IN Scorpene Submarines - News & Discussions

[IndianHawk]

Russian are behind west in electronics and that is evident in every sector.

Anyway in context of 75i project let's think logically. We have built SSBN and are designing SSN and also simultaneously building Scorpion class submarine yet we want another foreign submarine why?

The only logical explanation is we are still after certain technologies which we haven't developed ourselves and haven't gotten in tech transfer from Scorpion .

Hence 75i with foreign collaboration. Russian are lagging in aip and battery tech and French have shown limits of cooperation with Scorpion.

The only logical choice is ze German! Germany has a stellar record of tech transfer as south korea is now exporting the sub it developed from learning while building German subs .

So I guess this 75i is designed to go to Germany with imphasis on aip tech and battery tech.

It will be interesting to see what Saab offers in terms of tot but I believe German will prevail.

The only surprise could come from Japan if they can get in the game and offer soryu class but they seem way to reluctant and hesitant.

So Germany it is type 214.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[IndianHawk]

It's a well known fact that US navy hypes up russian submarines to secure higher funding. They are way ahead of russia but they just want more money.

They demand more money because they are tremendously waste full and most of their projects are desperately inflated to benefit military industrial complex.

They keep demanding more and more money to fight Taliban!

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Vijyes]

Russian are behind west in electronics and that is evident in every sector.

Anyway in context of 75i project let's think logically. We have built SSBN and are designing SSN and also simultaneously building Scorpion class submarine yet we want another foreign submarine why?

The only logical explanation is we are still after certain technologies which we haven't developed ourselves and haven't gotten in tech transfer from Scorpion .

Hence 75i with foreign collaboration. Russian are lagging in aip and battery tech and French have shown limits of cooperation with Scorpion.

The only logical choice is ze German! Germany has a stellar record of tech transfer as south korea is now exporting the sub it developed from learning while building German subs .

So I guess this 75i is designed to go to Germany with imphasis on aip tech and battery tech.

It will be interesting to see what Saab offers in terms of tot but I believe German will prevail.

The only surprise could come from Japan if they can get in the game and offer soryu class but they seem way to reluctant and hesitant.

So Germany it is type 214.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

Germany submarine is no longer as high end as Russian or French new models. Geemany technology has reached its limits. Moreover, Germany is reluctant to give full technology transfer. Only partial technology will be offered.

Russian electronics are not behind USA in defence. USA also uses older generation electronics as they are more reliable. Russia uses its own versions of electronics and at times can yield better results than western ones. Russian chipsets have analogous architecture which can give high speed output as the number of filters and steps are low. In defence, one doesn't need very high speed and diverse computing requirements and there is no need for battery saving technology. Hence it is acceptable to have older generation chipsets without any problems.

 

[IndianHawk]

Germany submarine is no longer as high end as Russian or French new models. Geemany technology has reached its limits. Moreover, Germany is reluctant to give full technology transfer. Only partial technology will be offered.

Russian electronics are not behind USA in defence. USA also uses older generation electronics as they are more reliable. Russia uses its own versions of electronics and at times can yield better results than western ones. Russian chipsets have analogous architecture which can give high speed output as the number of filters and steps are low. In defence, one doesn't need very high speed and diverse computing requirements and there is no need for battery saving technology. Hence it is acceptable to have older generation chipsets without any problems.

German type 214 has an Siemens aip unit where is Russian aip?

Also German have non magnetic steel hull technology which makes submarine detection by magnetic anamoli very very difficult.

And Germany has better record of tech transfer than other nations just look at south Korean submarine program. They bought German sub and now building their own based on German tech as well as are exporting to Indonesia !


Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Vijyes]

German type 214 has an Siemens aip unit where is Russian aip?

Also German have non magnetic steel hull technology which makes submarine detection by magnetic anamoli very very difficult.

And Germany has better record of tech transfer than other nations just look at south Korean submarine program. They bought German sub and now building their own based on German tech as well as are exporting to Indonesia !


Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

South Korean submarine uses Germany engine. So, no full ToT. Exporting it is like China exporting Jf17 to Pakistan with Russian engine.

Magnetic anomaly is for surfaced or snorkeling Submarine. It is not for submerged ones. Submerged submarine can't be found by magnetic property but are found by sonobuoy being dipped into waters and sonar used to scan submarine. For that matter, even copper or other metal like chromium can be used if it was so simple to escape the sensors by having non magnetic substance

 

[Knowitall]

For the p-75i project it is best we either go with France getting an extended version of scorpence submarine with vls or maybe German. Russia no they don't even having a proper AIP as of now.

 

[IndianHawk]

South Korean submarine uses Germany engine. So, no full ToT. Exporting it is like China exporting Jf17 to Pakistan with Russian engine.

Magnetic anomaly is for surfaced or snorkeling Submarine. It is not for submerged ones. Submerged submarine can't be found by magnetic property but are found by sonobuoy being dipped into waters and sonar used to scan submarine. For that matter, even copper or other metal like chromium can be used if it was so simple to escape the sensors by having non magnetic substance

Korean launched a three phase submarine building program to build 27 submarine between 1994-2029.

Under this program they continuously absorbed German tech and now are building there own subs which are still very influenced by German type 212. This is what a well planned tot looks like.

About magnetic anamoli. It's one thing to know have metals which can avoid magnetic detection and it's another thing to make a submarine hull out of such metallic alloys which can fullfil all other criteria. The tech is sensitive as Germans have not exported it yet to anyone. But the lure of 6 billion USD Indian contract might see them sharing the magic sauce.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[uoftotaku]

South Korean submarine uses Germany engine. So, no full ToT. Exporting it is like China exporting Jf17 to Pakistan with Russian engine.

Magnetic anomaly is for surfaced or snorkeling Submarine. It is not for submerged ones. Submerged submarine can't be found by magnetic property but are found by sonobuoy being dipped into waters and sonar used to scan submarine. For that matter, even copper or other metal like chromium can be used if it was so simple to escape the sensors by having non magnetic substance

South Korea has taken up full ToT of the Type 214 to the extent that their newest batch are actually improved "evolved" design more akin to the proposed Type 216 but without input from HDW themselves.

Regarding use of German engine, the engine is built under license by Hyundai based on German design. Even the Soryu uses German engine licence built by Kawasaki. This is done for simple reason that submarine engines have very specific requirements for noise and vibration which is not easy to replicate and not cost effective due to the small volume involved. Its cheaper to license build existing proven design rather than make one from scratch for 6-9 hulls. Yes there would of course be strategic implications due to End User Agreement from Germany which forbids use in war (stupid yes) but for most countries this is not a problem or they accept it.

Your knowledge of MAD sensor is flawed. Most western countries make subs with non-magnetic hulls now including Germany with their own Type 212 but the tech is barred from export, Type 214 comes with regular magnetic steel hull. Non-magnetic material exists but to get it to have the sufficient properties required for deep diving submarine use is not so straightforward as just adding chrome or copper as you describe. Otherwise submarine building wouldn't be such a black art.

Your statements reveal a deep ignorance of basic facts but you tend to speak with some false sense of superiority or authority on many matters in many threads mostly arguing with people endlessly despite no basis of reality

 

[Vijyes]

Your knowledge of MAD sensor is flawed. Most western countries make subs with non-magnetic hulls now including Germany with their own Type 212 but the tech is barred from export, Type 214 comes with regular magnetic steel hull. Non-magnetic material exists but to get it to have the sufficient properties required for deep diving submarine use is not so straightforward as just adding chrome or copper as you describe. Otherwise submarine building wouldn't be such a black

I understand what you are saying. I am only saying that submerged submarine doesn't need non magnetic property. Submergence will by itself reduce it. Secondly, if the submarine is snorkeling, then its its metal and heat will simply give away its location to aerial ASW assets via radar or IR signature. So, magnetism or not, submarine can't snorkel.

Regarding use of German engine, the engine is built under license by Hyundai based on German design. Even the Soryu uses German engine licence built by Kawasaki.

This is what I have been telling. You were arguing that Germany give Technology transfer only to end up accepting that engine is license built.

Your statements reveal a deep ignorance of basic facts but you tend to speak with some false sense of superiority or authority on many matters in many threads mostly arguing with people endlessly despite no basis of reality

I agree that I am a bit brusque but not ignorant. This is mainly because I am typing and I am not fast in it. Hence I have to cut down on number of words. But I revealed to you how Germany submarines will involve importing engine from Germany. It is you who are showing ignorance by advocating such restricted deals

 

[Shashwat]

Korea hasn't absorbed FULL TOT. They still need design consultancy from HDW for the KSS3 plus the engine and other major items are still imported. To a point where I'll say they are no better than us in Submarine design and manufacturing but their experience and speed are much better owing to overall excellent shipbuilding capability.

 

[IndianHawk]

Korea hasn't absorbed FULL TOT. They still need design consultancy from HDW for the KSS3 plus the engine and other major items are still imported. To a point where I'll say they are no better than us in Submarine design and manufacturing but their experience and speed are much better owing to overall excellent shipbuilding capability.

That is the actual achievement isn't it? To be able to design their own with even foreign consulting as opposed to our method of importing whole design.

Ironically we design SSBN and now designing SSN with Russian consulting. Yet for an SSK we have to import full design!

Which brings me back to my original point. We are after certain technologies otherwise nothing is stopping us to design a simple ssk ourselves.

So the question is what tech we are after and who can provide that.

2+2 and answer seems to be obvious ( Germany).

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Shashwat]

I wasn't contradicting their achievement, mearly correcting super bloated statements given above that they are self sufficient in making subs with everything from Sokor. That isn't the case, they are very efficient in making subs but they still need hand holding in design and items.

 

[uoftotaku]

I wasn't contradicting their achievement, mearly correcting super bloated statements given above that they are self sufficient in making subs with everything from Sokor. That isn't the case, they are very efficient in making subs but they still need hand holding in design and items.

You seem to be under the impression that ToT means that the original design holder is basically cut out of the proceedings and the buyer goes ahead and wholesale makes everything in house without any involvement of the partner. That is NOT what ToT is, what you are thinking of is reverse engineering like China does.

ToT means that components and designs are transferred to local partners in the host country which are then manufactured under a license agreement. The original design holder still receives a royalty fee for every item produced but that doesn't mean that the item is "imported". Some low volume components still may get imported if a.) the production numbers don't justify setting up a new assembly line or
b.) the host nation does not have any companies or organizations capable or willing to take up the local manufacturing.

So for example, as was mentioned before, the Koreans use a German engine (MAN to be precise) but it is not imported but rather wholly manufactured by Hyundai under license which is what ToT means.

In the specific case of SK, the only components which are still imported for Batch II hulls are as follows:
- Electric Motor for Aux Propulsion (Made by Siemens)
- Periscope (Made by L3)

For Batch III they have come up with a new original design based on the HDW 214 but stretched to accommodate an indigenous AIP and 10-cell VLS for their domestic LACM. HDW for its part is also marketing a similar design (but with German components) as the Type 216, it was offered to Australia and was considered for P-75i as well. However, the Type 216 and Batch III SK have little in common beyond the outer hull design as the Koreans have individualized almost everything on the systems side.

 

[harsh1912]

You seem to be under the impression that ToT means that the original design holder is basically cut out of the proceedings and the buyer goes ahead and wholesale makes everything in house without any involvement of the partner. That is NOT what ToT is, what you are thinking of is reverse engineering like China does.

ToT means that components and designs are transferred to local partners in the host country which are then manufactured under a license agreement. The original design holder still receives a royalty fee for every item produced but that doesn't mean that the item is "imported". Some low volume components still may get imported if a.) the production numbers don't justify setting up a new assembly line or
b.) the host nation does not have any companies or organizations capable or willing to take up the local manufacturing.

So for example, as was mentioned before, the Koreans use a German engine (MAN to be precise) but it is not imported but rather wholly manufactured by Hyundai under license which is what ToT means.

In the specific case of SK, the only components which are still imported for Batch II hulls are as follows:
- Electric Motor for Aux Propulsion (Made by Siemens)
- Periscope (Made by L3)

For Batch III they have come up with a new original design based on the HDW 214 but stretched to accommodate an indigenous AIP and 10-cell VLS for their domestic LACM. HDW for its part is also marketing a similar design (but with German components) as the Type 216, it was offered to Australia and was considered for P-75i as well. However, the Type 216 and Batch III SK have little in common beyond the outer hull design as the Koreans have individualized almost everything on the systems side.

Why are you people discussing AIP. We can buy any submarine but AIP in it will be drdo one.
As naval chief said this is last order to a foreign company and we will design our own afterwards. So we those technologies which we are not developed till now.

 

[uoftotaku]

Why are you people discussing AIP. We can buy any submarine but AIP in it will be drdo one.
As naval chief said this is last order to a foreign company and we will design our own afterwards. So we those technologies which we are not developed till now.

You do understand that AIP is a complete system of machinery which has certain space and weight requirements. It is not a One Size Fits All solution and at this point the DRDO AIP is being designed for fit into Scorpene only (since ToT for the design has taken place) and that too is still not close to actually being practical (exists only has a land based test rig).

For it to be fit into a submarine there are immense challenges to overcome which the process has only reached around halfway point. And again, that's only for Scorpene at this point. The system will require re-design and re-validation if its to be fitted into another hull form as space and power requirements as well as those for bouyancy are unique to each design.

This is by the way not a unique problem, for every single system in a submarine all over the world the same problem exists.

 

[Vijyes]

You do understand that AIP is a complete system of machinery which has certain space and weight requirements. It is not a One Size Fits All solution and at this point the DRDO AIP is being designed for fit into Scorpene only (since ToT for the design has taken place) and that too is still not close to actually being practical (exists only has a land based test rig).

Actually, the AIP technology is one size fits all. It is just that the design of the submarine has to be changed. The design doesn't involve any new technology but simply change in the shape and mechanics of the submarine to accommodate the weight and space balance.

 

[uoftotaku]

Actually, the AIP technology is one size fits all. It is just that the design of the submarine has to be changed. The design doesn't involve any new technology but simply change in the shape and mechanics of the submarine to accommodate the weight and space balance.

Depends on the type of AIP being used. For eg the German Fuel Cell based AIP is much different from the French MESMA or the Swedish Sterling engine.

AIP is a broad term encompassing many different technologies so its important to understand the differences. For eg, in fuel cell system there has to be extreme care taken to separate the hydrogen component outside the main hull. For Sterling the same problem occurs with liquid Oxygen and for Mesma its Methane.

Each country has taken different approaches to tackle the safety issues that arise from storage and handling and the systems all have different performance gains and disadvantages as a result.

DRDO AIP is being designed around Phosphoric Acid Fuel Cells which have their own unique challenges. It remains to be seen for eg if the system can be scaled up successfully to provide sufficient power for a larger boat 3000T+ displacement.

 

[Vijyes]

Depends on the type of AIP being used. For eg the German Fuel Cell based AIP is much different from the French MESMA or the Swedish Sterling engine.

AIP is a broad term encompassing many different technologies so its important to understand the differences. For eg, in fuel cell system there has to be extreme care taken to separate the hydrogen component outside the main hull. For Sterling the same problem occurs with liquid Oxygen and for Mesma its Methane.

Each country has taken different approaches to tackle the safety issues that arise from storage and handling and the systems all have different performance gains and disadvantages as a result.

DRDO AIP is being designed around Phosphoric Acid Fuel Cells which have their own unique challenges. It remains to be seen for eg if the system can be scaled up successfully to provide sufficient power for a larger boat 3000T+ displacement.

I am only speaking of DRDO fuel cells.

DRDO fuel cell is scalable. It simply requires multiple fuel cells placed in series and parallel to increase capacity. If you are thinking that entire submarine will be powered by 1 fuel cell, then you are wrong. Just like Tesla battery pack has many batteries stacked together, fuel cells are also stacked together.

Yes,care has to be taken to store hydrogen and oxygen but that is part of the fuel cell set up. The same set up can be used in various submarine design. It isn't necessary to have the AIP custom made for only certain submarine. Only thing to look is weight balance and space requirement.

 

[uoftotaku]

I am only speaking of DRDO fuel cells.

DRDO fuel cell is scalable. It simply requires multiple fuel cells placed in series and parallel to increase capacity. If you are thinking that entire submarine will be powered by 1 fuel cell, then you are wrong. Just like Tesla battery pack has many batteries stacked together, fuel cells are also stacked together.

Yes,care has to be taken to store hydrogen and oxygen but that is part of the fuel cell set up. The same set up can be used in various submarine design. It isn't necessary to have the AIP custom made for only certain submarine. Only thing to look is weight balance and space requirement.

Yes I am well aware of the way the system works, I work in naval field myself in engineering.

You have to think of the AIP not just as a battery or power source, it is part of a larger propulsion system. The bigger or smaller the submarine, the system in its entirety is scaled according to the performance requirements. As you so casually point out, the "only thing to look is weight balance and space requirement"....ahh but don't you know that in a submarine this small little thing is actually the single most difficult aspect to control and change?

For example, since we talk of the Scorpene in this threat, look at the differences of Scorpenes built for India, Malaysia and Spain. They are all fundamentally the "same" submarine but certain small customization has been made to both the latter examples. The result? Both the Spanish and to a smaller extent the Malaysian boats are unsafe to dive! Why? Because the small changes made have negatively affected the design buoyancy.

Our Scorpenes thankfully don't seem to be affected by this problem. However, the DRDO is being extremely careful to scale the AIP module to fit the EXACT space and weight criteria as the Mesma module for which Scorpene is already "certified". This has proven a challenge but they are working on getting over the various hurdles.

Now to take that system and scale it up or down to fit into another, unrelated submarine design is not so straightforward. Weight and balance is one thing, another is the power requirement. Hydrodynamics is a funny science, the required power for a 3000T boat to achieve say 15kn when compared to a 2000T boat is not proportional. Now we are not entirely aware of the kind of power density that DRDO is able to achieve in its system but when I speak of scale-ability that power density becomes important.

For eg, if a new larger P-75i submarine of lets say 3500T is chosen, and lets say theoretically it would require 10mW to achieve 15kn underwater, based on the power density per cell, the DRDO AIP module has to have X number for cells to achieve 10mW continuous output. Now, if the density is too low (relatively speaking) then the number of cells required may exceed the constraints of space and weight on board beyond the buoyancy limit. Result: back to the drawing board. So its not very straightforward.

Again, I do repeat...if submarine building was so easy, we wouldn't be going around looking ToT partners until this day and the few companies which hold onto the secrets of design would be nothing special.

 

[tharun]

This P75I must be last submarine class that procured from other country.
For future submarines..
We need is a good AIP solution and most of the sensors either can be sourced or
home made.
Most importantly Lithium battery
Coming to AIP there are two questions that must be answered.
1.Do we need a PEM solution which needs oxygen and hydrogen on board.
We can generate hydrogen on board via chemical reaction but need to carry oxygen in liquid form.
2.Or a stirling engines which only needs oxygen that can be carried in liquid form.

We need to work on chemical reaction that generates oxygen on board rather than carrying in liquid form.

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk