Ep 67: The Nuances of Designing & Building Submarines - A Conversation with RAdm Chandra Shekhar Rao

Añadido: 2026-05-15

[00:00:00]I think a time has come where industry is mature enough, capable enough, responsible enough that you can delegate it completely. I mean >> is there potential for modern tools and particularly artificial intelligence uh to compress uh the scale of the effort required and the timeline required uh to have a mature design. Can we leverage modern day needs to do that?

[00:00:24]>> Yes.

[00:00:37]Good morning everyone and welcome to the next episode of Dabm Dialogues. Uh today I am truly delighted to have as my guest Rear Admiral Chandra Shakhar Rao uh who spent uh more than 36 years in the Indian Navy. Uh he is a ship builder and a naval constructor by profession. uh and has done part of his education at the Russian Naval Academy in St. Petersburg which was largely I think on submarine design.

[00:01:04]>> Uh he has held several key assignments on the Indian Navy on the ship building and submarine design uh and retired as it culminated in being the director general of the submarine design group or the submarine design directorate uh and did that job for 5 years which was I think an unprecedented tenure. So if anyone knows about submarine building and the challenges involved, it is indeed Admiral Ralph. Uh so uh sir welcome once again and I thought let's start with this slightly personal question. What prompted you to take up this line and and become a ship and submarine builder in the Indian Navy?

[00:01:42]>> Okay. So first of all uh you know thank you for having me. I'm delighted to be uh here. over the last year I've been u you know listening to your podcast watching dialogues and um probably it is a unique uh forum where uh the maritime security issues are getting discussed.

[00:02:04]This was something really missing in our uh overall discourse. Uh so it's a wonderful addition and I think over time it has gained quite a lot of traction.

[00:02:15]uh you have a roster an eclectic roster of some very eminent uh speakers. Uh you've already done 65 episodes. So that's quite a uh you know track record that you have gained.

[00:02:26]>> Thank you sir.

[00:02:27]>> So it is a privilege for me to be here.

[00:02:29]Now coming to your question uh you know it was uh getting into uh the ship building or the submarine design and building was completely by chance. When I joined the Navy, actually I had joined, you know, seeing those posters, join the Navy, see the world. And I had joined the marine branch. I was supposed to do my watchkeeping on INS Vikrant and follow the normal trajectory that any marine engineer officer does. But uh there was a shortage of naval architects at that time. So for whatever reason, they I was one of those who was picked up and put into this. But uh and I'm not saying it because I'm sitting with you uh you know uh a veteran submariner but if I had not joined the core of constructors I would have probably been a submariner. So I wanted to do something you know which was different from the normal thing and u probably fate brought me into submarine design as it turned out and uh yeah I I think I've been singularly fortunate. So sir your experience actually of course we'll talk about that you know you're idly placed to tell us or to speak on this subject of um our indigenous submarine programs because not only have you done 36 years in the navy in this field but even after that you joined last tub bro which is heavily engaged in the underwater domain and spent eight years if I'm not mistaken. So you've seen it from both sides. You've seen it from what from the naval side and you've seen it from the industry side and no one better than you to do to discuss this topics. Uh in N&T you were the vice president looking after subs uh vehicle design center.

[00:04:11]>> That's right.

[00:04:11]>> Uh and uh engage in other programs also including uh the development of the light tank and the modular bridge. So a lot uh so let's start sir I mean let's history history is always a good place to start and I'm sure you must have seen uh if not from its inception but at least the early years of the submarine design group.

[00:04:32]>> Yes. Uh so can you trace this history for us as to what prompted us uh and our uh you know seniors at that time to take this bold decision of setting up a design group inside the Navy and getting into a space which actually um is not so easy a space to be in.

[00:04:51]>> True. So uh you know one must complement uh and commend the vision of our forefathers you know uh in the early days of the navy somebody who took a step that these are strategic capabilities which need to be uh created and even mastered. So it was back in 1964 that uh the central design organization was created for design of warships.

[00:05:19]uh and uh we started with uh you know the seawward defense boats then moved to the Leander project God gave etc etc uh so when in 1967 uh India started acquiring its first submarines the Foxtrot class I think it was a logical corollery that at some point of time the capability even for designing our submarines should come so when we had our next major acquis position project that is the type 1500 the SSK project uh in the early 80s again a very visionary step a team of naval officers was sent to Lubec near Keel where the design of the German submarines was being done and that was headed by the legendary Dr. uh Gabler.

[00:06:11]Okay.

[00:06:12]>> You know who probably those who know submarine history uh consider him as one of the forefathers of modern submarine.

[00:06:19]>> This is IKL. Is it >> IKL? Ikel >> uh Lubec. So this team uh of uh a composite team of engineers, electrical officers and naval constructors was deputed to sort of learn the basics of submarine design and they took on something called a project X uh academic exercise. This team returned uh towards end of 1984 and a submarine design cell was set up within the directorate of naval design which was already there for all uh yes for two decades >> and then they took up the case and in May 1986 it separated out it into a separate directorate of uh uh submarine I mean it was called directorate of naval design submarine design group but effectively the submarine design directorate it was created. So uh I would say that it was an extension of the same forward thinking that India must uh you know develop this capability because this is not a capability which somebody is going to give you on a plate. It is something which has to be sort of uh you know we have to go through the ropes to develop that expertise. So we had an early start sir but there must have been numerous challenges because this is a field where uh I think it's not so easy to get people to share information with you. uh so what you can acquire from outside of course you will acquire particularly I would say with the SSK the uh IKL 1500 program uh but beyond that if you're looking at you know uh extrapolating on the design etc to get your design standards uh there must have been numerous challenges not only in gaining expertise staffing can you walk us through some of these challenges you faced in early years >> sure yes so uh see when uh as I just mentioned when the organization was created. The nucleus was the team which had been trained in Germany. So what we had at that time was essentially handwritten notes which these people had gathered but they were rich uh in itself they were rich so much so that we even undertook the concept design of a small submarine using just that. So, so it had its uh uh you know it it had its purpose then but over the course uh uh in a few years we started collaborating with some other foreign collaborators uh you know for a different project and that brought in a lot of uh uh you know very structured normative documents. the intense sort of interactions we had uh with these uh uh you know foreign experts uh also uh we had a culture of sort of recording everything into workbooks archiving them systematically so that's a sort of a library of such information started getting collated u we also uh observed their organizational structure started uh understanding why their structure is what it is and uh adapt ed that into our organizational structure and that way sort of the whole I would say one was in terms of information and material we started uh collecting uh information organizationally we started structuring ourselves uh the workflows uh you know the the practices we started uh um uh evolving ours looking at the way they work and that way we started developing uh so it it was a sort of an evolutionary thing and it it kept evolving as we started doing more work but uh the repository of information started getting collected. We started acquiring software also from them very customized software which is not available in the market. We also had the ability to customize commercial software for submarine application. We sort of developed that type of skills also.

[00:10:18]So this is how it sort of evolved and it is still evolving uh today but u it was not bereft of challenges for sure. Uh probably the biggest challenge was uh the very nature of our manning uh you know we took a decision uh for good reason probably at that time that this uh uh you know this organization this capability would be created with naval manpower. But naval manpower has its own dynamics uh in terms of you know number of years somebody can be posted in one place. So we always faced two challenges mainly. One was the number of people uh uh you know the total compliment and secondly the continuity of personnel >> what people call the genform designer.

[00:11:05]Yeah.

[00:11:06]>> Yes. Yes. Uh and in fact uh the the word genform designer is something which really irks me but yes uh there were reasons why they were called that. Uh so you know these were the major challenges that people would uh gain certain expertise and you know the as you are aware there is no design training which the navy imparts you know the navy is focused on operation and maintenance and our training is mainly towards that. So we even had to sort of create an on job training uh curriculum. So we would find that officers are posted there by the time they you know sort of become uh completely adept at what they're doing it's time for them to go and then we start the cycle once again. So this was a challenge.

[00:11:55]uh also as the design stages progress you know from concept design we move to technical design sketch sketch design then technical design then detail the number of people that are required keeps increasing so we were not able to build people so I won't say we were able to overcome all the challenges but certainly we had some sort of you know workarounds of that uh we negotiated a lot with the naval headquarters that you know officers who were posted stood here for some amount of time gained certain expertise let them go to either an allied organization you know which is also working in sub a submarine project or go for their sea time which is mandatory from a career and then try to come back so uh largely naval headquarters while not promulgating an official policy has uh been doing that >> the second is to build up the numbers uh we will never get you know at at the peak of a project design we probably need something like 700 800 people or more navy cannot uh certainly give that so we worked a sort of an outsourcing model and started you know getting people so these are workarounds to meet that purpose I won't say they are the ideal solutions to it and definitely there is some thinking to be done to make this a much more permanent uh sort of uh this thing so that you know we have a much more structured way of building up and retaining this expertise.

[00:13:29]>> So uh is there also scope I'm sure it might have already happened of collaboration with uh uh academic institutions like IITs etc where you set up you know uh uh you introduce courses on them which from which you can dip into and get people or send people over there for training uh sent up you know centers of excellence within these institutions etc. So um we really have not set up uh uh any formal center of excellence with uh any of the IITs.

[00:13:58]Certain small courses have been held with IIT Madras for example. what we have with IIT Delhi today still remains the sort of you know the input uh where some amount of training and every year uh the course which naval architects or the naval constructors do at IIT Delhi also has a project on submarines so so there is some amount of input but then this is only for one branch of officers for the engineers and electricals today there is uh no no formal course and I don't think any of our instit institutions really uh has the ability to uh provide that uh but what I'm sort of um angling at is uh in future uh uh you know a more formal involvement of industry and probably we'll talk about that in a little more detail >> as we go along. When we look at a submarine, of course, there are numerous parts for a submarine. Of course, submarine design is one very important part, but also there are when we looking at of making a platform with a high indigenous content. Uh there are uh bits and pieces of equipment, some of it major, some of it minor, which have to go inside that submarines. Uh and uh if you want that content percentage to go up, you're not only looking at a Indian design and Indian construction, but Indian equipment also. uh so has the uh director of naval design also uh of the submarine design group uh played a major role in this process also in identifying sort of people uh industry which can and handholding them till they can sort of make equipment that can be inducted on these platforms. So um you know uh generally it is uh spoken that in our indigenous submarine uh construction programs um particularly strategic program a lot of indigenization has been uh achieved and which is true. Uh what is probably not so well known is the role that DND STG has uh played uh in this that is the directorate of submarine design has played in this indigenization process. uh in fact I would say they are like the opening batsmen. You know the specifications of the equipment which is compatible with the environment of the submarine is first drawn up by the sub by the platform designers that is DND STG that goes to the development agency who interfaces with the industry. Uh industry needs to understand this. So the designers have to you know play the role of explaining and making the industry understand what is required.

[00:16:34]very often the industry is not able to meet that requirement. So how do you sort of form a compromise that I want something but something which is achievable by the industry. So some sort of you know trade-offs have to come we play a role in that and then you know to ensure that that is uh interfaceable with all the other systems in so the designer actually plays a role right through the indigenization process. Now to a large extent industries have been identified for the strategic project but uh not entirely for you know our conventional submarine domain because to some extent uh the requirements of equipment for conventional submarines can be more stringent in what way? It may sound counterintuitive but uh power consumption has to be much much more optimized because >> a finite amount of power >> uh sizes have to be generally more compact. So there is more work to be done there. uh in particularly in something like uh submarine uh construction, we need to identify industry, you know, we need to identify specific industry uh who have demonstrated some capability in the other project and say that okay these are the industries which will also develop the equipment and sort of start investing in them. They would be willing to invest of course in in say developing doing their R&D if they know that yes eventually the order is going to come to us. This is a sort of a thinking which still has not matured in our whole acquisition process. You know we still tend to go for something like an L1 that >> process. Yeah.

[00:18:25]>> Yes. But for particularly for submarines, I think if we start identifying the industry and and you know that initial database has already been established in the other project, we can use that and then start developing something for the conventional submarines and certainly you know we will be able to build a very very high indigenous content because that capability is there. So right now so we are I mean if you take the 30th submarine building program of course uh uh 75 75 India 76 six six of each and then 12 of the other was its initial conceptualization that might have morphed a little but broadly speaking it's the same uh India now hopefully will happen uh but you've reached a point where our numbers are at such a low state that 75 India and 76 will almost be concurrent programs. I think you're looking at some some degree of concurrency. Uh so you think there will be uh is there scope now in so far as the indigenous uh conventional submarine project 76 is concerned? Uh can we do it ourselves or do we still rely on information coming in from both 75 and 75 India to funnel in uh to uh >> I I I'm very strongly of the opinion that we can do it ourselves. I mean whether 75 India is there or not 76 that is the next conventional submarine project can certainly go on without that we have all the ingredients which are there as I said it is the industry you know because eventually you need binding data of equipment for that we need to identify the agencies which are going to make specific equipment be it compressors be it uh uh you know the the main uh motor the the diesel generators etc. All these need to be there some uh amount of work in this is already happening. I think when you had your discussion with Admiral Mahindru and Admiral Takra we uh you spoke about Maida industries which is de so there are capable industries who can do it. We need to have a focused approach really task them to do it and we will have that if DND STG has got this sort of you know uh a set of industries who they can work with to uh you know to to make the equipment uh compatible completely with the design that they're doing and vice versa you know make the design compatible with the equipment also we will be able to do this in terms of capability in terms of norms uh expertise etc. Uh DND SSTG is completely capable of that >> and they're already partnering with some uh you know uh uh industry even to um address that manpower issue. So in terms of norms because in any submarine construction you require norms on the materials on the material specifications hull dimensions etc that is all based on certain uh you know scientific means of doing that. Now uh when it comes to norms of course you have a Russian program which is a conventional submarines largely in the past have come from there and then you have you know the IKL this is Germans then you have 75 the scorpions now you're looking at India so we've done a bit of a mix and match uh so when you design these norms I mean um I wonder whether we've done it sort of optimally because if you take another country just to give you another example if you Take an example of South Korea for examples. I mean you started off with the KSS1 which was essentially a 209. Uh then came the KSS2 which was essentially a 214 and then came the KS3 which is a homegrown submarine but in which you know because you use the same norms etc. It become much easier to adopt design etc. So it's done I would say in a more systematic manner. We have seem to have jumped from one to the other. uh is this uh been uh you say has this placed us in a better place because you're amalgamating so much information from different sources or you think this has been detrimental to uh the basic concept of something >> so um I would say Monty both are true uh on the one hand you know the fact that we have uh access to three different technologies we have direct access to three different types of platforms three or more different types of platforms which designers can actually go physically see and draw something out of that is definitely a big big advantage but from a time point of view it it it is not conducive to very fast this thing >> but I think we've gone through that uh cycle now and uh our designers today are even you know well equipped to discern which would be a more suitable norm from the ones they have and and uh create a set of Indian submarine design norms and work towards that is already starting or I would say is already started. It is something which we should you know develop into a set of Indian submarina where it could largely be say from one or the other norms that we have. Nothing wrong with that >> and you adapt it to your own requirements >> but but what is also required uh if we have to you know it it is not see norms are what it is essentially application of physics. Okay. The the say the Russian norms may specify a different factor of safety for the pressure hull the Germans may have but but the underlying physics does not change. We need to see for the steel we use and we have standardized steel also which is the sort of norm that we are going to follow and commit to that and say that okay these are the norms we're going to follow and work with that. We have enough information for us to do that today. But what is also important is to standardize various uh uh uh you know uh design philosophies and systems. Are we going to continue with double hull submarines or do we want only single hull submarine? This is a decision the navy together with the designers can take and then we can move in that direction. What is going to be the pressure of our HP airlines? It is different for different platform. We need to decide for our operating thing for our industry which is the better suited design on that. If the designer has been given a clarity of these things >> same applies to hydraulic pressure same power systems etc all that sort of absolutely standardize these >> do do we want AC do we want DC now if you want DC one has to see whether our industry is ready to supply DC so we need to actually look at these things it's a more holistic thing it is you know the designer can work towards whatever is decided but I would say that we've come to a time when all I mean within the navy we need to have a clarity on these take take certain set of decisions those decision need not be permanent we can move ahead with one platform like that and then if required tweak it at a later date but say for P76 let's take our fundamental decisions on these and move ahead and I think DND STG is fully equipped to take this irrespective of whether you have 75i coming I don't think you know the 75i by uh norms etc would would really be uh >> very different >> very different or maybe they they may learn some things but that would be a good bonus >> so uh in an ideal world of course now you've got 75 India hopefully which will roll on and now 76 and plus uh okay 75 the scorpion program has sort of is winding down now uh but in an ideal world now that we've been through this entire phase of trying to uh get uh you know uh design philosophy from various sources and amalgamate it. But now moving along as you mentioned uh we would ideally have some degree of commonality. So if uh 75 India and 76 were to have a high degree of commonality in terms of the equipment that is going inside it reduces your training requirement it industry orders go up consequently and therefore the prices come down uh your inventory your training all that sort of goes down.

[00:26:59]uh is there scope for at least on the equipment that is going into which will go into these two platforms to have a high degree of commonality in principle? Yes, it is possible to to have that sort of commonality with 75i.

[00:27:15]But that would sort of delay the whole 76 process. So it's a call which the Navy wants to take. Does it want to have commonality with uh the equipment already being uh developed say for the scorpion submarines or for something which can be adapted from the indigenization already done for the strategic submarine or do we go for something which is going to be developed and customized for 75. Both are possible. uh you know it's very much possible to uh to sort of base the design on an equipment fit of 75i but that would take a much longer time. uh so I would if if I was given the uh option I would say that let's move uh project 76 with what we have already been able to do standardize on that yes we may land up into an in uh you know a set of inventory which would be different from 75i but if you look at it anyway we have got such a large uh inventory would think that from a time point of view uh that is what we should do because the design has started and I think that momentum should not stop.

[00:28:30]>> So let's switch gears slightly. We've talked a lot about our in-house design capability and let's bring industry also into it. Uh to what degree can uh DND as you mentioned is overloaded I mean there are multiple programs running uh there are uh you always have a challenge in terms of permanence. uh is there any possibility of hiving off part of the design load also uh to industry?

[00:29:00]Certainly certainly in fact when I was um uh you know when I joined uh lassen and tub bro one of the kas was actually to develop the uh basic design expertise with a view that we can create a pool of people who will have much more permanency.

[00:29:22]private industry has that capability to scale up and scale down much much more flexible than uh say the Navy has and you know be able to provide that pool of uh uh expertise to the Navy to partner in the design >> and you can dip into Navy talent also I'm sure of retired talent etc. So th those are the I would say the downstream advantages if we follow the model which I'm going to talk about.

[00:29:50]Uh see for good reason it was decided that this capability would be created within the navy because the navy needs to have control on something which is a strategic capability. It's an asset. But having done that while navy can continue you know having that primacy of role with respect to steering the design I think the lead work can certainly be delegated. Today it is being delegated but under naval supervision. I think a time has come where industry is mature enough capable enough responsible enough that you can delegate it completely. I mean delegate it. I'm saying delegate even the responsibility to the this thing drawing up the boundary conditions and the framework to say that okay this is your role this is your job you are going to be responsible for it that is a thinking which the navy has to do that yes we should be ready for somebody to share the responsibility industry would be very happy to do that we have L&T MDL both capable and I think we can have a model either you know create a different organization which Mandru has been talking about or even within the organization to create a sort of a system where industry can formally play a role and it is these specific industries who have invested in you know building that capability but they are certainly capable ready and would be willing to take the responsibility. So just for the sake of our viewers, can you walk us through the various design processes involved in design? What are the stages of a design? I think there are three or four different stages of a modeling stage.

[00:31:33]>> So typically u you know it starts with the concept design or the concept studies where the naval uh headquarters draws up the preliminary staff requirements. Based on that conceptual studies are done and we identify you know what can be achieved what cannot be achieved or what requires a little change. So that's the concept design.

[00:31:57]Once between naval headquarters and this this concept is sort of accepted then the next stage is the sketch design where mainly you're trying to see that the size which we had decided at that time you know some basic uh dimensions of uh of equipment etc are taken.

[00:32:20]Sometimes the equipment may be readily available. Sometimes you need to extrapolate uh judiciously the damage and then try to size that. So the sizing comes and then you come to the sketch design phase. Then the subsequent design phases you start detailing more going into more of the system level fine-tuning the requirements of the equipment in more detail till you complete the technical design. By now by the technical uh design you have sort of completed uh all the major um you know bill of material of the this thing the equipment specifications have been worked out and industry you're ready to start placing order on various uh uh equipment manufacturers system manufacturers etc. Then you embark on the detailed design or the workshop design which is actually starting to make drawings for the yard to uh to execute. So these are broadly the uh the four stages depending on the project you can have you know some some of these uh stages can overlap with each other. So coming to yard capacity now I mean okay we have in so far as conventional submarine ship building is concerned uh you have already MDL which is engaged in a large number of projects and now probably with 75 India as well uh LNT of course they engaged on the strategic side but uh on the conventional side they've not done it as yet but they have I think partaken in uh played quite a big role in certain uh you know refits etc which have been done uh you got another in VISAC which is HSLs and they have also played quite a uh I mean a couple of uh normal and medium brief in fact of kiloclass submarines have been undertaken over there. uh you think uh given our requirements if you're talking about a fleet maybe of around uh let's say around 18 to 20 or between 18 to 24 conventional submarines uh and if you say the life of a submarine is maybe let's say 24 25 years I mean it can you can extend it >> 30 years >> yeah so you're talking about uh essentially if you want to stabilize this number you're talking about a boat required every one to one and a half years is is what the throughput of the yard. Uh is are two yards adequate to meet this load or is there space for a third yard in this?

[00:34:50]>> I think that that's a very pertinent question. Uh before I come specifically to India, let's look at uh how how it is world over.

[00:35:02]Largely most countries which are uh you know which are building uh submarines have only one yard, right? That is because unlike uh you know you have surface ships of different classes you can always keep multiple yards engaged but submarines are much much more expensive. Generally you will have one project going on and after that you know there will be a gap of many years before another project comes. So there's not enough volume to have multiple yards to do it.

[00:35:34]But there are some countries the US for example uh Japan Korea which have more than one yard uh and that could be because of various reasons but these yards are assured with numbers. I mean even if they have one project what they do is divide split it between them and again this is because those countries consider that this is a strategic uh capability which the yards also must contain and hence they need to be supported by a constant flow of borders.

[00:36:09]So coming to India now specifically if you look at the next 15 to 20 years there is enough volume for us definitely for two yards but not more than two yards and if you see these are the two yards which over the last two to three decades have already been doing work in submarines.

[00:36:31]So they have sort of you know invested in the government has invested in them.

[00:36:36]They have invested in their own capabilities and built that.

[00:36:40]We today need to consolidate that. HSL is a yard which certainly has developed expertise in refit of submarines, repair of submarines. The skill set there is different from you know the construction of submarine.

[00:36:56]If today we are thinking of giving HSL a submarine construction project first you need to create the skills for that but if you do that if you look at it long term are we going to have the numbers to keep three yards employed I don't think so we will not have so HSL can focus on >> can continue to be f yeah to focus on refit something like say zes doka and marsh in Russia Rest dutka is you know is is a repair yard whereas sev marsh is the construction yard.

[00:37:31]>> So we could follow a sort of you know that type of model >> but we should restrict our construction to two yards and then start you know um putting all the resources for that. In fact today these two yards are in competition. I foresee a situation where like you know Newport News and General Dynamics today are collaborating on the project that is the way it should be even between MDL and LNT that because otherwise what will happen is okay you will have some very long lean periods where either of them will find it very difficult to you know sustain that uh skill set and obviously they will get deployed into other uh uh industries and it'll be very difficult to bring back.

[00:38:17]There are several rand studies which have been you know done especially on this as to how to sustain that skill set in our context. I think given the numbers of you know projects that we have over at least the next 15 to 20 years two yards can easily be sustained then we should look at the future where you know how to get both of them to work together so that both these continue to retain that. very rightly said that of course you have these are strategic facilities and they have to be sort of uh sustained uh because you should have that of course surge would be a wrong word to use because you know there's these projects require an enormous amount of I would say lead time to fractify into assets but it's always better to have a couple of at least facilities in which you can uh uh take long-term decisions which will translate into uh more submarines uh but there are two ways of doing this also If you see the Japanese model between you rightly said Mitsubishi I think Kawasaki that they divide the load amongst themselves uh in the US also on the nuclear submarine side of course they've got these two large yards that is a electric boat and uh Newport News >> uh but where you have a large contract and you get both yards to compete and then the winner gets a larger work share and the other person gets a smaller workshare. So that's that's how you you generate that competition. So you had pricing ability and >> share see uh the government should be concerned about two things. One is about uh you know a price discovery and the second should be about efficiency >> right? No government likes a cartilization you know where all the cards are held with you know with the contractor they so there are various models suppose you have a project of six submarines you can start by contracting uh the first uh four uh and say that okay you both build this now the one which is doing this at a lesser cost or or at a faster pace will get the remaining two you know that's a big incentive which they can work to.

[00:40:25]>> So one can look at uh some such model.

[00:40:27]Another way is the way the British are doing it. You know they have BAE systems which is their prime contract. Yeah.

[00:40:36]Their prime contractor for the building.

[00:40:37]They have Bapcock, Rolls-Royce etc. for the other major systems.

[00:40:41]>> But what they do is they have embedded uh MOD people, Navy people in that who also have access to the books. uh so to speak. So that way you know the government is protected from any uh uh any overpricing or something which uh one may perceive. So there are different ways of doing it. one one can have a sort of a transparency and I'm sure industry see industry needs um business if they have assured business they would be willing to also be transparent otherwise you know for their own sustainance they will obviously build costs uh so that they can sustain themselves and and there's nothing wrong about it >> so in fact on ships you can say we've already following that model where in a sense that on 17 alpha also you decide as the lead yard who gets a contract at you know the L1 price and the second yard is given an opportunity to match that and make a smaller number of platforms. I think we've done it for the ASW corvette also. So in a sense that model already exists. What I want to ask is that when you have a lead yard and a secondary yard uh there are two ways you can do this that you give one more platforms and the other lesser platforms or what the Americans do is quite unique that all this section the midship section uh you know which contains a combat system etc will be done by electric boat and the ends uh the fore end the forward end and the aft end will be done by Newport News for all boats. Yeah. where each really because if you're repeating the same thing you become more and more efficient at that you know so instead of dividing the workload you if there are 10 boats to be made all 10 of these sections will be built in these two yards and all 10 of these other sections will be built in one yard is that a better way to go about it >> it's it's I won't say better or worse it is it is one way of doing it but if I if I remember correctly this is what uh Newport News and General are doing for the Virginia class but then once the Colombia started they started giving the entire Virginia to one yard and then they >> I think it's only the final integration so uh they each yard commissions a boat but the sections are either uh the sections are sourced from one and the other >> so so surely surely we we we could do that you know I I'm just off the cuff I'm thinking of example >> say for examp suppose MDL and LNT uh start collaborating together for the MDL has got certain strength areas. L&T has got certain strength areas. For example, a private industry has got very very good uh you know supply chain uh uh this thing and probably they can get a better price for what uh you know what they want. So so maybe that part can be given to them. uh maybe uh you know one yard can uh do the hull sections, the other does some other part. Yes. It's it's a model >> each plays to their strengths.

[00:43:45]>> Yes. Yes. Yes.

[00:43:46]>> And you see what you can best achieve.

[00:43:48]>> Yes. But the environment today unfortunately still remains that the two are competing each uh with each other and it should not be a sort of a fight to the bottom you know it should be a win-win situation for either. So uh coming to L&T now so a few more specific questions I know that uh there's one is of course you know these are full-fledged submarines if you're talking about 75 India 76 and the other is submarines and going beyond is uh UUVs unmanned this is a new space where there is a tremendous potential I would say and uh the demand can be explosive in nature because it's not only uh defense requirements but industry requirements also you're talking about uh people who are laying undersea cables, people who are you know for pipeline work uh for undersea resources now as it becomes more and more requirement for gathering underwater domain awareness, acoustic data etc. Uh so the potentially this market is huge.

[00:44:45]>> Yes.

[00:44:46]>> Can you tell us as to how industry is going to play a role in this and have they uh are they being quite aggressive in this space?

[00:44:55]>> Industry is very aggressive.

[00:44:59]one thing you know I I'll draw a very loose parallel with say the electric vehicle industry u electric vehicles their nature as compared to say the IC engines are technically more simple they're more software oriented uh type of vehicles so you have seen a proliferation of uh of you know car makers uh you know software ware or or consumer electronic giants like Xiaomi and all are now moving into the uh EV market and successfully so they are in fact overtaking many of the established uh European players uh and American players at this a similar thing is happening even in the case of unmanned vehicles uh in terms of technologies uh uh and this thing it it is uh in many ways simpler than uh a submarine design, right?

[00:46:02]So you will have a large you know industry playing a much much larger role than uh it could have in submarines for sure and it will play a role and I think today it's still nent you you have a very large number of you know msmemes uh very small industries you know startups which are coming into the domain but over time you're going to have a segregation of say the excel UVs and all which will require the larger players to be there and uh I think uh companies like LNT etc have started focusing on those areas because they cannot compete in terms of uh agility and this thing with the smaller company or even in terms of pricing with with the smaller companies. So you'll have smaller companies working on the you know the the more yes the more basic type or the ones which have which are used in much larger numbers and the mo the much more intricate platforms are going to be with the larger industries and if you look at the design aspect uh uh here is where you know even DND an organization like DND STG needs to very quickly adapt to the new requirements uh you know the traditional requirements like habit ility etc cease to be any considerations >> but on the other hand control systems communications become much much more uh important >> uh software development so if STG has to uh you know have one line of uh products and it is now you know I make a distinction between platform design and product design this is more akin to product design they'll they'll have to sort of you know uh have more people with those type of skills maybe get those skills from the market which are available and embed them into their teams and then focus with industry. Uh here directly the designer will have to work with industry to produce this because there will be iterations there will be prototypes which will be made. So it's a little bit of a paradigm shift in role also and in the type of skill sets which DND will require.

[00:48:14]uh but on the other hand I also see uh you know a case for uh platforms uh man platforms will also continue uh in the foreseeable future but with a role change I guess. So uh another issue that invariably comes up is uh as we uh stand up our own homegrown capabilities both I would say in making larger conventional submarines as well as in the unmanned space is the export market and the export potential. uh could I ask you to tell our viewers I mean can be it's it's a it's a competitive space you have a I mean a relatively small number of established players which are you know around but there have been some new entrance and I would say the Koreans are one of the new entrance in the export space they've muscled their way in and have done reasonably well I would say uh in recent years is there space over here for us to look beyond our shores and uh see look for export potential also >> so uh over the next few decades I would say it'll become an imperative. Uh let's look at the case of say Germany or France. The German Navy has what about seven submarines, seven or eight submarines.

[00:49:29]>> But uh how they are able to sustain their submarine industry is is because of export.

[00:49:36]>> If they cannot export, they'll not be able to sustain. So, so that's a fact of the submarine you know industry as such that one needs to unlike say US which which always has a constant market for itself today we have a market I mean that is the Indian Navy has a requirement of submarines but that may not be the case 20 years down the line so I would advise if somebody asked me that don't wait for the next 20 is start building a small stream of export today.

[00:50:14]Uh focus on some of these you know smaller countries which aspire to have a fleet which don't have start with the smaller uh uh submarines. Today if you see the uh the established players are you know working on something which is in the 2,000 to 3,000 ton range. when we embarked on the small submarine, it was only because we were looking at an a type of market, you know, which has not yet been penetrated. So maybe we could start focusing on the smaller submarines. L&T uh in fact already >> you have a mature design already. If I'm not mistaken, >> we have a design uh you know which is sort of ready to go into the detailed design. The philosophy followed there was that it was agnostic uh to any particular navy. We we developed it to a set of you know possible staff requirements but with the uh with the um provisio that if we find a buyer for it that buyer may have certain specific requirements which will require a very quick design iteration to bring that in and then move into production. So we have a design which uh you know probably can move into production in about uh 6 months to one year as early as that >> to start the production. Yes, >> of course uh certain equipment need to be uh uh you know uh identified and finalized uh to be able to do that. But yes, it is something which can move into the market quite uh uh quickly. So small submarines is probably an area where uh we could still find a market among the smaller submarines. But uh the challenge which LNT faced was that any navy uh you know if it wants to buy a submarine says >> is is your own navy using it or not?

[00:52:08]>> Yes. Yes. Have you sold it to your navy?

[00:52:10]How many have you sold? So if if say our navy buys one submarine which is then it is going to change the game alto together and uh are we in a position I mean finally of course when uh any nation evaluates a platform uh they want uh an effective platform and they want value for money as well and the price segment I'm talking about because uh traditionally actually our uh conversion factor I think our pricing has been a little weak uh mainly I would say on the public sector side but I'm not too sure on the private sector side can we compete uh against these western nations in the price segment also >> I think we can be much much more competitive than they are we can be much much more competitive and and you know if if uh we are able to tap into our own uh uh industry uh we can be even more competitive as of today particularly in the small submarine market our industry is not making uh much of the equipment.

[00:53:14]>> So if you're sourcing from outside of course you don't have that much.

[00:53:16]>> We don't have that advantage. Yes, we have the advantage of say labor cost.

[00:53:20]See labor cost typically is about anything about 20% of the total project cost. Uh people talk of steel. Steel hardly is 1 to 2% of the overall project cost. It is equipment, electronics, weapons, systems which are the most expensive. So there the price differential may not be so much. But then there are certain areas like uh you know propulsion sonar systems the torpedo systems etc which where we have our own uh capabilities but if we can say get into we can get our own propulsion system we can get our own diesel etc also >> batteries we can do our own like xide hl and all have got the capability >> for lead acid batteries also they're getting into that space right >> yes they're getting into the space so batteries also I think we can be indigenous Yes. Uh it is it is mainly in the um the propulsion motor and the diesels that we still do not have the particularly for the uh small some some work has been done. BHL has developed uh something MA is developing but u again they have to do a complete redesign uh for this for for which they need an assured market capability is there but we need to so export in fact would give a huge boost to industry I mean let's say we start a line of export and uh Maida is making the main motors and they know that okay I I have a steady uh stream of this thing. They will be yes they'll be willing to do that.

[00:54:58]>> So I think we've covered a lot of ground. So sir, but I just want to end with one segment that's on the technology segment. I mean submarine design is a really an intense and I would say uh quite a manpower inensive sort of process uh where you have you mentioned you know hundreds of designers have to work to make a mature design etc. Is there potential for modern tools and particularly artificial intelligence uh to compress uh the scale of the effort required and the timeline required uh to have a mature design. Can we leverage modern day uh needs to >> yes we can u it's difficult to predict you know in terms of uh numbers how much uh how much it would reduce. I mean today if we are saying that at peak uh 800 900 people are required how much it's difficult to predict but yes there will be a certain this thing uh definitely it can help in you know uh optimizing the design cycle uh but uh you know it can also work in a way that you can produce many more iterations of the design in the same time. So depending on how much time a project uh uh time is uh you know budgeted for the design one can use uh the the computing uh capabilities and artificial intelligence in both ways.

[00:56:26]Broadly I would say that there is a potential to optimize both on timelines and maybe uh even in the number of uh people uh and and perhaps you know the the accuracy of checks etc will also uh uh improve uh using these uh type of tools. But I also look at AI uh from another angle. you know an organization like SDG over the last 40 years has uh uh has actually collected a huge database of information uh somebody new who joins will actually you know it's not easy to find when whereas the answers may already be there so today I think LLM uh uh you know gives that ability to be able to sift through such a large and you know give you what you want of course The um classification of the information has challenges to keep this in the open domain but maybe an on- premises type of large language model can be developed or some sort of a hybrid this thing where these tools can be used to leverage even the information because that itself takes a lot of time and you know that may have an impact on the time taken to take a decision time taken to do the job. So sir uh if I could it's been a fascinating conversation today and if I could ask you to some closing thoughts I mean that you would might like our viewers to know on this subject.

[00:57:56]>> So having worked uh for so many years in an organization and you know considering that uh the directorate of submarine design is going to commemorate its uh 40th anniversary.

[00:58:09]uh my closing thoughts would be partly emotional and partly uh you know uh technical mean emotional point of view it is always uh you know I've always felt that uh the nature of projects which this organization has been working with have been uh in the highly secret or classified domain because of which as an organization it has not really got its recognition due yes and its visibility uh I think it is time now for the Navy to sort of you know probably um acknowledge uh what this organization has done and uh the 40th year would not be a bad time to to you know take that step and do it. So that that's from an emotional point of view. uh but I mean coming to the uh crux of the question see over the 40 years this organization has already uh you know laid a very very strong foundation of a capability which only six nations out of you know 195 nations that this world has uh has. So that's something to be really proud of.

[00:59:24]uh all the ingredients all the capabilities are there probably a a more structure you know an ecosystem together with R&D together with industry needs to be created where the navy and the government need to play a role uh maybe certain policies largely everybody looks at all acquisitions in one uh you know on on one board we need to recognize that submarine is a different beast altogether. It needs to be looked at through different lens through different acquisition strategies.

[01:00:04]If we are able to do that, I think we would consolidate what we have and we have the capability of actually being counted amongst the best in the world and that's what I hope to see at least in my lifetime.

[01:00:17]>> So it remains for me sir to thank you once again for taking the time out and coming to go and having this conversation. It's a really insightful conversation and of course I think one thing that comes out clearly u we've covered a lot of ground but there's still a lot of >> there's a lot lot more to do >> a lot more to be covered uh so um thank you all viewers for uh daring in uh uh look forward to many such conversations with you >> thank you thank you Monty and uh thank you once again for inviting me here it's it's been wonderful to interact thank you so