One of the Netherlands four large conventional Walrus class submarines that need to be replaced.
---
The main islands (Aruba, Curacao and Bonaire) of the Dutch Caribbean are an ocean away from the Netherlands, but uncomfortably close to Venezuela. The constant long range blue-water responsibilities of the Netherlands' submarines mean they need to be larger than usual Western European conventional subs.
---
The Netherlands is running a replacement process for its four large Walrus class submarines with the aim to have the first new submarine operating by 2024-25. The Netherlands again wants large subs due to its commitments to the islands of the Dutch Caribbean and other long range tasks. It has quiet intelligence gathering commitments in the Indian Ocean area which includes (at a better known level) anti-piracy.
At Comments in http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2015/02/sweden-and-netherlands-replacement.html Kevin provided some interesting insights into the Netherlands’ needs. The Dutch have with the Walrus class a unique position within NATO. The Walrus is the only sub in NATO capable of both littoral operations and long range ocean patrols. The Walrus replacement must be in the 2500 to 4000 ton range, depending on the company designing the sub.
The Dutch rekenkamer (general Audit committee) have released a devastating June 2015 report on the state of the Dutch subs (and the military in general). Most of the equipment of the Walrus is not supported anymore and spares cannot be bought from the suppliers, putting into doubt operation of the Walrus out to 2024.
In the Walrus replacement process the Netherlands has been talking to Sweden, Norway and Germany.
It is well established that SAAB-Kockums seeks to design and perhaps build the four relacements. SAAB in January 2015 announced an "exclusive teaming agreement" with Dutch shipbuilder Damen. That is the reason why Damen shipyards is talking to SAAB/Kockums. Damen only has experience in maintaining subs not building them. The Netherlands would need to build any large Swedish designed sub not SAAB-Kockums. SAAB/Kockums need to reconstruct Sweden’s submarine building industry but the Dutch cannot wait for such rebuilding if the Walrus replacements are to be ready from 2024-25. The SAAB - Damen corporate alliance does not prevent the Dutch government from selecting another design such as the Type 216 [or Shortfin Barracuda?].
At Comments in http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2015/02/sweden-and-netherlands-replacement.html Kevin provided some interesting insights into the Netherlands’ needs. The Dutch have with the Walrus class a unique position within NATO. The Walrus is the only sub in NATO capable of both littoral operations and long range ocean patrols. The Walrus replacement must be in the 2500 to 4000 ton range, depending on the company designing the sub.
The Dutch rekenkamer (general Audit committee) have released a devastating June 2015 report on the state of the Dutch subs (and the military in general). Most of the equipment of the Walrus is not supported anymore and spares cannot be bought from the suppliers, putting into doubt operation of the Walrus out to 2024.
In the Walrus replacement process the Netherlands has been talking to Sweden, Norway and Germany.
It is well established that SAAB-Kockums seeks to design and perhaps build the four relacements. SAAB in January 2015 announced an "exclusive teaming agreement" with Dutch shipbuilder Damen. That is the reason why Damen shipyards is talking to SAAB/Kockums. Damen only has experience in maintaining subs not building them. The Netherlands would need to build any large Swedish designed sub not SAAB-Kockums. SAAB/Kockums need to reconstruct Sweden’s submarine building industry but the Dutch cannot wait for such rebuilding if the Walrus replacements are to be ready from 2024-25. The SAAB - Damen corporate alliance does not prevent the Dutch government from selecting another design such as the Type 216 [or Shortfin Barracuda?].
Another plan is (or was) to build the new subs domestically in partnership with Norway. Yes Norway ! see “While the [Dutch] MoD is currently exploring a variety of options it sees Norway as a potential partner for co-developing and building submarines.” This is even though Norway would probably be seeking a much smaller sub. An immediate problem of a Dutch-Norwgian alliance is that the company that built the Walrus class no longer exists and Norway has never built subs.
Another alternative is buying the German Type 216 design and building 216s in Dutch Damen shipyards. Kevin believes “The Type 216 can be operational in 2020”. Kevin indicated “It will be more logical if a German design will be selected. The German subs will at the end of 2015 be under Dutch Command [presumable this is under NATOs ComSubNATO arrangements?]. It will be more cost effective if the logistics of the 2 countries are the same.”
EU guidelines prevent the Dutch government from buying military equipment outside the EU, (the exception are items that cannot be bought in the EU like fifth generation fighters). So buying Japanese subs to replace the Walrus subs is not an option for the Netherlands.
WHY A LARGE SUBMARINES? - STRATEGIC NEEDS
Since becoming operational in 1992 Walrus subs have had long range responsibilities to support Dutch and broader NATO objectives in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. It is known for the past few years that Walrus subs operate near the Somalian coast for NATO anti-piracy duties and in the Caribbean for the gathering intelligence on drug smuggling. According to wikipedia following the Cold War, the subs have been tasked for many highly
confidential intelligence gathering operations in the Yugoslavian region, Iran
and Iraq on request of NATO Allies, including the
US.
A more specific objective for Walrus subs has been deterring Venezuela's claim to Aruba, Curacao and Bonaire islands of the Dutch Caribbean. Former president Hugo Chávez of Venezuela threatened in the early 2000s to invade these islands - a threat countered by Dutch and US warships. For the last decade a Dutch warship is always present in the Caribbean and a Dutch forces equivalent to a battalion are stationed on the islands of Aruba and Curacao as a deterrent.
The decision on the Walrus replacement may occur in September 2015.
Please connect with Submarine Matters:
- Sweden and the Netherlands Replacement Submarine Needs, February 19, 2015
Pete
Dear Pete,
ReplyDeleteaccording to your article the Dutch Walrus-class shares its problems with Canadian Victoria-class and Australian Collins-class: submarines were built by a too small company. The companies do not exist anymore or the link to the company was cut for reasons nobody really wants to know.
That experience will lead the Netherlands to the conclusion not to buy again a submarine from a too small company. There are just two Western companies capable to provide a sustained supply of help in which form anyway: DCNS and TKMS.
SAAB is a big company but has no sustainable submarine business.
The Netherlands did have all the papers, drawings and sketches to do it. It is the lack of a company to build them properly and not to expensive. A company still in the business may offer a different solution for its own subs.
Regards,
MHalblaub
Hi Pete,
ReplyDeleteMy thinking is that the Dutch are looking for a Sub with Long Range blue water patrol capability with the capability to work in the Littoral environments. The one that tops the list is SMX ocean but that is years before it becomes a reality. For near future options, I think the French Scorpene class Submarine tops the list, follow by the Type 218 Submarine that is currently being built for Singapore. The other is the Type 214 class Submarine that is currently in production. The other option would be the S-80 class Submarine being built in Spain.
Interesting fact: The Walrus class subs were almost license-built in Taiwan:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/taiwan-submarine-import-and-export-behavior/
Quote:
"another Dutch shipyard, RDM, engaged in negotiations on the licensed construction
of Walrus-class boats in Taiwan with components to be delivered by RDM. [3] The
shipyard's general optimism concerning the export of submarines was also
illustrated by its 1988 agreement to partner with the Wilton Fijenoord shipyard on
the construction of Hai Lung-class vessels were Taiwan to order additional vessels.
While the latter company owned the design to the boats, it had ceased to built new
units, leaving RDM as the only operational Dutch submarine builder. [4]
Despite pressure exerted by local trade unions, members of parliament and Taiwan,
in 1992 the Dutch government decided not to grant a license for the export of 10
submarines."
===================================================
Due to Chinese pressure, and the fact that the U.S. doesn't build conventional
subs, the Taiwanese are so hard up for subs that they're even refurbrishing the old
GUPPY-class boats, though even after that, they would only be useful for training:
http://thediplomat.com/2015/05/taiwans-submarine-saga/
Quote:
"The first stage involves a domestic shipbuilder refurbishing two obsolete GUPPY-
class submarines to make them training capable. This plan will start with an in-
depth overhaul, making steel plates and replacing the pressure hulls of these two
old submarines."
Though the main puprose of this work is to prepare Taiwanese shipyards for
constructing indiginous submarines in the future:
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/taiwan-is-building-its-own-attack-submarines-90d7b8ce95d7
Hi MHalblaub
ReplyDeleteI agree. The Netherlands is suffering the same uncertainty as Australia. As well as DCNS and TKMS there is MHI-KHI. MHI-KHI is a large building combination of large subs with decades of continuous building experience.
SAAB really needs non-Swedish busines - otherwise Kockums may have to change hands again after its A26-Gotland orders finish. What Singapore does next is critical.
Regards
Pete
Hi Nicky
ReplyDeleteYes there is the SMX Ocean - now called Shortfin Barracuda http://en.dcnsgroup.com/news/dcns-unveils-shortfin-barracuda/ and the 216 has not yet been built or tested either.
Seems the Netherlands will just extend use of their current large Walruses rather than buy much smaller subs. Interestingly the Walruses don't have AIP so a Li-ion sub only around 400 tons heavier than HDW heaviest current sub (the Dolphin 2) or the DCNS Scorpene S-BR may be the answer. That 400 tons addition might mainly be for extra diesel fuel for 10,000 nmi range or extra crew spaces for the electronic monitors.
Spains suffers from lack of experience building subs by itself, has made major program erros with the S-80 (Isaac Peral class) and no submarine export experience by itself. Spain decided to split from its French submarine helper some time ago.
Regards
Pete
Dear Pete,
ReplyDeleteI think the Netherlands will look at capabilities rather than size/displacement as Australia is doing.
Capability of the current Walrus-class is 10,000 nm at 9 kn.
Capability of the current Type 214 is 10,500 nm at 8 kn.
The Walrus carries about 20 torpedoes.
The Type 214 has 8 torpedo tubes with at least 7 reloads (smaller Type 212A has 7 reloads).
I don't think the Netherlands are locking for a large Type 216 with a displacement of 4,000 t.
Regards,
MHalblaub
Hi Anonymous
ReplyDeleteIf Taiwan simply built defensive mini-subs Taiwan could do that fairly easily. But Taiwan appears to stubbornly want large subs as a political test. The US makes pointless promises it can't deliver on to keep Taiwan happy.
It seems that Taiwan is aiming high for large subs as this is a test for broader political recognition of Taiwan's right to grow militarily stronger.
Meanwhile China gets stronger in every respect - making it less likely that subamrine builders will help Taiwan's lost cause.
Regards
Pete
"EU guidelines prevent the Dutch government from buying military equipment outside the EU, (the exception are items that cannot be bought in the EU like fifth generation fighters). So buying Japanese subs to replace the Walrus subs is not an option for the Netherlands."
ReplyDeleteAre you sure about this? Sure its not a NATO guideline, if it actually exists?
For example, Finland bought SAMs from South Africa for their corvettes, even though it exists several different SAM systems designed in the EU and there has been discussions that Sweden might buy Brasilian KC-390 transport aircrafts as part of the Gripen-deal with Brasil.
HI Pete,
ReplyDeleteMy take on that is that for Netherlands, something like a Shortfin Barracuda is something that they are looking for. Though currently the only submarines that are in the production pipeline are the Type 214, Type 218 SG, Scorpene class Submarine and the Spanish S-80 class Submarine. I can see Netherlands going for the Brazilian version of the the Scorpene class Submarine. As for the Dolphin-class submarine, I think that is an Israeli only deal and I doubt Israel will allow another country to operate a similar submarine. Though in the end I think for Netherlands that a Type 214, Type 218 SG or Scorpene class Submarine or the Brazilian Version of the Scorpene class Submarine is their Only option.
As for Taiwan, my take on that is that Taiwan should take a page from MOSSAD and send their people out to learn how to build submarines. They need to start reverse engineer the Walrus class subs that they have on Hand and start building their own copies of the Walrus class subs. The other option is to talk to Russia on buying the improved Kilo class Submarine with the rights to have it built in Taiwan under supervision. Taiwan needs submarines and I Know Europe won't sell them cause they fear china, but Russia may cause Russia know China needs them as well. On top of that Russia doesn't care who uses their export subs as long as they are getting paid
The other option I see for Taiwan is that they ask the US for the blueprints for the Barbel class submarine and Taiwan can build them under US Supervision. That way they have the skills and knowledge to build their own, while US watches them.
Hi MHalblaub [at August 2, 2015 at 9:53 PM]
ReplyDeleteYes I agree that the Netherlands are likely to order submarines only a few hundred tonnes hevier than the usual weight German, French or Swedish SSKs.
This is noting:
- the preceding (1972-95) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwaardvis-class_submarine were 2,408 tonnes surfaced
- the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walrus-class_submarine (1992 on) are 2,350 tonnes surfaced
So the conservative Dutch are likely to order a 2,350-2,400 tonnes surfaced submarine - which may be a high end 214/low end 216, large Scorpene, or large A26.
Same number - 20 torpedos/missiles. Some provision for the new large UUVs and diver delivery vehicle - like a detachable pod on back behind the sail.
Regards
Pete
Hi Anonymous [at August 3, 2015 at 3:08 AM]
ReplyDeleteThe quote: "EU guidelines prevent the Dutch government from buying military equipment outside the EU, (the exception are items that cannot be bought in the EU like fifth generation fighters). So buying Japanese subs to replace the Walrus subs is not an option for the Netherlands."
is from Kevin - knowledgable on Dutch needs and probably an EU citizen.
Regarding the two European countries (Sweden and Finland) that you mention - Sweden and Finland:
1. are not members of NATO, and
2. both are EU members but joined in 1995 (later than many)
So Sweden and Finland exercise more autonomy than most Western European countries.
I'll leave it to EU-NATO specialists to identify any relevant EU-NATO guidelines.
Regards
Pete
Hi Nicky [August 3, 2015 at 3:25 AM]
ReplyDeleteI think the Shortfin Barracuda and a 216 (of the 3,000+ tonnes surfaced weight Australia is after) are both heavier than the Dutch are likely to want. Spain's S-80 is likely to remind the Dutch too much of the small submarine company mistakes the Dutch made when building the Walruses.
Yes the Dolphin 2 may be too Israeli specialised.
A 2,400 tonne 214 or 218, Scorpene or A26 may be what the Dutch are after. As I said to MHalblaub the Dutch have a pattern of buying subs of 2,400 tonne (surfaced) subs noting:
- the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walrus-class_submarine (1992 on) are 2,350 tonnes surfaced
- the preceding (1972-95) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwaardvis-class_submarine were 2,408 tonnes surfaced
This is assuming same number of 20 torpedos/missiles. Some provision for the new large UUVs and diver delivery vehicle - like a detachable pod on back behind the sail. Assumes they want Li-ion batteries and no AIP.
Taiwan is a whole other issue where Taiwan can't expect any help from European contries due to China's displeasure. Whether Japan or S Korea would help involves Northeast Asian sensitivities still including China.
Since 2001 the nuclear sub lobby in the US have prevented any substantial US assistance to Taiwan in building conventional subs. US Navy and US arms countries see any return to the conventional sub business as full of risks of losing money-capabilities.
Reverse engineering on the scale of a whole large sub is almost always restricted to great powers who want to build more than the 4 (or so) subs Taiwan is really after.
I think half of Taiwan's game is to go for high end large SSKs for Taiwan's political recognition objectives (especially from the US). I also think Taiwan only really needs 1,000 ton surfaced defensive subs which it could probably build without much assistance.
Regards
Pete
Hi Pete,
ReplyDeleteMy take is that the Dutch need a Sub that can travel to the Dutch Caribbean. I think something that is currently in production like the Type 214, Type 218 and the Scorpene is something the Dutch want. The A-26 is still years away before first steel is ever cut. The S-80 is something to consider but that would be a last resort. The only way I think the Dutch is ever going to make it to the Dutch Caribbean is on AIP. Which I think the Dutch should look into getting an enlarged Type 214, Type 218 and the Scorpene.
I can see the Dutch going with either a Type 214, Type 218 or the Scorpene. They need something that can work in the deep and in the littorals. Though I have to wonder does the Type 214, Type 218 and the Scorpene have the capability for UUV and Diver delivery.
As for the Dolphin 2, I doubt the Israelis will allow anyone else to buy a sub that is designed purely for them. It would be to political and I think it would next to impossible.
As for Taiwan, I do think they need to import the skill sets required to build their own submarines. I know Europe won't give them one because of Chinese pressure and I think the only way Taiwan is ever going to get submarines is either through Russia or America. I know Russia needs the cash and Taiwan needs submarines and something like an Amur, Lada or even an improved Kilo class SSK can give Taiwan something to stand on.
One option I see Taiwan getting submarines is that the US gives them the Blueprints for the Barbel class Submarines and let's Taiwan build them under US watch. The other option is like i have said is to bring the skillsets to Taiwan and Taiwan can build their own submarines
Dear Pete and Nicky,
ReplyDeletethe only special thing for the Dolphin2-class are the bigger 26 in torpedo tubes for a second strike capability. A normal Dolphin 2 could have ten 21 in tubes with 7 reloads (estimation from Type 212A).
Next thing to lock at is a Type 214 subclass:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tridente-class_submarine
- 8 tubes and 12 reloads
- range 12,000 nm @ 8 kn
So what else does the Netherlands need?
Regards,
MHalblaub
Hi Nicky [at August 4, 2015 at 2:29 AM]
ReplyDeleteThe Dutch have actually safely been sailing their subs on the surface, Netherlands to Dutch Caribbean, for since 1972 when the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwaardvis-class_submarine were commissioned.
AIP would be handy but not against a low level threat like Venezuela - rather against Russian backed Iran especially when the Dutch are in the Persian Gulf on NATO missions.
I reckon a 2,400 tonne surfaced sub would be right for the Dutch whatever the type or country origin.
All subs have capacity for UUV and Diver delivery even the little HDW Type 210mod with its large horizontal swim out tube.
The Israelis have been lucky to get German Government subsidized discount Dolphins from HDW for years. It is Germany and HDW who would decide what subs that could be sold to the Dutch. Customers rarely call the shots on other customers.
Amur-Ladas or Kilo class to Taiwan is not a bad idea. Even if Taiwan thought those subs not ideal the threat of Russia selling subs to America's vassal state Taiwan may just get the US more seriously helping Taiwan build subs.
Regards
Pete
Hi MHalblaub [at August 4, 2015 at 3:01 AM]
ReplyDeleteI think the hull size of the Dolphin 2 class, at 2,050 tons surfaced, makes it an attractive base in which to insert a hull plug mainly for greater range. This is assuming the Dolphin 2 is deficient in range.
Of course a horizontal 2.5m swim out tube in place of the Dolphin 2s 650mm tubes would help the new Dutch subs LDUUV and diver delivery options. Note the swim out tube here https://www.thyssenkrupp-marinesystems.com/en/hdw-class-210mod.html - with 7 smallish crew sufficent.
Regards
Pete
HI Pete,
ReplyDeleteI think for the Dutch, either the Type 214, Type 218 or the Scorpene or the Brazilian Variant of the Scorpene is very well suited for the Dutch. I do think the Subclass of the Type 214 the Tridente-class submarine that Portugal Navy operates is something to consider as well. Though for the Dutch, I do suspect they are looking for something like a Type 214 or the subclass the Tridente-class submarine.
Also, what's your take on the Type 214, Tridente-class submarine and Scorpene class Submarine. Have you ever thought of doing a comparison.
As for Taiwan, I do think they should talk to Russia on getting the improved Kilo class SSK, Lada class SSK or Amur class SSK. Even if Taiwan thinks they are inferior, it's better than nothing at all. At least it gives them something to stand on something.
What's your take on the idea if America gives them the blueprints to the Barbel class Submarines and let's Taiwan build them under US watch. I would think an updated Barbel class Submarine with AIP would give something Taiwan wants.
If the Netherlands buys new subs, maybe they can go in with Canada to get a bulk
ReplyDeletediscount. It looks like the Canadians may need more subs soon as well:
Russia to UN: We are claiming 463,000 square miles of the Arctic:
http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-to-un-we-are-claiming-463000-square-miles-of-the-arctic-2015-8
Hi Nicky
ReplyDeleteYes a 2,400 tonne sub for the Dutch from any country would be super.
Comparisons could fill a book that people should pay for.
To build a submarine relies on much more than blueprints. Taiwan would immediately ask the US to be involved in every stagae of Barbel building - something not in the US's national interests to do.
Regards
Pete
I would say for the Dutch, The Type 214 or Type 218 is something they are looking for. Though I think the Dutch should have AIP for them, so they can loiter and conduct ISR missions.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Barbel class SSK, do you think Taiwan can build them.
Hi Nicky
ReplyDeleteThe Dutch are facing many of the same issues as Australia. eg:
- given the higher need for discretion, considering increased/emerging ASW capabilities of enemies, will LIB advances be sufficient?
- would AIP make enough of a difference on top of LIB?
Choosing between the 3 main types of current AIP (MESMA, Stirling and fuel cell) will decide which country's sub to choose. I know which AIP type India and Japan would choose if they wanted AIP.
No. Taiwan couldn't build Barbel's or any type of sub - with huge foreign help (which only means the US) - within the underestimated budget Taiwan is prepared to pay.
You will note we have had no comments from Taiwanese. They are not serious.
Regards
Pete
Hi Pete,
ReplyDeleteWhat is the difference between AIP, MESMA, Sterling and Fuel Cell. What's your take on the Type 214 vs 218.
Hi Anonymous/Nicky? [at August 5, 2015 at 6:13 AM]
ReplyDeleteLast I heard Canada has just begun to operationally use 3 of its Victoria class.
Much rumour that Canada cannot afford new subs for some time.
Sub buying is so complex that countries very rarely do joint purchases.
Regards
Pete
Hi Nicky [August 6, 2015 at 3:38 AM]
ReplyDeleteAIP comparison see http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2015/04/air-independent-propulsion-aip-issues.html
and http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2014/08/air-independent-propulsion-aip.html
218s would be a development of 214s.
Regards
Pete
Dear Pete,
ReplyDeleteeven Norway can afford 6 submarines. The problem is related to displacement.
Ula-class: 1,000 t
Victoria-class: 2,500 t
Not only the price to purchase new submarines is related to displacement. Also the price to maintain them is related to displacement.
6 x 1,000 t is less than 4 x 2,5000 t.
Australia may have dude subs but this is nothing compared to Victoria sucks.
Did I ever mention that 12 x 4,000 t is twice as much as 24 x 1,000 t?
Dear Nicky,
according to efficiency the order is
- MESMA (worst)
- Sterling engine
- fuel cells (best)
according to noise the order is
- MESMA (worst)
- Sterling engine
- fuel cells (best)
according to peak power output the order is
- not relevant because peak power is provided by the batteries.
according to sustained power output the order is
- according to the order of efficiency
according to supply the order is
- fuel cells (worst)
- Sterling engine & MESMA (best)
(Sterling and MESMA just need liquid oxygen and diesel while fuel cells need oxygen and hydrogen or methanol)
LIBs are not an easy to recharge at sea via wire. Oxygen or even Hydrogen tanks can be filled up far more quickly.
The best future option I can see according to current technique would be direct methanol fuel cell submarines without diesel engines but with very efficient batteries of what kind however.
Regards,
MHalblaub
Hi MHalblaub [August 8, 2015 at 12:14 PM]
ReplyDeleteI think we can agree that joint purchases are rare. Countries A and B buying from country C are rare because A and B usually have significantly different requirements and want to buy at different times. Joint development between A and B more likely eg. Germany and Italy with 212s. France and Spain also used to have a good joint production going.
After Canada's unfortunate experience with the Victoria-class t it may be a decade before it considers future subs.
Netherlands - Norway very different requirements. Netherlands around 2,500 t (long range, tropicalised for hot Caribbean-Middle East) Norway maybe 1,000- 1,500 t (shorter range, colder whether Baltic, N Sea, Arctic).
Australia is more likely 6 or 8 x 4,000 t subs. I'm hoping weight more like 3,500 t - with horizontal 1.5m tube rather than VMPL.
Yes the overall superiority of fuel cell AIP is reflected in sales to more countries than Stirling or MESMA (Pakistan only). Also India and Japan seem to be exploring fuel cell more than other AIPs.
Regards
Pete
HI pete,
ReplyDeleteI would think a Fuel cell AIP would most likely give Norway a SSK Submarine with near Nuclear capability.
Hi Nicky
ReplyDeleteYes nothing short of a Norwegian Virginia class (SSN) - only smaller.
Pete
Hi Pete
ReplyDeleteNothing short of a compact Norwegian Virginia class SSN in a Fuel cell/AIP would be what Norway needs.
Hi,
ReplyDeleteThanks Pete for quoting me i'm honored :)
"The German subs will at the end of 2015 be under Dutch Command [presumable this is under NATOs ComSubNATO arrangements?]."
No it`s a bilateral agreement outside NATO or the EU. The Dutch and German Armed forces are in progress of merge to one common Army. This is seen as predecessor to a common EU Army.
The Air Mobel Infanterie of both countries is already merged and placed under German command and they are plans to merge the last of the Dutch tanks en artillerie with the German counterparts.
Next step is to place elements of the German Navy under the Dutch admiralty (like the Belgian navy). The first units reported are the German subs.
The Dutch and British expedition force are also merging and place under the British admiralty.
The European F35 pakners are talking about to share training, maintenance and logistics facilities for the F35.
Kevin
@Anonymous August 3, 2015 at 3:08 AM
ReplyDeleteEuropean law is complex and full with exemptions, this because of the entery negotiation and the freedom a member state haves to interpetad European law
The European Arms trade is documented and regulated by the European Defence Agency (EDA)
The general rule is a EU member state does not go shopping for armes outside the EU unless you can't buy it in the EU. If you want to buy outside the EU you need clair it with the EDA.
this is to protect the EU military industrial complex. Sins the cold war the EU member states have cut in the defense spending to a point it treadens the capacity to produce it own arms.
If Sweden can sell more fighter planes bay buying Brazilian transport planes the EDA will look the other way because this deal will strengthen the european industrial complex.
For the Netherlands, the Dutch airforce is a clone of the USAF. And the Dutch navy is co-developing the ballistic missile shield with the USN, so the Dutch warships are equip with the VLS. The Dutch cannot get more exemptions fom the EDA.
Kevin
PS. i`m Dutch and i'm associated with a political party in the Netherlands
Hi Kevin
ReplyDeleteBoth of your comments are very interesting. I'll put them together as an article soon.
What is the latest on the Walrus replacement program - as far as you can reveal?
Regards
Pete
ReplyDeleteHi
I dont know jet, 15 september is prinsjesdag(state of the Kingdom)
If the government have made a decision about the subs they will probably announced then ;-)
But for now they don't say much about it
Kevin
ReplyDeleteFor the AIP discuion above,
I think it's highly unlikely that the new Dutch subs will get Hydrogen fullcels
Dutch subs runs without support ships and you can not get Hydrogen with the puraty you need easy at port.
:)
Kevin
Hi, sorry for my absence.
ReplyDeleteAt te moment the selection process in the Netherlands was postponed (no idea why, lack of interest i think).The selection and the debate will begin in the spring (I hope).
The Dutch industry is now covandent that can build the subs on ore own, I still have my doubs about that claim, (its I think more an attempt to keep the money with the Dutch industrie at the expense of the taxpayer (but this is my personal opinion)).
For the type of drive, from the Dutch submarines serves there is a heavy wish to keep it with batteries and no AIP, for the logistic reasons i have expland with my previous posts.
When i have more news i will come and tell
Kevin
Hi Kevin
ReplyDeleteNo problem. I think the Netherlands is hesitating because the two likely replacement submarine types have not yet been built. They are:
- Saab-Kockums A26, at design stage but 2 definitley to be home built for Sweden, and
- TKMS-HDW 216, at design stage, may not be built if Australia doesn't choose it.
Also there is an upgrade program on the 4 Walruses which is not yet half way through https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walrus-class_submarine#Upgrade_program .
The Netherlands government says it aims to extend Walruses lives to 2025. But they may still be operating till the late 2020s if they've been maintained well?
Regards
Pete
Hi Pete,this is my first post here,
ReplyDeleteFrom what i read on the dutch defence forum,wishes are:
Possible woman on board(means extra room,extra toilets,showers,etc)
More room for special ops teams(so that they can depoly more of them when needed)
room for UAV's
Weapons to defend themselves from heli's,etc
At least the range of the Walrus,speed and diving depth(when poss more)
Equally capable in littoral work.
So i'll give another option for the replacement;
The Walrus NG(next gen)since the OZD(sub service)is happy with the hull(form and stealth,but offcourse upgraded in the Gen2 version)
Very happy with the X-style rudders(manouvrebillity,etc)
And i think it will be in the 3000 ton range
gr,walter
Hi Walter
ReplyDeleteWelcome - for your first visit :)
Those features eg. "More room for special ops teams" sounds like an increase of 500 tonnes SURFACED displacement may be appropriate.
If that is the case then:
2,350 tonnes Walrus surfaced ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walrus-class_submarine )
+ 500 tonnes
= very close to the Kockums designed Collins ( SURFACED displacement 3,100 tonnes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collins-class_submarine )
I'm assuming Netherlands would want to buy from EU and/or NATO countries in first instance, which means:
- DCNS France
- Saab Kockums Sweden, or
- TKMS Germany
- maybe Spanish S-80
If Australia chooses from DCNS or TKMS the economies of scale may benefit Netherlands although the future subs for Australia may only start being built in about 2027 - maybe a bit late for Netherlands.
Do you know if the Netherlands has been talking to Australian Government on subs?
Regards
Pete
Without sounding like a douche, but one have to be a complete moron if one thinks Germany could deliver a type 216 submarine in 5 years time.
ReplyDeleteJust look at the troubled type 214 project, an operational type 216 submarine is definitely at least 10 years away.
Hi koppen89
ReplyDeleteFortunately the midlife upgrade of the Netherland's 4 Walrus class may allow some or all to remain operating until 2030 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walrus-class_submarine#Upgrade_program .
As 216 would be designed by EU and NATO country Germany - in political terms the Netherlands would probably choose TKMS-Germany's 216 or maybe an enlarged 218 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_218_submarine .
Regards
Pete
If I were to guess the Walrus will be replaced with a standard type 214 model. Same guess for Norway.
ReplyDeleteFor Poland I would suspect the swedish submarine may be the one to beat.
Hi koppen89 [at 6/4/16 4:55 AM]
ReplyDeleteI agree Norway is likely to buy the 214. see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_214_submarine
The Netherlands has for decades preferred larger subs of longer endurance to extend operations to its Caribbean possessions and to intelligence gather in the Middle East on behalf of NATO. You need more living space for a larger crew (than the 214) to undertake the 50 day missions, likely necessary.
This suggests a sub larger than the 1,700 ton (surfaced) 214 is necessary. That larger sub may be the 2,000 ton (surfaced) 218, which is to be delivered to Singapore in 2020.
If Australia chooses the much larger 4,000 ton (drawing board) 216 then it may be economical for Netherlands to choose a 2,500 ton (surfaced) TKMS submarine which could be called a light 216, or heavy 218. See my post on the 218 http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2015/09/key-tkms-type-218sg-details-revealed.html
I hear Poland wants land attack cruise missiles for any new subs. Such missiles would worry Russia. I wonder if "peaceful, neutral" Sweden would want to build such a sub capability for Poland?
Regards
Pete
You must remember that The Netherlands have slaughtered their entire armed force almost completely. A big custom build is highly unlikely for their new submarines. A type 214 fit their requirements very good IMO. With only minimum adjustments to how they operate it they can get it to fulfill all of their requirements.
ReplyDeleteAs to Poland, I don't see why Sweden would not sell them a sub. The cruise missiles won't be supplied by them, and I highly doubt they would not build them the platform for them, the A26 is already designed to carry missiles if wished.
To be honest though I am doubtful to if they can really acquire real long range cruise missiles. When Spain tried to buy some Tomahawks they were be allowed to buy them but not to launch them. That would only be possible after US approval. For that reason there was no deal. To get them from France will probably only be possible if they buy a french submarine, and maybe not even then either, something I don't see them doing.
A nice find for the 218. If it really is around 70m long and around 2000 tons then I can definitely see that it will be the preferred solution for The Royal Netherlands Navy!
ReplyDeleteA better question is probably what Singapore will do with it, it's gonna be hard for them to navigate around their littoral waters with that monsters. Dare I predict that Singapore will order another two submarines in the near future, to replace the Archer class, that is more sized for littoral operations?
Hi kppen89 [at 7/4/16 7:41 AM and 7/4/16 7:41 AM]
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walrus-class_submarine and preceding Zwaardvis class had many custom made elements. Each customer for 214s requires custom making, especially sensors, weapons and other electronics.
If Poland cannot acquire Tomahawks there are other submarine cruise missiles which may become available including from Germany and China. France might still sell such missiles to Poland - as weapon systems for each customer are often from several countries.
Singapre has been operating subs in the littorals around it since it received the 4 Challenger class subs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Challenger-class_submarine from 1997. It later recieved 2 Archer class with AIP - precisely to hide in the littorals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer-class_submarine .
The US alliance with Singapore requires Singapore to monitor the Strait of Malacca with subs and with other sensors.
Regards
Pete