Article

2007-02-16 India-Pakistan

Indian Navy to get 2nd submarine assembly line

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by john 2007-02-16 11:32|| || Front Page|| [10 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 However, the Americans could be late entrants for Indian submarine deal and by the time the RFP's are issued in late march or early April, they could also be in the hunt for the Indian deal.

One would think that if a reporter's job is reporting of defense matters, he or she would do a little research. It is not difficult to find out that the US does not manufacture conventional submarines.

Posted by john 2007-02-16 11:42|| 2007-02-16 11:42|| Front Page Top

#2 That may change. If US mining companies developed an interest in undersea mining operations, there would be tremendous demand for an entirely new concept in submarines.

Not as improbable as it sounds, because undersea are vast amounts of high grade surface mineral and gem deposits that have been mined out on land. This would mean only needing to haul up perhaps 1/20th to 1/50th the amount of ore to be as profitable as a land mine.

Already, diamonds are being recovered through dredging, as is gold, in river deltas. However, dredging is impractical at depth.

An undersea operation would involve shattering the sea floor with explosives, then a slow moving large boat scooping up the ore, and giving it a first crushing to a manageable size, then transferring it to shuttle submersibles that carry it up to a surface ship.

Posted by Anonymoose 2007-02-16 12:42|| 2007-02-16 12:42|| Front Page Top

#3 I can imagine what the Greenpeace folks would make of that. They're strip mining the sea. They're killing the baby dolphins. Please donate.

Posted by john 2007-02-16 13:00|| 2007-02-16 13:00|| Front Page Top

#4 While the US doesn't build diesel boats at present, it wouldn't be hard to get back into that end of the business. The diesel-electric drive in a submarine is technologically not that different from what's in a diesel-electric locomotive, and we build lots of those. We also build lots of high-capacity batteries. The rest of it -- hull, sonar, electric motors, ballast tanks, and so on, is pretty much the same as a nuke boat.

Posted by Mike 2007-02-16 13:18|| 2007-02-16 13:18|| Front Page Top

#5 Mike: This would be a logical conclusion but it is not consistent with the reality of engineering cultures and competences. BAe Systems manufacturers top of the line nuclear powered boomers and attack boats but had real trouble with its last round of SSKs (Upholder-class, now renamed for Canada). It is about a whole-systems competence and not as simple as swapping out the engine.

Posted by Excalibur 2007-02-16 16:44|| 2007-02-16 16:44|| Front Page Top

#6 Yes it is true that the US has not built diesel electric subs for awhile; however, a couple of the big US defense contractors have major shares in European sub builders, and there is serious talk and planning for diesel electrics to be built in US shipyards for Taiwan. The Taiwanese would need between 8 and 16 subs, but that is being held up due to Taiwanese internal politics.
The biggest hindrance for the US building diesel electric subs is the fact that the US Navy does NOT want those subs built in the same shipyards or using any of the same crews as used for the nuclear subs. The Navy is worried about technology bleedover from nuke to conventional.

Posted by Shieldwolf 2007-02-16 17:08|| 2007-02-16 17:08|| Front Page Top

#7 RE: tech bleedover; probably more correct to say that about bleeding across countries rather than systems, since the workforce is generally 'pigeonholed' on a particular project.

Note to India: Don't ask the French to build one; when the prop falls off it will be harder to find a sub than an aircarft carrier sitting dead in the water.

Posted by USN, Ret. 2007-02-16 17:37|| 2007-02-16 17:37|| Front Page Top

#8 I would not be surprised if an effective domestic conventional submarine could not be built. U. S. shipbuilders have become dysfunctional corporate welfare whores. Look at the LCS and Zumwalt destroyer. Both are out of control spending boondoggles and the George HW Bush has enough bleeding edge tech to assure it is a catastrophe even greater.

The Navy has a real problem.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2007-02-16 17:42|| 2007-02-16 17:42|| Front Page Top

#9 #7 And only pay the French on delivery.

Posted by gromgoru 2007-02-16 18:28|| 2007-02-16 18:28|| Front Page Top

#10 The French company DCN, which is building the Scorpene subs is also the design consultant for the aircraft carrier being built in India

Posted by John Frum 2007-02-16 18:39|| 2007-02-16 18:39|| Front Page Top

#11 Which is why if there is ever a diesel electric sub built in the US, watch it be built in an old closed shipyard that is brought back on line by the American incorporated branch of a foreign sub builder. And watch them hire non-union/non-Navy projects workers, to ensure quality control. Kind of like the Mercedes or Toyota plants in the South, making the quality cars.

Posted by Shieldwolf 2007-02-16 18:41|| 2007-02-16 18:41|| Front Page Top

#12 I would not be surprised if an effective domestic conventional submarine could not be built.

Won't happen, and not simply because of 'corprate whores'. The Navy's nuclear mafia won't permit it.

Posted by Pappy 2007-02-16 21:57|| 2007-02-16 21:57|| Front Page Top

08:24 DarthVader
23:51 Creregum Gleanter1164
23:51 Danking70
23:48 Creregum Gleanter1164
23:17 Shieldwolf
23:02 ed
23:02 49 Pan
22:57 Omans Ebbogum2503
22:57 whatadeal
22:56 Omans Ebbogum2503
22:53 ed
22:52 ed
22:43 whatadeal
22:42 49 Pan
22:37 Geoffro
22:35 DarthVader
22:33 DarthVader
22:28 Lone Ranger
22:27 RD
22:23 ed
22:22 Chinesh Hupert1797
22:22 Zhang Fei
22:20 Zhang Fei
22:20 DarthVader