Indonesia is
undergoing a quick and efficient submarine expansion program. Indonesia has 2
aging German built Type 209s, 2 South Korean new build 209s and 1 209
built in Indonesia (see Table below). Three more 209s are being jointly
built by South Korea and Indonesia with delivery to the Indonesian Navy by around
2026. That totals 8 209s by
2026.
Some naval,
political and industrial factions in Indonesia understandably see a need for a
total of 12 submarines to defend
Indonesia’s huge archipelagic sea space. Twelve also happens to equal the
number of 12 future submarines planned by Indonesia’s southern neighbour
Australia for the Australian Navy. Indonesia’s healthy economic growth (just
over 5% a year) can afford it. Indonesia is forecast to have the world’s fourth
largest economy by 2030.
Indonesia appears to have a requirement
beyond 2024 for 4 (to make up 12) or 6 more submarines (to make up 12 owing to any replacement of Indonesia’s 2 aging "Cakra" 209s (delivered in 1981)). Janes advises Turkey's
ship and submarine builder STM [with German backing] gave a presentation to the Indonesian Navy on 12 February 2019. This was to market German designed Turkish built 209s and Type 214s submarines to the
Indonesian Navy.
Type 214 submarines feature air
independent propulsion (AIP) technology allowing them to remain fully submerged
longer than the plain diesel electric (only) submarines that Australia envisages for
the future Attack class. In that sense Indonesian Type 214 submarines would be
regionally superior to Australia’s current and future submarines. Australian
submarines have poorer fully submerged performance than submarines with AIP or
Lithium-ion Battery technology because our current and future submarines will lack those technologies.
Germany
appears to be supporting Turkey’s bid to export submarines to Indonesia. In 2011 a joint German/Turkish bid to sell
209s to Indonesia had been unable to compete with South Korea (which had 209
export rights) to export 209s. Anonymous
advises this would have caused some German resentment.
Now in 2019 a German (TKMS)/Turkish (STM) bid
to sell 4 Turkish built 209s would
still be likely to be outbid by South Korea’s technology transfers, continuity
of supply and soft loans all effectively meaning a cheaper price and benefits for Indonesian industry.
However
if Germany/Turkey instead managed to sell Turkish built 214s to Indonesia Germany/Turkey would
have a complete advantage over South Korea. This is because Germany has given Turkey
rights to export 214s while South Korea has been given no such rights.
Indonesia,
with the last of 8 209s to be received by 2026, may want to receive the first of
4 x 214s by 2027. This may mean Indonesia would need to secure a 214 contract
with Turkey in 2021-2022.
So by
2030 Indonesia may have 12 submarines possibly including 4 regionally superior
Type 214s with AIP and perhaps 2 more 214s by 2032. 2030 will be a year that Australia will still only have 6 aging (hence regionally
inferior) Collins class submarines. According to current schedules (likely to slip) Australia will be operating its
first Attack class submarine only by 2035. However having no AIP nor Lithium-ion
batteries Australia’s Attack class will be inferior to the Type 214s of
Australia’s nearest submarine neighbour and strategic competitor, Indonesia.
-----------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
Indonesian Submarine Table (1981 – 2035)
Class/Sub Name/No.
|
Launched/
Delivered
|
Details – Comments
|
KRI = Ship
of Republic of Indonesia.
|
||
Cakra
class Type 209s
|
Two
sub Cakra
class German HDW (now TKMS) built in Kiel. Are Type
209/1300s. 8 x 533mm tubes with 14 x AEG torpedoes. Specs last
refurbished 2012.[18]
|
|
KRI Cakra
401
|
Specs Old at 2019 may be for training only.
|
|
KRI
Nanggala 402
|
||
Nagapasa
class – Batch 1 of Type 209s
|
3
submarine contract signed with South Korea's
DSME, December 20, 2011. US$1.12 Billion total to
build 3 x Improved Chang Bogo Type 209 variants of the Type 209/1400 (beating Russian, French
and German/Turkish bids
with greater South Korean technology transfer and soft loans)
|
|
KRI Nagapasa 403
|
Delivered 2017
|
1st Nagapasa
|
KRI Ardadedali 404
|
2nd Nagapasa
|
|
KRI Alugoro 405
|
3rd Nagapasa, Commissioned 2019? PT PAL
assembled.
|
|
Nagapasa
class – Batch 2 of Type 209s
no
submarine names so far, ie:
|
US$1
billion contract with DSME signed April 12, 2019 in Bandung, Indonesia, to conclude in late March 2026. for contract with South Korea’s three Type 209/1400 submarines.
|
|
KRI ????????? 406
|
Probably
2024.
|
4th Nagapasa PT PAL to build 2 modules to be sent to Okpo, South
Korea (SK) where sub will be assembled with DSME’s 4 modules.
|
KRI ????????? 407
|
Probably
2025.
|
|
KRI ????????? 408
|
By
2026.
|
|
Possible
4 to 6 more Nagapasa Type 209s
(409 to 414)
OR
4 to 6
Type 214s (409 to 414)
|
By
2030
|
Possible 4 to 6 (with the 2
aging Cakras retiring) future Nagapasa Type 209s. First likely built
in South Korea. Final 3 or 5 may be assembled by PT PAL, Surabaya, Indonesia.
OR
German designed, Turkish built Type 214s (with
AIP)
|
Pete
8 comments:
The type 214 with PEMFC and the Atlas Elektronik combat suite will certainly be a good addition. Having said that the PLAN Type-039 class SSK is improving leaps and bounds as the Chinese crank up their efforts and given the shallower nature of the South China Sea etc..even their Sterling AIP equipped subs with very advanced combat suites and anechoic tiles, other sonar mitigating measures will make them a good match for any regional navy.
20 such modern SSKs are in various stages of operation, construction etc.. and more will come... along with the Shang SSNs, a dozen Type-214s will be only a minimal deterrence...
50-60 ultramodern subs backed by an array of undersea sensors and a phalanx of surface assets can probably swat aside a combined thai + indonesian + filipino + vietnamese + australian naval threat with ease...
Does not bode well for Australia, although perhaps they'll be too busy forcused on the north, rather than the south.
Perhaps Australia could have gotten a few Type 214's. Much smaller, but the range is reasonable. Obviously not suitable for the massive round the world journey's, but adequate to circumnavigating Australia. Yes, I know logistics and crew numbers come into play
Andrew
South Korea's DSME never had any rights to export 209. Normal end-user agreement in the contract would not allow that. But the Korean use a loop hole in the contract to enlarge their 209/1200 design and make it into a different type, hence the official type name DSME1400, not something like 209/1400K. And this cause even more resentment for the German.
It's interesting to see how the Turkish indigenous will eventually look like. But with support from Germany, they might even be able to use the name 214 for export.
Hi GhalibKabir
China, an economic and soon to be military superpower, can use its nuclear and conventional submarines, air, surface forces (all Chinese nuclear weapon capable) and sensors to dominate the East Asian and Australian navies. But that rides on no intervention by the US.
All of the East Asian and Australian submarines may well keep an eye on each other and one day support conflicting undersea oil and gas claims (Indonesia vs Malaysia already? https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2009/06/indonesia-gets-apology-from-malaysian.html ).
It seems more than a coincidence that naval neighbours Australia and Indonesia have both arrived at an optimal number of 12 submarines - parity?
As the Singaporeans have found submarines (with Stirling or Fuel Cell AIP) are particularly well suited to sitting in the shallows and narrows in Southeast Asian waters.
Regards
Pete
Hi Andrew
Australia's submarines are definitely focused on defending against incursions from our north and having a look at the north - not defending against southern threats (ie. Antarctica).
Nuclear submarines transiting the open waters of the Southern Ocean may be a future item of interest - for Aussie subs and fixed undersea sensors.
The Germans were basically offering very enlarged 214s, called 216s (with more range and endurance) to Australia in our submarine competition (up to 2016 when Turnbull chose France).
The extra range may be supposed to take our Attack class to China's shores and narrows - more to surveil than to attack - as attacking China would be more in the US Navy's league.
Australia's northern waters (particularly Torres Strait-Arafura Sea) may well be too shallow and full of rocky outcrops for medium (eg. 214) to large subs to transit.
Regards
Pete
Hi Anonymous
I am sorry. I think I deleted your comment by mistake. Please send it again.
You were saying that South Korea (SK) did not have an export permit from Germany in 2011 to export Type 209s to Indonesia.
Instead SK changed the name of the 209s to make export to Indonesia "legal" in SK eyes.
Regards
Pete
See La Tribune, Indonesia Navy under final negosiate with Naval Group France for litoral submarine, while 2nd batch advance CBG with DSME south korea not yet canceled,but imho 214 Reis class still to be the best option with constructed in Indonesia shipyard.
Hi Jose Timoer
Thanks for the tip.
According to Janes of December 2, 2020 https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/indonesia-in-talks-with-naval-group-for-variant-of-riachuelo-class-submarine
"Officials from Indonesia’s defence ministry are in discussions with a consortium led by French shipbuilder Naval Group for a possible order of the [Brazil assembled] Riachuelo (Modified Scorpene)-class submarine, separate industry sources close to the talks have confirmed with Janes.
[But it must be remembered] The discussion is the latest development in what has been a series of sporadic talks between Indonesian defence planners and Naval Group since 2016, when Jakarta first indicated its interest in the Scorpene 1000 vessel type for its naval requirements..."
Pete Comment
Even though Indonesia has actually been buying subs from South Korea (SK) for years Indonesian officials have been talking for years to Russia and France about possible SSK purchases. Could be serious discussions, or to keep SK subs cheap and competitive or testing the waters for commissions? All three? I don't know.
Pete
Post a Comment