From 10 comments of August 29, 30 and 31, 2023 below my article "4 New SSKs Better Than 5 Collins LOTEs: No Virginias?" I assume:
1. Germany is not winning the Walrus Replacement selection and hasn't even decided whether it is offering a Type 212CD E (as "its low magnetic steel hull can only be welded in Germany") or an enlarged Type 214 offered as a Type 216? (which could be assembled hence welded in the Netherlands).
2. Swedish Saab's offer of an Expeditionary Submarine C718 has probably been selected - to enter service from 2034.
3. France has been largely quiet on the Walrus Replacement. But I assume Saab's C718 design will use many French components including large Jeumont PM motors and E drives, Sonar suites from Thales, optronic masts from Safran, Navigation systems from ECA and probably Lithium-ion LFP batteries from Saft/Total..to name a few.
The winning C718 may provide a design and pricing benchmark for Australia from the late 2020s to locally build 4 to 6 C718s. This benchmark would serve to minimise Australia's customary shipbuilding inefficiency dividend. Inefficiency that underwrites Australia's "20,000 well paid union jobs", poor work practices and rich sinecures for retired Labor and Liberal politicians, admirals and other officials.
Homage?
This may follow a Trump 2.0 (or geriatric Biden 2.0) Administration's 2026 decision to cancel the Virginia offer. Meanwhile the US will retain Albanese's extraordinary "coals to Newcastle" $3 Billion feudal payment of homage to Biden and the already highly profitable American arms industry.
Hi Pete
ReplyDeleteTake a look at what Spain wants to offer to the Philippines.
Spanish firm cites edge in submarine proposal to PH
https://globalnation.inquirer.net/218409/spanish-firm-cites-edge-in-submarine-proposal-to-ph
Stealthy Submarines: Spanish Navantia Offers S-80 Isaac Peral Subs To The Philippines To Fend-Off China.
https://www.eurasiantimes.com/stealthy-submarines-spanish-navantia-offers-s-80-isaac-pera/
Navantia offers two S-80 Plus class submarines to Philippine Navy
https://navyrecognition.com/index.php/naval-news/naval-news-archive/2023/august/13510-navantia-offers-two-s-80-plus-class-submarines-to-philippine-navy.html
what's your opinion on the Philippines buying the S-80 Plus vs the Scorpene & Type 209 from South Korea
Hi Nicky at 8/31/2023 3:06 PM
ReplyDeleteI think the Philippines would be wise NOT to select Spain's very large, therefore expensive S-80, whose hull and AIP have not been operationally tested https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-80_Plus-class_submarine#Units
The Philippines would do better to select the much cheaper, operationally tested Scorpene (from France) or Type 209s or Type 214s (with long proven AIP). The 209s and 214s should be available from Germany and/or South Korea.
However, the Philippines has a long history of corruption [1] which might mean seller bribes could contribute to a poor Philippine submarine selection.
[1] at 116 on the Corruption Index the Philippines is highly corrupt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index
The Philippines is even more corrupt than Malaysia of Old, which selected an unviable number of 2 Scorpene's with a commission?Bribe (equivalent to US$One Billion in today's money) going to Malaysia's then Defence/Prime Minister. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Shaariibuugiin_Altantuyaa#Relations_to_Najib_Razak
But I don't think the Philippinese current President is anything like his corrupt, late father, Ferdinand Marcos.
Regards Pete
Hi all,
ReplyDeleteThe Navantia S-80 Plus should enter commission in the Spanish Armada sometime this year, so the proof of concept will be when it deploys for its first long patrol.
The AIP system the S-80 class uses is to use bioethanol to generate hydrogen gas, which is then fed to a hydrogen fuel cell (American commercial grade?)- basically a similar system to NG's MEMSA.
Now that this class is ready, twenty years after it was ordered into production, Navantia finally have a boat that they can actually physically show to navies, and they've started a marketing push for basically any submarine tender available - India, the Philippines, the Netherlands.
With regard to the Philippines submarine program - most articles position the NG Scorpene as the obvious winner, thought I reckon this is due to a big marketing push from the French.
We also know that the procurement budget for this program was increased earlier this year, which is why DSME is now offering a revised bid with better combat systems. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/madex-2023-hanwha-ocean-sweetens-philippine-navy-submarine-offer-with-kss-iii-systems
Hi Shawn at 8/31/2023 4:32 PM
ReplyDeleteThanks for locating https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/madex-2023-hanwha-ocean-sweetens-philippine-navy-submarine-offer-with-kss-iii-systems
It would be a brave Philippines indeed to be the first export customer to cross-subsidise the prolonged development costs of the troubled S-80. Even S-80's AIP might be a disincentive if it is "similar system to NG's MEMSA".
This in in view of total international sales of 3 MESMA AIP systems (to Pakistan) - a choice never repeated by more discerning customers.
Also there is a well known correlation in the submarine game of Large size = Large cost.
But, as I said, in response to Nicky above, a healthy bribe may overcome prudent purchasing. Prudent being purchase of a submarine with a long track record, for a startup submarine force.
Cheers Pete
The tender is still ongoing and there will be no public updates till the so called D-brief (D- letter) is sent to parliament. That will be around december/januari periode if there is no delay.
ReplyDeleteKevin
Sorry, with all due respect, the Filipinos might not be understanding the true complexity of creating a SSK fleet from scratch. Even buying one of the 2 the best established non-chinese SSK, namely the Scorpene will be a humongous undertaking for any smaller country's navy. Ditto for any 21x series from TKMS.
ReplyDeleteI would say investing in a fleet of low cost UUVs, USVs and calculated addition of potent ASW assets such as the P-8 and MH-60 might give more bang for the buck rather than 'Mughal level Khayali pulao' of an expensive SSK that ultimately leads to a policy cul de sac.
A cursory look at this Janes article will give an idea. The navy is likely to get < PHP 3-4 billion or US$ 55-75 million for capital outlay purpose in 2023. This is not enough for even a MH-60R. I don't intend to slight the Philippines, rather I am pointing out at the scale of expectations vs reality's yawning 'grand canyon type' chasm.
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/philippines-proposes-double-digit-growth-in-defence-spending
Look at Indonesia with a US$ 2.5 billion capital outlay... Even with better ship building and maintenance facilities, it is just enough to down pay for one SSK assuming the Navy gets half the capital outlay funds at US$ 1 billion.
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/update-indonesia-reduces-projected-defence-spending-for-2023#:~:text=The%20Indonesian%20Ministry%20of%20Defense,that%20was%20allocated%20in%202022.
For context, India advertises US$ 3 billion for shipbuilding yearly (likely excludes SSBN, SSN costs) -> enough for one new frigate/destroyer and one SSK every year roughly.
https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-raises-defence-budget-726-bln-amid-tensions-with-china-2023-02-01/
OR...the one thing India's airforce is studying about the pakistani airforce keenly and likely being studied by the IN vs PN's midget subs and other 'low cost strike assets'
https://quwa.org/2023/08/14/pakistan-looks-to-use-drones-as-strike-assets-2/
an underwater version (with limitations entailed on communications, netwroking etc..)of a similar strategy might be a cost effective and not so bad idea...
Hi Pete
ReplyDeleteTo Shawn, Mesma AIP was different than the Spanish system
It was using ethanol in a boiler to generate steam.It suffer from reduced Energy Density (However very high power, similar to post combustion in jet) therefore not very useful for low speed, long, amnbush style patrols.
The Spanish ,Indian DRDO or the French AIP FC 2G are generating hydrogen to load fuel cells.Hydrogene is produced in situ by reforming: ethanol, Phosphoric Acid Diesel fuel respectively.This would allow to get rid of the cryogenic, at sea ,problematic H2 refilling.
No real operational data on an actual sub sofar
Unlike Australia or Holland, The Philippines has no requirement for long range submarines. They would patrol in the immediately adjacent South China Sea and Philippines Sea.
ReplyDeleteAssuming range and endurance are not critical, the smaller, cheaper Type 212 or Scorpene would seem logical choices.
Hi Pete
ReplyDeleteI guess I communicated that a bit wrong in the first comment, when I said, "will most likely be built in Germany"
"Built" may also be matter of interpretation
A 2018 Defence24 article covered the German offer to Poland, to "built" 212CD there. [1]
This article is also my source, for the "welding issue", I mentioned. And even there it is said, it is not impossible, but it would cost a lot (who knows, maybe they just pretend..)
What is Built vs. Assemble?
Isn't this the same in Australia?
Earlier articles often claimed how important the "Made in Australia" issue is. But now, if I remember that right, whole sections of the AUKUS subs will be built overseas and just be assembled in Australia (or did that change again?). Because that is more realistic and even more pragmatic.
I guess, local politicians would still call that, "Made in Australia".
And while the current (2020) budget for the Walrus replacement program is 4.64 billion Euro for 4 subs, just a single of the once planned 12 diesel electric Attack class submarines for Australia, would had been cost 4,66 billion Euro! (56 billion Euro all 12)
So the 2 212CD (that are a bit smaller than offered 212CD-E!), will cost Germany at least 2,79 billion, so nearly 1,4 billion per sub. The 4 subs planed for Norway, would be 4,5 billion, so 1,12 billion per sub. (Source for all prices used: Wikipedia)
As the Netherlands only want to pay 1,16 billion (by yet) per sub, I guess there is not much marigin for a technology transfer within that.
(Source of all prices: Wikipedia)
You've said, "Germany not decided yet what to offer".
The offer is already made, we (the public) just don't know much about it and all the circumstances. Guess tkMS would in the end made a choice what to offer or offered even both, as long this RfQ process allowed that.
Now it is up to the Netherlands, what they wish and what they think that they really need and for which they will decide.
Well, it may be my special view through German glasses, letting me see it like that, but for me it is a decision, between a state of the art submarine, versus some kind of compromise...
I'm personally very excited and can hardly wait for more detailed information about the offers to be made public.
[1]
https://defence24.com/armed-forces/navy/orka-the-german-way-will-the-polish-navy-submarines-be-built-in-szczecin
Whatever submarine is selected will have to deal with increasingly advanced ASW tech:
ReplyDelete"China has tested the world’s first submarine-detecting device based
on next-generation communication technology, according to researchers.
The terahertz device identified extremely small surface vibrations
produced by a low-frequency sound source in the open sea, scientists
involved in the experiment said."
See:
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3232682/chinese-scientists-look-6g-hunt-submarines-testing-device-small-enough-fit-drone
Hi pete
ReplyDeleteAs of right now, I know South Korea is pushing really hard for the DSME 1400/209 sale to the Philippines. Here's their sales pitch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuO4JNKuR98
I know IMO, the Scorpene would be a better option for the Philippines.
Hi all,
ReplyDeleteJust a brief comment. The S80+ AIP is completely different from the MENSA. In fact, it is much more similar to the AIP in the 212 subs except that the hydrogen is produced from bioethanol. It really looks good, but the problem is that the AIP will only be initially installed in the third and four of the units ordered by the Spanish Navy. Therefore, it is not installed in the first unit (the only one launched) so we do not know if it really works…
I don't think the offer to the Philippines has a chance due to the many problems of the S80+, but it may be of interest because of the technology transfer (not only submarines) and the training of personnel that was already key in the Navantia contract with Saudi Arabia.
Sorry for my English. I am a Spanish speaker. :)
Interesting note is that the designer Isaac Peral spent time in the Philippines and even has a street name named after him before it was renamed to the 'United Nations Avenue'. Philippines has more experience with acquisitions with Spanish defense materiel and such as the EADS CASA C295s and now the ASCOD 2 IFV/Light Tanks. So far they've been reliable. They also do have a chance given the boats do still fit within the $1.7 Billion budget. The ToT is rather enticing as well as the low interest loan which doesnt need to be paid until the s80+ has been received. Even more so that the S80+ is probably more advanced than any AIP subs amongst SCS claimants.
DeletePete
ReplyDeleteOne slight quibble with this comment of yours:
“ Inefficiency that underwrites Australia's "20,000 well paid union jobs", poor work practices and rich sinecures for retired Labor politicians, admirals and other officials. ”
I think unfortunately the problem is sinecures for both retired Labor and Liberal politicians in defence projects and quangos like ASPI.
If it was only one side doing it then things might change after an election. But we just had a government change and the politicisation of defence contracts and appointments has not stopped ergo it is both sides.
Thanks Anonymous at 9/01/2023 5:23 PM
ReplyDeleteYou're right.
So I've changed the text to "sinecures for retired Labor and Liberal politicians"
Cheers Pete
Sachsa
ReplyDelete“What is Built vs. Assemble?
Isn't this the same in Australia?
Earlier articles often claimed how important the "Made in Australia" issue is. But now, if I remember that right, whole sections of the AUKUS subs will be built overseas and just be assembled in Australia (or did that change again?). Because that is more realistic and even more pragmatic.
I guess, local politicians would still call that, "Made in Australia".
The desire for Australian built submarines has become a political football but local jobs were not the original reason for it. When Australia operated UK built Oberon class submarines in the 1960s to 1980s, there was a lack of any local IP or even plans. Maintenance was difficult and costly, sometimes requiring UK assistance with long periods out of service.
The Collins Class was required to be built in Australia to avoid that problem. The diesel engines and some propulsion elements were built in Sweden but all of the hull and most other systems were built or supplied in Australia. This allows more than 90% of maintenance/sustainment work to be done locally. So local construction leading to local sustainment did work.
For any diesel or nuclear powered submarine now the engine and/or reactor compartment (if nuclear powered) could not be built at ASC Adelaide. It would be built and supplied from the country of origin for the design.But the rest of the sub including the entire hull, battery, combat system, accommodation and controls could be built in ASC. Perhaps 70% of an SSK and 50-60% of an SSN. As Ukraine is proving, the ability to sustain complex systems locally is important in a real war, so I think RAN should stick to this requirement.
Hi Carlos at 9/01/2023 5:25 AM
ReplyDeleteThanks for advising that the S80+ AIP is actually a Fuel Cell type and not MESMA style.
Yet it shows Spain has not yet perfected the S80+'s AIP. As you have advised the AIP will not be fitted in 2023 to S-81 "Isaac Peral". More likely being fitted to the third sub, S-83 "Cosme García" in 2026 or later.
Thankyou also for your advice "I don't think the offer to the Philippines has a chance due to the many problems of the S80+, but it may be of interest because of the technology transfer..."
Of course the French and South Korean competitors for the Philippine submarine order also have good, long established, technology transfer and submarine training packages.
Regards Pete/Pedro
Hi Anonymous at 9/04/2023 6:47 PM
ReplyDeleteI think Australian industry and union claims of "Made in Australia" and percentage of Australian content are more patriotic political in nature than technically based.
In the most relevant SSN-AUKUS example the rear hulls, containing the reactor and other propulsion machinery, are likely to be UK welded in as a complete half then placed on a Heavy Lift Ship for transport from Barrow-in-Furness, UK to Osborne, Australia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSN-AUKUS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy-lift_ship
Then one third of the half-UK Built and half front section, that will be Australian assembled, will consist of mainly US Combat System Lockheed Martin integrated components (of weapons, torpedo tubes, VLS, sensors, computer databases and workstations) all fitting into UK designed spaces.
But it is true the bunks, chairs, tables, toilets and maybe backup batteries will be dinky-di Made in Australia.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dinky-di#:~:text=dinky%2Ddi%20(not%20comparable),(by%20extension)%20Authentically%20Australian.