Type 216: Silver lining for India's much delayed P-75I project

[DMLA]

There had been reports from 2010 of IN officials in consultation with HDW guys on a larger type 214 with vertical missile bay as well as AIP and increased sea legs and endurance. It would seem that HDW has obliged with the new Type 216 design drawing from the 212/214 design. This design clearly outclasses anything else out there available for the IN at this stage. RUBIN and DCNS will have to do some major design work and bring out new designs to compete. This clearly explains the delay in RFP for P-75I (IN must have been waiting for the promised designs). This also explains the recent reports of increasing the scorpene numbers to 9 as a way of keeping the french happy and OUT of P-75I for good. It should now be a fight b/w S-80 and Type 216!

..........................................................

Description

The German shipyard HDW has released information about a proposed conventional propulsion long-range submarine project, called Type 216. Based on the Type 214, the Type 216 is designed specifically to meet the "larger conventional submarine" needs of countries like Australia, India and Canada.

Design

Double hull design.
Type 216 could be equipped with an air independent propulsion system, giving it the same kind of ability as a nuclear submarine: Staying underwater for weeks to reach crisis area, such as the Strait of Malacca. Like an SSN It would have the ability to launch cruise missiles, to deploy special forces with their underwater delivery vehicle and even unmanned underwater vehicles. The class is designed to be extremely quiet due to its propulsion system and through the use of sound absorbing coating on the hull.
Weapons

1. 6x 533 mm torpedo tubes (to deploy torpedoes, anti-ship missiles or mines)
2. Vertical Launch System (2.5 m diameter to deploy cruise missiles or UUV)
3. Swimmer Delivery Vehicle (SDV) to deploy special forces

Propulsion
Diesel / Electric. Optional air independent propulsion system.

Type
Conventional Submarine (SSK)
Crew
33 (extra accomodations for Special Forces)
Performance
Range: 10,400 nm @ 10 kts
Endurance: 80 days

Displacement
~4,000 tons
Engines
Diesel Electric with AIP
Dimensions
Length: 89 m
Breadth: 8.1 m
Maximum Draft: 6.6 m

The type U216 can also be fitted with the IDAS system and the TRIPLE-M/MURAENA system.

source: navyrecognition.com

..........................................................

It would be interesting to see if DCNS fights back with SMX-25 concept or an expanded scorpene design with two decks taking this development seriously! Personally, I feel 216 fits the IN requirements perfectly and we should look at a fleet of 9-12 subs at the minimum with two shipyards doing simultaneous construction.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

But i want amur S 1000 !!!
It will be a big deal
Russian friends will give us anything we wanted

 

[angeldemon_007]

@ DMLA
What is the maximum depth ?
I mean for U214 its 400m which is the maximum depth among all the subs offered to India under P75I. I think it will be close to what SSN dives in...a SSK with maximum diving depth close to an SSN will make it virtually untraceable...

But i want amur S 1000 !!!
It will be a big deal
Russian friends will give us anything we wanted

Yeah but German subs are the best and they will also give whatever you want considering German naval shipyards are at their all time low and desperately needs orders...

French are offering Germans are tie-up but i think either we should join this or we ask Germans to join us instead French. Germans and French were never friends...

 

[DMLA]

Being double hulled and a much larger submarine, I would expect that the maximum diving depth should be higher. However, the value has not been divulged and therefore I am not sure how much it would be. Since the product is still in design stage, I would expect that they may take in inputs from the user (IN) before the final design of the submarine is fixed.

 

[sancho]

Being double hulled and a much larger submarine, I would expect that the maximum diving depth should be higher. However, the value has not been divulged and therefore I am not sure how much it would be. Since the product is still in design stage, I would expect that they may take in inputs from the user (IN) before the final design of the submarine is fixed.

The problem is, that this would delay the competition too much and IN already evaluated subs that are available. Considering this one would mean, other vendors would provide future studies to a new competition again and that's not what IN needs at the moment with the sub fleet as the main problem!
If the Germans can integrate the vertical launchers to their U214 offer, they clearly have the best sub for India, otherwise I see a follow order of more capable Scorpens coming in (with MESMA AIP and hopefully Scalp cruise missiles).
Another great possibility would be, if the Germans offer a co-development of the U216 to India, combined with a procurement of U214 beforehand. Would be a great chance, they could produce the U214 in fast track, we get more industrial participation and the licence production line in India.

 

[DMLA]

The problem is, that this would delay the competition too much and IN already evaluated subs that are available. Considering this one would mean, other vendors would provide future studies to a new competition again and that's not what IN needs at the moment with the sub fleet as the main problem!
If the Germans can integrate the vertical launchers to their U214 offer, they clearly have the best sub for India, otherwise I see a follow order of more capable Scorpens coming in (with MESMA AIP and hopefully Scalp cruise missiles).
Another great possibility would be, if the Germans offer a co-development of the U216 to India, combined with a procurement of U214 beforehand. Would be a great chance, they could produce the U214 in fast track, we get more industrial participation and the licence production line in India.

First there have been no evaluations (officially). That will happen only when the RFP's have been sent out and responses obtained followed by official evaluation. IN was not happy with any of the designs (as per initial evaluation of RFI responses as you mentioned). IN has clearly articulated a bigger design with improved firepower (read brahmos/ nirbhay VLS) and AIP. 2010 DEFEXPO saw IN in consultations with both Rubin and HDW that it wants a bigger design with ocean going capabilities. India is not happy with the 214 and amur/S-80/1000 therefore the clear articulation in HDW release that this is probably in response to IN requirements. The delay in P-75I has been the non-conformance with IN requirements of all the designs proposed in the initial RFI (and that's why RFP's were not sent out!). To counter the delay, a possible increase in the P-75 order (scorpene) is likely as is observed from recent reports from IN and Mazgaon.

Edit: In a way if IN select 216, it would be as good as co-development as all subs will be made in India and it would probably remain the largest operator as well. They will ofcourse not share specific technologies with us as expected.

 

[zer_0]

are we going for type 216 submarine????

 

[angeldemon_007]

The problem is, that this would delay the competition too much and IN already evaluated subs that are available.

IN has also evaluated new Swedish A26 sub which is considered to be very good. Some people are also talking that French has also offered SMX-25...
This deal is not happening any time soon. Its most likely to be signed by 2014.

 

[Tumba]

But i want amur S 1000 !!!
It will be a big deal
Russian friends will give us anything we wanted

and the delay will be in decades ... bro yes they will give us best they have but looking back at thr record ... delay for 5-10 years is expected so better go for speedy delivery ... that is a must as chinese doesnt seem to interested in peace ...

 

[araz]

" things that come to mind is that this is a new concept which will need development. Will the IN fork the money for its development? Secondly learning from the greek experience with U 214s if this baby has teething problems as well, how will that issue be resolved. If there are tried and trusted designs on the market, I guess IN will go for those rather than a paper design.
I am no Sub expert so feel free to contradict and teach me.
Araz

 

[Tumba]

" things that come to mind is that this is a new concept which will need development. Will the IN fork the money for its development? Secondly learning from the greek experience with U 214s if this baby has teething problems as well, how will that issue be resolved. If there are tried and trusted designs on the market, I guess IN will go for those rather than a paper design.
I am no Sub expert so feel free to contradict and teach me.
Araz

wats new here all the tech is right now in production .... wonder why you think IN will have to fund the research ... only think IN will have to do is get the German version not the export version ... and anyway we have good experience with scorpion // so that will help us to modify this baby too if Germans dont give us the prime version ...

 

[araz]

The technology has never been in doubt, but when you mix and match , sometimes there are problems. Are you telling me that the Germans use a boat similar to 216? If that is the case then i t is a tried and tested platform,, otherwise it will need to be seen how the displacement and COG of the boat changes with the additions and how it impacts on the navigation of the boat.
I am not sure what you mean by "The scorpion boats". If you are referring to U209s they have already undergone refitting. If you are talking of Scorpene class, you have not received them yet.!! So you cant have any experience of them when you have not received them.
I dont want to waste my time spamming. i asked a very simple question. Would be obliged if I could have a simple answer.
Regards
Araz

 

[DMLA]

" things that come to mind is that this is a new concept which will need development. Will the IN fork the money for its development? Secondly learning from the greek experience with U 214s if this baby has teething problems as well, how will that issue be resolved. If there are tried and trusted designs on the market, I guess IN will go for those rather than a paper design.
I am no Sub expert so feel free to contradict and teach me.
Araz

U 216 derives heavily from 212. There are no major redesign as far as the sub shape is concerned. The major modification is the addition of 2 new hull sections (forward and aft of the tower) and new thruster propellers for littoral operations. Ofcourse it is a new design and will require extensive testing. So will ANY OTHER SUB IN QUESTION. All other options including those from DCNS and Rubin are in design stage and therefore this point is moot anyway. If IN really wanted a quick fix it would have already ordered Amur's or 214's by now! But the IN's final RFI will call for a boat with VLS unit, fuel cell AIP and long range capabilities which current crop of subs do not provide (As was indicated in reports from the previous DEFEXPO). Hence I am sure IN is more than happy to pay for the development (specially considering Australia showing interest as well). The fact that the plan outlay as per media reports is close to $2 billion per sub clearly points us to that conclusion. IN has stated that RFP is still 2 years away indicating the willingness on part of IN to wait.

I predict a faceoff between U-216 and S-80 and possibly a Amur derivative if Russians are too keen (as IN requires minimum 2 designs fitting its needs for competitive bidding required by DAP). May the best sub win.... though my bets are on the 216 ofcourse!

 

[DMLA]

Note the following was reported thorugh German military & defense magazine "Strategie und Technik" ( November 2011 issue):

Typ 216 class
89, 00 meters long
Speed: >20kn
8, 10 meters in diameter
3.000t Deplacement
2 Decks, 10 cabins with up to 6 bunks
80 days at sea
Extra space for Special Forces, divers, teaching staff, Engineers
Crew: 33
The submarine has a “Vertical Multi-Purpose Lock” for UUV’s. mines, cruise missiles, navy divers and Special forces or as extra space for cargo or fuel. The type U216 can also be fitted with the IDAS system and the TRIPLE-M/MURAENA system.

(source: militaryphotos)

air-defence forum provides some additional information on the TRIPE-M/MURAENA systems:

...................................................

The modular-purpose mast developed by TRIPLE M GABLER Maschinenbau IS Designed to enable the subamrine To Be fleible more and more easiliy Equipped to Meet a wide range of new challenges. The payload modules Can Be Exchanged Rapidly, Providing the boat with task-specific equipment and capabilities to Enhance covert reconnaissance with aerial support, Improve self-defense and soft or down-scaled reaction in a crisis situation or to expand electronic COMINT Abilities. The open, modular system Ensures That TRIPLE M continues to Will Provide A Suitable Platform for Further components in the future.

TRIPLE M is a two-course hoistable mast with a pressure-proof container to Accommodate under the payload system, fully protected Against water and pressure. The system employed at Can Be periscope depth, ie the submarine Does not Have To Completely rise to the surface, Which Would it exposes to a Much Greater Risk of detection. The Various sensor or effector modules Can All Be fully operated from the submarine's CIC.
The different payload components and extend the Increase Already Remarkable Abilities and versatility of a modern submarine. Key components of the system and TRIPLE M Individual modules are Being Developed in close cooperation with Leading names in the German armament and Industry Sector with the German Office for Military Technology and Procurement (BWB).

The VOLAN (covert reconnaissance Naval Airborne Optical System Adapted) Provides the submarine with a bird's eye view of events. A fully automatic Launching catapult developed by GABLER Maschinenbau Enable the submarine to launch a number of and Operate UAVs to Perform covert airborne reconnaissance tasks. The engineering firm of Ingenieurgesellschaft Dipl.-Ing Hartmut Euer-Gesellschaft mbH (EMT) HAS Developed a UAV with foldable wings on the Basis of STI Proven ALADIN UAV for use with this system. The pressure-proof container accommodaties Launching the swivel-mounted catapult and at least Three UAVs That Can Be configured with different sensor modules for daytime or night reconnaissance missions.

To Improve self-defense capabilities and more Varied Provide a scale of reaction to a crisis situation, the RMK 30 recoilless machine gun built by Rheinmetall Munition Waffe GmbH (RWM) Can Be Used in Conjunction with the TRIPLE M system.

Quote

THE new system developed by HDW Muraena IS interesting

Muraena Is Another innovative idea for littoral warfare and counter terror IS Proposed by HDW for submarines. The System is a hoistable, mast-mounted automatic gun Designed specifically for submarines. HDW Expects to complete the system development by 2007. The unique design Enables the submarine to use lethal force Without Having to surface Therefor Maintaining the element of surprise. The hoistable mast, designed by Gabler Maschinebau, IS fitted wit a Mauser 30mm automatic gun (RMK 30x230) from Rheinmetall Waffe Munition (Mauser Werke) without Having to surface. The gun Can Be operated from periscope depth, the submarine to Remain Enabling underwater and not exposed to hostile small arms Itself, RPG or missile fire. The Gun Is accommodated in the submarine's super structure, in a pressure-tight container and hoisted Hydraulically Can Be like a snorkel. For a gun of this caliber to Be Installed On top of a mast hoistable, It Is essential for it to Be recoilless. The gun HAS Already Been Tested on a light armored vehicle.

....................................

essentially multi-use packages (recce, missiles, guns, etc) available as mast mounts to carry out different tasks.

It is interesting to note that many of the capabilities are to be derived from 212 instead of 214. I hope IN gets its hands on all the goodies. I will not mind paying as much as they want provided they give us the very best!

 

[sancho]

First there have been no evaluations (officially). That will happen only when the RFP's have been sent out and responses obtained followed by official evaluation. IN was not happy with any of the designs (as per initial evaluation of RFI responses as you mentioned). IN has clearly articulated a bigger design with improved firepower (read brahmos/ nirbhay VLS) and AIP. 2010 DEFEXPO saw IN in consultations with both Rubin and HDW that it wants a bigger design with ocean going capabilities. India is not happy with the 214 and amur/S-80/1000 therefore the clear articulation in HDW release that this is probably in response to IN requirements. The delay in P-75I has been the non-conformance with IN requirements of all the designs proposed in the initial RFI (and that's why RFP's were not sent out!). To counter the delay, a possible increase in the P-75 order (scorpene) is likely as is observed from recent reports from IN and Mazgaon.

Edit: In a way if IN select 216, it would be as good as co-development as all subs will be made in India and it would probably remain the largest operator as well. They will ofcourse not share specific technologies with us as expected.

That's not correct mate, the intial RFI was send out in 2008 and several companies responded and even made presentations for IN, so they already have data to evaluate, based on the U214, Scorpene, S1000, Amur and probably the S80 subs:

domain-b.com : Indian Navy issues RFIs for six next generation submarines

As you can see the RFI mainly focused on AIP but also asked for land attack capability, which doesn't necessarily mean Brahmos VLS, but includes Cruise Missiles launched through the torpedo tubes as well. The only subs that most likely can offer this, will be the Amur class and the Scorpene, while the German and Spanish sub will have to get a Cruise Missle first.
Brahmos VLS requires an extra module and therfor increased size of the sub and it was already reported that neither the Amur, nor the Scorpene class can have them and an AIP propulsion modul at the same time, because it would stretch the sub too far. There was no official statement from the Germans though and the U216 concept seems to be a solution for international customers with such requirements, since it is on offer for several countries, not only India:

U-boats may be on navy's shopping list - National News - National - General - The Canberra Times


It is estimated that Australia wants to induct 12 new subs for a cost of up to €19 billion Euros! I would love to see such a sub for IN, but at the moment I see the French in a better position.

If IN really wanted a quick fix it would have already ordered Amur's or 214's by now!

They couldn't, because the Amur is still not fully developed especially the AIP propulsion, even the Scorpene is integrationg AIP right now and the S1000 as well as S80 are not even available as diesel - electric subs so far. The U214 would have been the only option, for a fast procurement, so no competition would have been possible and if they wanted the AIP propulsion so bad, they would have chosen the U214 even in the first competition.
With the current infos, only Scorpene, U214 and Amur class subs are really interesting, because they are more or less available and developed. The S80 is still in a very early stage, which will make it very difficult to build them under licence in India, especially since the Spanish have not the experience in the Sub development like the Germans, French and Russians.

" things that come to mind is that this is a new concept which will need development. Will the IN fork the money for its development? Secondly learning from the greek experience with U 214s if this baby has teething problems as well, how will that issue be resolved. If there are tried and trusted designs on the market, I guess IN will go for those rather than a paper design.
I am no Sub expert so feel free to contradict and teach me.
Araz

The Greek had issues with their upgraded U209 subs, that was cut in half, streched with another module for the AIP propulsion and put together again, not with the new subs. Not to forget that they mainly made up the issues to delay the payment of the subs, since they couldn't afford them anymore. The U214 sub is widely exported and no other country reported such issues.
Wrt your question, if we could be a partner in the development and production of the U216 subs, there should be no doubt that MoD/IN would fund some parts of the delopment, since it would be a similar offer like Brahmos, MRTA or FGFA. We wouldn't be a sole export customer anymore, but a partner that would be involved in the development from the start, according to INs requirements. The Germans would even have an advantage then, since they can base the development on their proven U212/214 designs, which makes the development easier, while the Russians just get their Amur class which is comparable to the U214 and a further development would need way more time. The French initially offered Pakistan navy a new class of sub (Marlin) too, but that development was stopped as far as I know. However, they could easily offer IN the development of the Marlin class, with participation of Mazgoan Docks, since that sub is based on the Scorpene class anyway.
No matter how, a co-development would require co-funding from our side too and I don't see why IN would reject it, when the benefits are worth it, be it from the operational side, as well as the industrial side.