Below TKMS finally sells 212CDs: 4 for Norwegian Navy, 2 for German drawing from Anonymous kindly provided comments of July 26, 20221:
Poland’s submarine budget (around US$897 million per submarine = US$2.6 Billion / 3 submarines [1] ) is less than the price for German/Norwegian Type 212CDs. (On July 29, 2021 /Kjell reported that that Norways 4 x 212CDs cost estimated March 23, 2021 "45 Billion NOK" = US$5.12 Billion (this equals US$1.3 Billion per sub). Meanwhile the 2 x 212CDs for Germany, estimated June 23, 2021, cost 2.7 Billion Euro = US$3.2 Billion (this equals US$1.6 Billion per sub).
On July 30, 2021 Anonymous reported a major issues for TKMS is management instability resulting in rumours TKMS may be aquired by Italy's Fincantieri [2]. If TKMS loses its submarine bids in Netherlands and/or Poland the rumor may come true.
Are maintenance costs, for example spare parts, included for the Type 212CD purchase? In the earlier purchase of Type 212As for the German Navy, procurement of spare parts was not included in the contract. This led to reliance on cannibalistic maintenance for spare parts.
This can also be compared with the contract value of 2 x Blekinge-class A26s submarines at around US$475 million each (US$949 million based on 8.2 billion SEK total for 2 subs in 2015 [3]) Maintenance costs seem to be included.
[1] https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2021/07/poland-seeking-new-frigates-and.html
[2] See "Fincantieri declined to comment about interest in Thyssenkrupp Marine System” of May 14, 2021 at https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/fincantieri-declined-comment-about-interest-thyssenkrupp-marine-system-2021-05-14/
[3] https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blekinge-klass Swedish Minister of Defense Peter Hultqvist announced on 17 March 2015 that the Swedish government had ordered for 2 x A26s from Saab Kockums AB, for a maximum of SEK 8.2 billion. [“9” https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/6119284 ] . The US$475 million each in 2015 would be substantially more in 2021. In any case US$475 million each is a Swedish Navy only price which would be much higher for potential foreign customers (currently the Netherlands).
7 comments:
Hi Pete,
Some input on the 212CD costs, Norway says 45 billion NOK or 4.32 billion EUR or 1.08 billion EuR each for their subs and Germany says 2.7 billion EUR or 1.35 billion EUR each for their subs.
/Kjell
Hi Pete
Issues of TKMS is management instability as shown a rumor of acquisition of TKMS by Fincantieri [1]. If TKMS loses the submarine bids in Netherlands and/or Poland. The rumor will be true.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/fincantieri-declined-comment-about-interest-thyssenkrupp-marine-system-2021-05-14/
“Fincantieri declined to comment about interest in Thyssenkrupp Marine System”
Regards
Thanks /Kjell and Anonymous
I've altered the article text, taking in your new information.
Regards
Pete
Hi Pete
In the Dutch submarine replacement program, Naval Group proposed Barracuda family to Dutch Navy [1]. As Dutch is money minded and traditionally understands French business, Naval Group cannot treat them as cash cow.
[1] https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/05/latest-update-on-the-netherlands-walrus-class-submarine-replacement-program/
Regards
Hi Anonymous
Thanks for the information in https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/05/latest-update-on-the-netherlands-walrus-class-submarine-replacement-program/
Which partly says:
"A contract award is expected at the end of 2022 with the winning shipyard. “All of this is of course partly dependent on the progress and depth of the dialogue, but the situation regarding Covid-19 can also influence this,”
and "... the first ship is expected from 2028 and at least two submarines are to be fully operational by the end of 2031"
So it looks like the Netherlands will get their new submarines 6 years more quickly, and presumably more cheaply, than Australia.
But it was and is always an Australian political intention to get our new submarines more slowly and for a higher price because this buys more Federal Election votes in Adelaide, South Australia, where they are building the new subs.
Regards
Pete
Hi Pete
TKMS revealed data of 212CD submarine as follows [1].
Displacement (surface): ~ 2,500 m³
Length overall: ~ 73 m
Beam: ~ 10 m
Height: ~ 13 m
IR (Indiscretion Ratio, an indiscretion ratio to indicate the proportion of mission time a submarine):
212CD has heptagonal shaped cross section of hull where pressure hull with circular section is covered by plates for sound reflection/absorption. As a result, beam of 212CD is bigger than diameter of its pressure hull [2]. Beam of 2121CD is significantly larger than 212A [3], but diameter of its pressure hull is not so big. Height of bridge for 212CD does not seem to be bigger than 212A, because exhaust pressure of diesel should not increase in 212CD. Considering heights of 212CD and 212A (13m,11.5m) and beam of 212A (7m), diameter of pressure hull of 212CD might beca. 8-9m which allows parallel arrangement of 3 diesels. IR may be 2-3% [4] which is significantly lower than existing non-AIP submarine (10-15%?).
L/D (Length/Diameter, an important hydrodynamic parameter in submarine):
L/D of 212CD is 7.3 (8 for 212A) which is nearly same as the optimal value of 7 and is best of existing submarine. Then, improved underwater performance is expected for 212CD.
\[1] https://www.thyssenkrupp.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/pressdetailpage/thyssenkrupp-marine-systems-receives-largest-order-in-its-history-118164
[2] https://www.naval-technology.com/projects/type-212cd-submarines-germany/
[3] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-Boot-Klasse_212_A
Technical specifications of 212A submarine.
Displacement (surface):1450ton [ ~ 14,500 m³]
Length overall: 56 m
Beam: 7 m
Height:11.5m
[4] Rough estimation of IR for 30-days and 3knot underwater patrol with daily energy consumption of 5MW/day by AIP submarine with 100MW of AIP energy and three 1MW of diesel generators:
Total energy needed for 30-day patrol is (1) 150MW (=5MW/day x 30 days). In 30-days patrol, energy should be supplied from diesels is 50MW (= (1) - AIP energy = 150MW-100MW). In a daily base, 1.7MW of energy should be supplied where operation time of dieses is 0.6 hours (=1.7MW/(3 x 1MW)). Then, IR is 0.6 hours/24hours x 100%=ca.2-3%
Regards
Hi Anonymous [at Aug 9, 2021, 10:07:00 AM]
Thanks for the information.
So one cubic metre of water weighs one metric tonne - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubic_metre#:~:text=A%20cubic%20metre%20of%20pure,1000%20kg%2C%20or%20one%20tonne.
I am surprised that the Type 212CD's displacement (surfaced) is 2,500 cubic metres = 2,500 tonnes.
But https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_212_submarine#General_characteristics also indicates "2,500 tonnes surfaced for 212CD"
and
https://www.naval-technology.com/news/tkms-to-build-six-type-212cd-submarines-for-germany-and-norway/ indicates "The 73m-long 212CD submarine will have a beam of 10m and a 2,500m³ surface displacement."
Looking at https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2021/07/submarine-cost-estimates-need-to.html which provides costs.
- So Norway and Germany are buying a vastly modified and larger 212CD which is 73m long, 10m beam, 2,500 tonned surfaced displacement for ONLY US$1.3 Billion per sub for Norway and US$1.6 Billion per sub for Germany!
- while the 212A is 56m long, 7m beam and 1,450 tonne
surfaced.
Yes it looks accurate that the 212CD will be much larger than the 212CDs. So the CD will need much more powerful diesel and AIP propulsion.
Regards
Pete
Post a Comment