“India refuses upgraded submarines from Russia”

Is it just me or does it looks like the Indians keep pulling out the same bargaining chip?

On the heels of the deadlock over the pricing of Russian aircraft carrier Gorshkov, India has refused to take delivery of the latest submarine INS Sindhuvijay from Russia [Images], saying its cruise missile had not performed up to parameters.

The Navy refused to take delivery of the Sindhuvijay, which completed refit at a shipyard near St Petersburg [Images], after its missiles failed to find their targets in six consecutive test firings, the India Today reported.

bharat-rakshak.com...

Was the sub manned by Russian or Indian crew during test firing?

This seems to be the same pattern over and over again.

Indians complain that delivered equipment does not work, refuse to accept the order and bail out of the contract, only to go right back to get a better price, and when they get it everything is just peachy.

IL-38 claims were nonsense and were publicized during contract (pricing) re-negotiation forced by the Indians.

Other the Indian delivered 3M54E1 Klubs, does anybody know of their previous failures and their general failure rate?


I for one have not heard anything about it, so chip in if somebody has been following up on that one.

I mentioned this about the Sea Harriers: why have 3 indian sea harriers crashed this year alone - when only 1 RAF joint force harrier has crashed in 3 years?

Maybe an indication on the training rather than the equipment i think.

Possibly..
But here's one..

The vintage of all harriers (Mk51?) in the IN fleet predates ANY serving RAF/RN harrier by atleast a few years I believe.

And secondly, ALL klub missiles fired(it really doesn't matter who fires them) seem to have not performed acceptably.

The servicibility of the klub in the RussN and the PLAN seem to be unknown, and unforuntanately one doubts the exposure of failures of the same(if any) in such navies due to state controlled media.

As for the Gorshkov, well its down right shoddy..
The deal was made for a explicit amount and the timeline was set.
Now the russians crib that the estimates were incorrect(might I add by a factor of x2) and that the schedule is to be delayed by another 2-3 years?
Note that the orignal timeline for the refit was 4 years itself so a delay of almost by a factor of 100%.
If the Russians expect the Indians to bear the brunt of the estimation lapse(a purely russian lapse that it) AND also end up paying twice as much..
well then there's a serious misconception of business acumen here.

EDIT: The latest sea harrier was delivered in 1992 I believe. Weren't RN sea harriers retired in 2006?



[edit on 14-1-2008 by Daedalus3]

aye 2006 - but they have 12 of the newest . shortest frame life ones in ready storage - this includes the last build ones in 1999

Right..

Also a bit more on the IL-38 issue..
I heard that the dragon suites on the a/c were fixed and only then were the deliveries accepted?

There was no re-pricing issue as far as I knew. Could you source that?

EDIT: On second thoughts, one can never rule out training lapses and operational shortcomings of maintenance crews.
Each case(harrier and klub) requires more research.

The gorshkov matter, on the other hand,has got nothing to do with Indian shortcomings. It is a pure Russian lapse of estimation and they're rather bashful in assuming that the contractual bindings are something that can be waived and in fact spun around to suit their situation.

[edit on 14-1-2008 by Daedalus3]

IF the russians had kept the original contract that ship would be nearly ready to roll - but its not and india will be left without any carrier soon - daed maybe talk them into buying a cheap one from , maybe , i dunno - the uk ;D

And secondly, ALL klub missiles fired(it really doesnt matter who fires them) seem to have not performed acceptably.

That’s what I wanted to know about!

I’ll appreciate if you can direct to some sources.

As for the Gorshkov, well its down right shoddy..
The deal was made for a explicit amount and the timeline was set.

This is where it gets tricky, because some time ago I read a snippet that Indian Navy kept reevaluating and upping technical requirements even after the retrofit work began.

I don’t know how many of you guys here dealt with building contractors/interior decorators, but I know what kind of a nightmare a project can turn into when the client keep changing the plans while the work is in progress, and in order to make those new changes a whole bunch of work that was already done has to be scraped and started from scratch.

reply to post by Daedalus3

I heard that the dragon suites on the a/c were fixed and only then were the deliveries accepted?

There was no re-pricing issue as far as I knew. Could you source that?

www.kommersant.ru...

It’s in Russian, but I’ll sum it up;

During testing of “Sea Dragon” Indian officials stated that the submarine was not detected from the expected range. Russians insisted that detection of the submarine went exactly as planned and fall with in operating parameters of the system.

The contract for retrofitting was $150 mil US.

At the same time, Indias negotiating point focused on their consideration of Lockheed Martins P-3C Orion and Boeing P-8A Poseidon.

Contracts could reach $400 mil US it India chooses Russian modernization program of the existing fleet of IL38s, or totaling a full $1 Billion if $120mil Orions or $133mil Poseidons are chosen.

Here’s the interesting part.

One of the Indias aerospace industry officials said that as an alternative Indians wanted to alter the original contract in order to allow a retrofit of IL38s with BrahMos missiles.

Personally this is what they were really after.

They dragged out the testing/contract negotiations in order to squeeze in the BrahMos, which in any case can not be mounted on Orion or the Poseidon.

ahh.. its a classic case of each side saying that I'm right.. and their respective media supporting that point of view.

Let me get some info on hearsay among the people who've worked with the stuff..
This media can really blur the facts out.

As for the Harrier Harlequin,

If fingers are to be pointed here in India, prime suspects IMHO will be the industries who have sub-contracted maintenance and replacement contracts.
There have been instances of sub-standard support given, I won't deny that.
The training and pilots will be last place to look.

However, when it comes to procuring brand new units, I think the problem can only be sub-standard delivery or improper usage.
And I believe that has never been the issue with units procured from British(or French) sources. The Harrier, Mirage 2000 and Jaguar never really had crashes or issues until HAL started taking over support and spares supply..Again this is not some well accepted fact, its just my take on things.

I think HAL's got the Jaguar support figure out, but the Harrier maybe another issue. I believe the Harriers were meant to be retired in 2009 latest, but they were suddenly given a upgrade schedule that would be handled by HAL.
Apparently, before HAL got this Harrier job, the British had offered an MLU of sorts early this decade. That too was put off due to the gorshkov/MiG29K deal.

There isn`t too much information about the `why` the harriers are crashing - the reports are that ` another one has crashed` then suddenly all quiet when teh investigation is complete/// does make you wonder really.

Now even if he airframe is failing or the pilot training's bad or the maintenance is shoddy, the MoD cannot finger point at any one reason directly.
There is media speculation on pilot error but the MoD is quick to rebuke that.
In fact they're quick to rebuke any speculation.
I'm not sure what the issue is but I'm sure its either:

1. Air Frame/Engine Age.
   
2. Air Frame + spares local support.
   
3. combination of the above two.
   

I don't blame the Indians!!!
Not many people would buy a submarine from the russians, they are nothing more than poorly built under-funded death traps. I also suspect the performance didn't live up to the Indians expectations because the sub is a so called "monkey" model.

reply to post by SKUNK2


Actually their submarines, the Kilo Class type 877EKM have performed quite acceptably in the last decade or so.
I believe the problem lies with the upgrade of these Kilos to be able to fire(horizontal submersed torpedo tube launch)an AShCM, range 300km(?), called the Klub.

reply to post by SKUNK2

I don't blame the Indians!!!
Not many people would buy a submarine from the russians, they are nothing more than poorly built under-funded death traps. I also suspect the performance didn't live up to the Indians expectations because the sub is a so called "monkey" model.

A source please? I’d like to read what the analysts have to say about this, and how exactly those Kilos are outfitted. Thanks in advance!