Above and here the Scorpene is featured, courtesy this 2 year old Naval Group video. It begins with 14 Scorpenes sold, but recently India is building 3 more, for a total of 17.
On August 4, 2023 Anonymous from France (with
some editing by Pete)
Here is a "French" perspective on the Scorpene successes (17 exported, none built for the French Navy. France’s attack submarines are all SSNs. Probably more Scorpene sales to be confirmed.) The Scorpenes are still without AIP? How come?
A
look at the overall picture and a few points (hope not to be too
"cocky").
AIP
is very important in some tactical/geographical situations, but is clearly not the
"panacea" although with high strategic impact.
(However, Japan? Australia in 2016? Brazil?). Naval Group’s effort is clearly
in the direction of Lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) for submarine. (Battery maker Saft is/will be a major
supplier,
LFP and
see)
for at least since 2008. LIBs will likely be introduced in the next Scorpene exports (to Romania, Indonesia, Philippines, Morocco and to India) because
this is the obvious road map to the Scorpene story. Adoption of LIBs implies a
complete change of the electrical and diesel subsystems, not a minor change.
Israel
and South Korea need submerged SLBM platforms that can be protected in nearby bastion waters. Specifically the Dolphin and KSS-III SSBs are protected by friendly aircraft, warships and missile defences. They may
rely more on AIP than LIBs.
The
Scorpene is an "oceanic" type of submarine, travelling fast and deep,
equipped with up to date, if not the best, sub systems
- (Thales sensors, Safran
optronic masts, permanent magnet motor and drives from Jeumont, inertial
navigation system (laser gyro or fiber) and combat systems...that are also
on Saab Blekinges (by and large), South Korean DSME or even the TKMS
(navigation in the Type 212CD) proposals, if one looks at the details.
- France’s Thales not only supplies the UK Royal Navy (Thales UK and France have been partners for 40+ years..and the technological building-blocks, components, software modules, test equipment and experience at sea etc, are unlikely to be different ). Also the USN with its latest submarine digital sonars
- the
weapon range of the Scorpene is state of the art, F21 torpedoes, Exocet SM39
anti-ship missiles, MdCN cruise missiles..ITAR free are on par with the best
world systems.
-
Naval technology transfer to India or Brazil alleviates the limited capacity
and the high labor cost in France. To achieve for instance 100% indigenous
“Make in India”, it is sufficient at the beginning to have modules made in
India (or Brazil), incorporated in a third party sale..
- Contrary to TKMS or Saab, Naval Group yards are booked for the next 10/15 years with France’s top priority Barracuda SSN and Third Generation SSBN nuclear orders. Naval Group needs its foreign partners in fact for Scorpene and conventional Shortfin construction.
I agree that the Scorpène-class is an excellent submarine, one that can even be preferrable to the Type 214 depending on the customer's priorities, but I do have some reservations about some of the points made here, especially the point about Scorpène being an "oceanic" submarine when it can only reach 6,500 nautical miles. Ultimately, range appears to be this classes' main disadvantage, with it being far inferior to Type 214 both on the surface/while snorkelling (12,000 nm for 214) and submerged (550 nm @ 5 knots vs 1250 @ 4 knots). But as I've explained in an earlier comment, range when sailing via diesel isn't always important for a conventional submarine, while the importance of AIP depends very much on the distance of the planned destinations: If they can be reached air-independently while entirely submerged, AIP is an invaluable asset, since the submarine can then operate exclusively submerged with near certainty that it won't be detected. If not and the submarine would have to snorkel to reach its potential destinations either way, the advantage is less important. This is probably why Australia didn't care much about TKMS' clear AIP advantage over Naval Group, since the Pacific Ocean is so vast that snorkelling will always be necessary.
ReplyDeleteI'm certainly interested in what the future of submarine export brings! Scorpène vs 214 is a head-to-head race as of now. One advantage the Scorpène design has is that it's not just one design, but has at least two versions readily offered for purchase. The larger Brazilian design variant shows that there is even more openness to costumer wishes. In contrast, there is only minor variation between the different Type 214 versions, at least from what I've gathered. One of the main advantages of the timeless and absolutely brilliant 209 design, its adaptability to the customer's wishes, appears to not have carried over to the AIP export. If a customer wishes for a 214 submarine with major changes, he is essentially forced to order a completely new submarine tpye. This was the case with Singapore's Type 218SG design, and the result is quite astonishing, a submarine with a submerged range up to twice (!) as high as that of the domestic Type 212A -- but it was certainly quite expensive to design. Scorpène might offer more economical solutions here. German submarines have led the conventional submarine market for a reason, they tend to have more impressive stats, but that is not always what matters most for smaller navies. An important advantage Type 214 has is that it's essentially the only option for customers interested in transfer of technology for working fuel cell submarine propulsion, allowing TKMS to put a high price tag on such a deal. Scorpène ToT is could be quite a bit cheaper so that India chose to build Scorpènes and develop AIP more or less on their own (though it has to be said that India's Scorpène deal originated from a time when Type 214 wasn't even on the market).
We really have an interesting competition here. The other export submarine competition I'm increasingly interested in is Type 212 CD Expeditionary vs Blekinge Oceanic Extended Range for Netherlands. As always, only the future has the power to confirm or deny our beliefs and projections. I'm looking forward to what will happen.
Lots of advanced French concepts. But how many will ever become reality?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtwKJyK6BQA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mG3unwnjZEI
https://www.thyssenkrupp-marinesystems.nl/en/the-new-submarines.html The new expeditionary generation HDW Class 212CD E offers:
ReplyDelete• Increased displacement (> 3,000 t)
• Increased length (> 80 m)
• Longer endurance
• High accommodation standard for long time missions
• Worldwide deployments (!)
• Enhanced weapon capacities (!) This is Dakar-type, but without Israeli systems and "doomsday weapons". Regards...
Hi all,
ReplyDeleteLatest update on Marazon Dock Shipbuilders Ltd and Naval Group Scorpenes and subs -
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/08/india-proceeds-with-new-submarines-surface-ships-development/
TL/DR-
MDL has collaborations with both TKMS fort the Project 75I (6 subs), and Naval Group for the the three additional Scorpenes - including discussions about export
DRDO AIP module 'should' be fitted to the INS Kalvari when it undergoes refit, beginning 2025. Not confirmed the three new Scorpenes will get this module from construction, as Naval News suggest they may get LIB instead, wuth 'similar or better performance'.
MDL is discussing with the IN about a follow-on indigenous SSK class, Project 76.
Hi Submarine Autistry at 8/11/2023 10:47 PM
ReplyDeleteI will respond to your interesting comments with comments of my own. in an article soon.
Cheers Pete
Hi Anonymous at 8/12/2023 3:13 AM
ReplyDeleteIndeed the French Naval concepts in those 2 videos: SMX-26 Littoral Seabed Landing Submarine 10 years ago; and SMX-31, France's future submarine 2 years ago, were interesting.
I think what killed off customer interest was the lack (in both concepts and in similar proposals) of a standard sail/fin. Sail/fins are essential in the approaches from and to port and in rapid ascent emergencies for command, navigation, sea-keeping and anti-boarder security.
Maybe sailess might find a market in wet and dry diver delivery vehicles, mini-subs and XLUUVs!?
Regards Pete
Thanks Anonymous at 8/14/2023 12:58 AM and Shawn C at 8/14/2023 2:23 PM
ReplyDeleteFor the Scorpene and other subs info at https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/08/india-proceeds-with-new-submarines-surface-ships-development/
Unlike highly efficient South Korea being given permission by TKMS to build 209 variants for Indonesia I don't see Indian firms as being competitive enough (yet) to build Scorpenes for export to third countries. NG has already said it (France) wants to sell Scorpenes to Indonesia and the Philippines.
India after all might see the desperate need for more SSKs for its own navy as a higher priority.
I also wonder why India did not incorporate DRDO AIP into its Scorpenes 5-10 years ago rather than maintaining the P-75(I) Project (for 10 years) which was mainly about obtaining Euro-AIP integration.
Project 76 indigenous SSK subs? Maybe in 20 years time. If little Sweden can succesfully invent and export SSKs and Stirling AIP then India's much larger industrial base should be able to do it.
Regards Pete
Thanks Oleg at 8/14/2023 7:20 AM
ReplyDeleteTKMS's Type 212CD E looks attractive. But I wonder if the Netherlands has requiements for AIP or for VLS? If the Dutch go the Attack class Australian way (up to 2021) then AIP, VLS and even LIBs may not be requirements. That might then suggest a large Scorpene/Shortfin.
The third option of a large Saab A26 might be attractive if the Dutch want to avoid being dominated by a great power's submarine builder. Although the Dutch may not want the Stirling AIP that Saab specialises in.
In short the Walrus Replacement is anybody's guess.
Regards Pete
(Dutch, google) "What's in a Name.
ReplyDeleteSaab-Kockums used the designation Type 712 for years. Because their proposal to NL is a derivative of the Type 612 proposal to Australia. The new name C71 was introduced in 2022, because it sounds better commercially. And now the designation C718. The diameter is indeed about 8 meters. With a length of approximately 73 meters. C718 probably does not refer to these dimensions.
It is still a concept boat. So maybe hence the C designation.
Edit: C71 is the family name, C718 is the variant." Saab- the highest marks but probably with the highest price. We'll see, it's still looking like coffee grounds.
The issue with the Swedish boats is indeed that they made an, in my opinion, wrong turn with the Stirling engine, which will always be inferior to fuel cells in at least two aspects: noise and operational depth (both of which are rather integral for an SSK...). In most other aspects, I would expect Kockums to be roughly on a par with TKMS. Saab also promotes Blekinge's "Multi Mission Portal" for manned and unmanned vehicles. TKMS was less concrete about such capabilities, only hinting that the Type 212CD boats might closely cooperate with specially developed naval drones in the future (which would be a major step forward for submarine technology as a whole, but is very vague at this point). An even more important advantage of Kockums is that they closely cooperated with Damen Group, a major Dutch shipbuilding and defense company, for the Oceanic Extended Range design. Normally, a Navy would want to support its domestic shipbuilding industry, meaning that Saab/Damen have a clear advantage here...
ReplyDeleteHowever, we should not forget that Germany itself heavily cooperates with Damen for its F126 frigate (of which I'm not a huge fan...), so perhaps the Dutch could see this as a chance to return the favour... Seems unrealistic, but otherwise, the TKMS design is at something of a diplomatic disadvantage, making it more likely that the Netherlands will choose Blekinge, in spite of the fact that Type 212CD may well turn out to be the superior submarine with its extremely forward-thinking features.
Hi Pete ,to complement my (French ano ) previous post
ReplyDeleteThe AIP vs Li discussion needs also to take into account the development of networking , drone,..ect and it is not as clearcut , especially with Li
A modern surveillance aicraft ASW "à la P8" can detect in theory a snorkel at 120 miles (small ECS and size, higher frequencies needed /Atmospheric Absorption..
In practice contrary to the baltic or mediterranean areas, it is extremely rare in the ocean to have more than 3 days in a row of sea state below 3 Beaufort.There is considerable clutter that can be alleviated to some extent by specialized radar techniques (polarization, specific signal processing..).This is clealy not obvious , detection has to be much closer, and the stealth snorkel is equipped with a radar detector that would allow the sub to close the snorkel and dive in 10/15 seconds
The indiscretion ratio is around 15% in LAB and move to 7 to 5 % with Lib.As important the Li can be reloaded partially at full current, and it keeps its power intact up to the end.It can sprint with a very hih current load.Look at Tesla auto with LFP batteries, which are alsoinherently safe
However such a plane (size , radar..) can be detected by AA modern frigate up to 350 miles (L band radar) or even more by satellites Optical or Elint (CSO , Ceres for the Fr Navy)
A modern sub is a passive listener to Link 16 type of network and is fully aware of the tactical situation in its area
Moreover the development and implementation of submerged submarine launched minidrones for ISR such as the US Blackwing10, the Israeli Ninox103 or the French Diodon HP 30 allow an inspection for at least 30min.Thetered by a FO link miles long likely.
The July release by the French Navy of the succesful launch, and operation ,of such a drone,from the sub console combat systems underwater, made clear also the installation of A3SM (Mica VL). on the Barracuda class.This was a puzzle for the non "initiated"
This dived sub launched surface to air missile(Mica VL) and such a drone with modern sensors
creates in the very short term ,a 25Km no escape zone for an unfriendly aerial platform
As you says in English "coming out of the blue"
The death sentence of the modern SSK is somewhat premature
Hi Pete
ReplyDeleteA precision as my last comment might be misleading. The Diodon drone (a few kg , and disposable)is not "thetered via an FO link.It is in radio contact, and in the trial trough the submarine surface antenna.However the next likely step is to have the base station on a long optical fiber link as in the novel Thales linear towed sub sonar array( ALRO ) for discretion
Hello Pete:
ReplyDeleteI also wonder why India did not incorporate DRDO AIP into its Scorpenes 5-10 years ago rather than maintaining the P-75(I) Project (for 10 years) which was mainly about obtaining Euro-AIP integration.
The idea was to develop an indigenous AIP system and incorporate it in the last two Kalvari builds, but by 2016, the 'program was on schedule' but they decided it wasn't ready.. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/scorpene-submarines-to-miss-air-independent-propulsion-system/story-MgTC5fIBytrCMeOlyfogYI.html
Also, NG's MEMSA was sold to Pakistan in the 2000s, which could have soured the IN from this AIP technology - the PN should take delivery of the first of eight Hangor-class AIP boats (Type-39B)in 2024.
Project 76 indigenous SSK subs? Maybe in 20 years time. If little Sweden can succesfully invent and export SSKs and Stirling AIP then India's much larger industrial base should be able to do it.
It would probably take the Indian military twenty years from the start of Project 76 development to the start of construction - that's how long it took them to get the first HAL Tejas prototype flying (then another 12 years before it underwent IOC)
The comments in this section by the Sub Autistry and the French? anonymous are simply outstanding. My gratitude to them. I learned a lot.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Indian list shown above, allow me to comment
1. Next Gen destroyers with 100 VLS - max 4 are likely just like Kolkata and Vizag Class due to competing demands on limited IN budget.
2. SSK - Between S5 SSBNs, domestic SSNs, 3 extra P75 Scorpenes and Chakra 3 Akula SSN (Iribis or Kashalot under refit), I think 75I is not likely any time soon. Project 76, I would say like the PLAN Type 32, they should make a trial SSK with SLBM/SLCM/UUV launching/SAM related capability upgrade test bed. Then move to a full fledged P76 based SSK line by 2040-2045. All this is mostly 'Khayali pulao' as things stand today.
btw, the Indian scorpenes are not fitted with AOM 30 attack mast and have a hull penetrating earlier generation Safran APS 20 attack periscope. I wonder why...
Also, the Type-209s got refitted with Hensoldt OMR 110 optronic mast and SERO 400 direct view periscope while L-3 Kollmorgen (L3 Harris) is fixing optronic masts/periscopes on Kilo class/Sindhughosh class SSKs.
The Li tech for Indian SSKs negotiations has failed in the past.... we have to see how that pans out in the future
3. NG corvettes: The current kamorta class are being refitted with VL-SRSAM and similar to Kamorta class... 4 are likely due to budget considerations....
@Shawn C and Pete,
ReplyDeleteIndia can make an SSK. However, the IN and Government's financial resource constraints are quite clear. With 3-4 SSBNs, 3 SSKs, 6 SSNs + 1 SSN on lease... it is about the limits of what we can do... if the above program can succeed, it would make a decent achievement..
it would not be excessive to say despite points of improvement, India has one of the world's more reasonable sub building programs currently.
With Tejas, one should remember it had to survive a lot of political and military vested interests besides tech challenges such as composites and failure of the GTRE Kaveri engine etc..
While it would be great if India could have benefited from accelerated time frames...40 FOC, IOC-II jets are flying today, a naval variant has been tested on the IAC-I and a mark 2 version should fly soon.... i would wager that is a much better outcome than the policy dud equivalent of a 'whack on the nose with a rusty poker' alternative....