Business case JFS: short addition

Remembered the new project proposal I called: Joint Future Submarine (JFS)? A project to replace the current Dutch Walrus-class submarines with new ones in a joint cooperative program… because the Dutch lost their full capabilities to deliver new submarines themselves.

class_walrus2_2

 

Joint – A submarine is a strategic asset important for the whole defence force. It will gather intelligence over sea, and over land, it will insert and extract Special Forces, it will influence warfare on land with land-attack missiles and act as a (satellite) communication relay, between forward / expeditionary positioned land and air forces, if necessary.

Future – this one should be clear, a submarine design must be compatible for future uses. Just like the Walrus class we may expect them to operate for long lifetime. They must be built in a modular way to insert future technology at the moment not even available.

Submarine – yes ofcourse, the vessel is a submarine. They will be of the non-nuclear type. But must be fitted with Air Independent Propulsion systems. The type, just as the Walrus class should be able to operate independently on long ranges and without any direct support vessels.

In short just look at the new Kockums A26 propsal from Sweden’s Saab Group!

download (1) kockums_a26_468

Advertenties

4 gedachten over “Business case JFS: short addition

    1. dutchforce21 Berichtauteur

      Hi Jurriën, I have had numerous talks with specialists from both Dutch and Swedish navy, Kockums, FHM and Swedish navy. The need in the first place for the Netherlands is that they see a necessary for long range patrols for a bigger crew. That’s a need that not always can be addressed by computing and automation of things. The “specialists” say that it should be possible for the modular designed A26 concept to fit another section which increases fuel capacity and birthing places. Without loss of maneuverability and acoustics. So if the RNLN wants a bigger submarine than that will be possible at a modest price I presume.
      Let TNO and DMO research this. I am convinced that Saab Kockums can deliver this for a much better price and under more equal conditions than that any other contender could. But in the end that should be figured out by a open tender/comparison without any political prefixes like is happening with the JSF at the moment (for almost 10 years now). This will mean that the RNLN should stop focussing mostly on the Norway deal which will, in the end mean we buy a German sub from the TKMS who proven to be untrustworthy to other countries. The one thing they want is money.

      Remember the whole fuss about Swedish A26 subs? The Swedish government had a deal inked with Kockums already and then the German gigant TKMS wanted to get more money out of it.. prices for the two A26 where at € 175 million a piece, but the Germans sell their boats for at least 450 – 800 depending on size… That was clearly not enough.
      But industry shouldn’t be leading: NO the benefit of the people should come first. So industry should built systems as affordable as can be. To deliver effective but affordable military capabilities.
      So yes, the proposed A26 design is capable of Ocean long range patrols on its own power. But additional crewing capabilities should be possible.

  1. Harald

    The A26 has a tonnage of 1800 ton, the Dutch Walrus class has a tonnage of 3000 ton.
    A A26 with a extra section is still smaller the Walrus class.
    Why not stick with the desgin from de Walrus class en retrofit the interieur or add a little extra section for AIP and a VLS en call it a Walrus NG class ?
    A partnership between the Dutch Navy, DMO, NEVESBU, TNO, Damen, Imtech, the skills are still in the Netherlands.

    1. dutchforce21 Berichtauteur

      Hi harald, I know all things you are saying, but I also know that to think outside the box you have too leave all prejudged thing and move on to look at all alternatives with a neutral stance. The things you are saying at the same time are the most dangerous. Just like with the JSF, they claim things about the 4th and 5th generation, and state that as the total truth. But are those arguments realy true? They claim they are.. (for example fighter pilots) but they for a fact have never proved it, because al “qualities” of the JSF, haven’t been proven jet. The same for a submarine replacement program. If you at the beginning asume that certain things MUST be…. without looking at ALL alternative options, then you in the end will get what you want… at all cost. Why… if Saab Kockums and the Swedish navy claim that the A26 design will be able to operate in the way the RNLN want it to operate… shouldn’t it be trough? The only thing that the RNLN demand is that it will be able to operate with an enlarged crew because that’s in their experience a hard demand. Well and I agree on that demand, that’s also one thing that the Dutch experience can contribute to a Swedish Ocean going submarine isn’t it?

      So let’s partner up with them as soon as possible so “we” convince the Swedes to enlarge the design somehow… and build the vessels als a joint modular vessel.

      And another thing, shouldn’t it be a strange decission to use the Walrus class as the basic design… and not using a new clean sheet design? With the JSF they convinced both industry and government that a regenerated Gripen was an OLD aircraft, and not capable to perform the 5th generation demands… With the Armored Wheeled vehicle of the Dutch Land Forces it was the same….. The Boxer was the only option because it was a clean sheet design… At that time RDM wanted to build the Mowag Piranha IV/V for the Netherlands and offered it unsoliciated. And we all know how that went… the Piranha was an old design not fit for the incredible demands, the Boxer would be…. including weight, protection etc. Just like the JSF, total bullshit!

Geef een reactie

Vul je gegevens in of klik op een icoon om in te loggen.

WordPress.com logo

Je reageert onder je WordPress.com account. Log uit / Bijwerken )

Twitter-afbeelding

Je reageert onder je Twitter account. Log uit / Bijwerken )

Facebook foto

Je reageert onder je Facebook account. Log uit / Bijwerken )

Google+ photo

Je reageert onder je Google+ account. Log uit / Bijwerken )

Verbinden met %s