we were relying on their engine for our tank development.

While Germany does have this bipolar disorder kind of thing when it comes to defence exports, let me point out three things:

1. Germany has historically not caused such major problems for India, by and large. For instance, our four Type 209-1500 boats have never faced challenges with maintenance and serviceability, with the only gap of support there being the 10 month period in 1998-99 when the Germans where party to sanctions on India over Pokhran-II.

2. What you say for the Arjun tank engine is false. The fault there was on our end, not on Germany. The simple problem here was that MTU closed down the lines for the engine in question when they did not have new orders and had a newer, more efficient design. We went to them after these lines were closed down. Unfortunately, as it so happened, the newer engine wouldn't fit, which then means MTU is now having to set up a production line for the older engine. That takes both time and money, and will result in the delays in question.

3. There have been delays with the Zorawar tank engine, and those were purely diplomatic in nature. As I said, Germany does have the bipolar thing going. However, should we get ToT and other things as part of a deal, this would be a smaller issue, though a complete resolution won't happen.

 

[PKPRS]

We should never buy any defense equipment from Germany. They always comes with string attach and Germany stops the supply of critical component during critical time. They did the same thing with us when we were relying on their engine for our tank development.

What other options do we have, currently European countries are in a terrible state, this is the best time to make deals, we need to make good use of them.

 

[PKPRS]

with TKMS expected to b acquired by US firm Carlyle , then Navantia offers look good , Look like TKMS want to Just win Order just to get better deal with US Firm

Only Navantia’s AIP is good, otherwise S80 plus is nothing but a fat Scorpene submarine but TKMS is technologically superior, wish Japanese provide Soryu tech.

 

[NSR]

India must not fall for Spain Navantia or France Scorpene+ and mess up with German U212/C/D P-75I program.
The supposed cost savings will disappear soon after signing their contracts as evidenced by original Scorpene contract execution by DCNS/Spain/Naval Systems, etc

German U-212 is a high quality and reliable and battle proven submarine so checkout all the terms and sign the contract with a complete submarine design center in India.

India went through all these songs and dances too many times to fall again for it.

 

[Sunil Choan]

Build All subs in India no interference from foreign entities

 

[Sea Harrier]

Its better to go with the one which offers best tot rather than price which is needed more

Russians do knows it too, that's why they are offering 80% tot on Amur 1650 on their previous offer. (Although they lacked AIP).

 

[Manish Jha]

While Germany does have this bipolar disorder kind of thing when it comes to defence exports, let me point out three things:

1. Germany has historically not caused such major problems for India, by and large. For instance, our four Type 209-1500 boats have never faced challenges with maintenance and serviceability, with the only gap of support there being the 10 month period in 1998-99 when the Germans where party to sanctions on India over Pokhran-II.

2. What you say for the Arjun tank engine is false. The fault there was on our end, not on Germany. The simple problem here was that MTU closed down the lines for the engine in question when they did not have new orders and had a newer, more efficient design. We went to them after these lines were closed down. Unfortunately, as it so happened, the newer engine wouldn't fit, which then means MTU is now having to set up a production line for the older engine. That takes both time and money, and will result in the delays in question.

3. There have been delays with the Zorawar tank engine, and those were purely diplomatic in nature. As I said, Germany does have the bipolar thing going. However, should we get ToT and other things as part of a deal, this would be a smaller issue, though a complete resolution won't happen.

I completely agree with you here. The problem is that they never said no to us while their products lines were closed. They only informed all this when we were about to begin integration of this engines in our prototypes. We both know that both UK and Germany is lacky of Uncle Sam. Plus this company is now going to be sold to company in USA. They are offering this Submarine for a hefty amount and it is better to deal with a neutral country with new design. The Spanish Submarine is a new design where TKMS offering is quite old design.

 

[Manish Jha]

I completely agree with you here. The problem is that they never said no to us while their products lines were closed. They only informed all this when we were about to begin integration of this engines in our prototypes. We both know that both UK and Germany is lacky of Uncle Sam. Plus this company is now going to be sold to company in USA. They are offering this Submarine for a hefty amount and it is better to deal with a neutral country with new design. The Spanish Submarine is a new design where TKMS offering is quite old design.

Regarding the design, I request you to read my comment in this same article. It is quite long, so I don't want to recreate that here. Please read that and let me know what you feel. Thanks in advance.

 

[Anant]

Russians do knows it too, that's why they are offering 80% tot on Amur 1650 on their previous offer. (Although they lacked AIP).

The problem with Russia in this is manifold:

1. They have never designed an AIP system or a submarine with an AIP system. That means they are essentially newcomers in this, which is concerning.

2. Russia hasn't designed a proper new seagoing diesel-electric submarine since the Kilo-class in the 1970s. Even the Lada-class are essentially modernised Kilos, and considering the history of the lead ship of that class (13 years to commissioning, then 10 years of sea trials, then 2.5 years of service before being decommissioned for scrapping), there is a lot to ponder.

3. Russia has historically been very ambiguous on ToT, and especially naval technology transfer, as a whole. Look at the Ka-226 ToT dispute, for instance. Secondly, they had promised as part of the first Kilo-class order in the 1980s that they would transfer skills and expertise for submarine refits to HSL, which is something that was never done.

That is to say nothing of the geopolitics of this, which is already known.

 

[Anant]

Build All subs in India no interference from foreign entities

That will come with Project 76. For now, we need submarines in the meantime to keep up fleet numbers.

 

[Raja Raja Cholan]

Indian Navy negotiators should not prioritise costs over quality and of proven it is mature in operational experience and sea proven. You can't have everything to your expectations and for a cheaper costs. There are no market players in this category. Go for quality and deal with ToT.