Canada Navy Canada SSK program

[DAVEBLOGGINS]

Pondering the South Korean decision to build the KSS-III submarine of their own design

Thinking in general about the South Korean vs TKMS (German/Norwegian) proposal, I note the KSS-II class submarine of Korea was a German Type-214 class submarine, built in South Korea.

Now that I have been digging through the press, learning a bit more about submarine lineage of the South Korean KSS-III batch-2 (and the German TKMS Type-212CD), I note for the KSS-III batch-1, 2 and eventually batch-3, South Korea has decided to domestically design and build these sumarines. I am asking myself, is there more than just 'domestic build benefits' to the South Korean decision? Could it also be design aspects of the Type-214 (ie South Korean KSS-II) that lead Korea to decide it was better off to both design and build its own superior class of submarine?

So in regards to the Type-214 (ie KSS-II) according to a National Interest blog, there were issues with the Type-214 class. I quote:



Further Navelnews goes on to report:



Despite all of that I note Nationalinterest article notes the issues with the Type-214 have been addressed where the https://nationalinterest.org article concludes with:


Still - it does make me wonder if the German export submarine Type-214 having issues, were a factor in South Korea going its own way with the KSS-III batch-1 (which is operational) , which they then improved on with the under construction KSS-III-batch-2?

Having typed that, India has very recently selected the German Type-214 class submarine, where I have read conflicting reports re:the Indian customization. Some articles have suggested the India version of the Type-214 will have a stretched hull with a larger displacement. I don't know if that accurate. Likely the Indian Type-214 variant will have other improvements to address issues other navies found with the Type-214.

I am obviously curious to learn/read more about the South Korean KSS-III-batch-2 which owes its lineage to the KSS-II (German Type-214).

Hello "oldcpu". Personally, in my own opinion (IMOO), I am disappointed Canada chose not to pursue the French Short-Fin Barracuda Block 1A design that Australia "Threw away" in favour of the US/UK nuclear program. Having said that, the TKMS Type 212 CD-E (Expedition) or the HDW Type 216 (paper design) classes would also be worthy of at least "some" interest from Canada. Whichever design Canada chooses, it has to be done very quickly to fit into PM Carney's "mega" projects before the end of 2025!!! We cannot "dilly-dally" around any longer for the military health of the Country or the RCN!!!!!!!

 

[oldcpu]

Personally, in my own opinion (IMOO), I am disappointed Canada chose not to pursue the French Short-Fin Barracuda Block 1A design that Australia "Threw away" in favour of the US/UK nuclear program. Having said that, the TKMS Type 212 CD-E (Expedition) or the HDW Type 216 (paper design) classes would also be worthy of at least "some" interest from Canada. Whichever design Canada chooses, it has to be done very quickly to fit into PM Carney's "mega" projects before the end of 2025!!!

@DAVEBLOGGINS.

I have some thoughts (my own opinion) on this, where in summary the reason for the current short list is to reduce development cost/risk and to have a superior delivery schedule.

TKMS:

I don't think the Type-212CD E nor the Type-216 were ever proposed to Canada (in addition to Type-212 CD) - but perhaps as time goes buy we will learn more. I suppose its possible TKMS proposed all three and let Canada decide which to short list, either Type-212CD, Type-212CD E or the Type-216. I personally doubt that. I speculate TKMS decided to go with only the one proposal.

There is a LOT of work required to prepare a proposal of such magnitude, so I speculate TKMS only proposed one class, the Type-212CD. To propose 3 different possibilities with no guarantees would be an expensive proposition for TKMS. Maybe as months go by we will learn more about the procurement history.

Also, with regards to the TKMS Type-212 CD E and the Type-216. Both are these are paper designs, and it reads like the Canadian navy did not want that, which would likely have a price tag including cost overruns due to development - where possibly, given issues with the Victoria class in the beginning, the Canadian Navy did not want a repeat of that.

French Naval Group

As for France, I think the France's Naval Group likely did offer a variant of the Barracuda or Scorpène class, but I have not (yet) read anything official there. I did read the French Naval group made an offer of a some submarine, so that is likely a good guess.

While I note your comments re: the French Short-Fin Barracuda Block 1A and earlier comments re: TKMS Type-216, I can only surmise they were lacking in one or more of the CPSP criteria. My suspicion is both TKMS Type-216 and the French Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A may have scored lower in evaluation due to their procurements elsewhere being less mature.

I think the Netherlands ordered the Backsword Barrcua, and not the Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A. Further the Netherlands contract was only signed around 1 year ago, so the program is very very far behind in development in comparison to that of the TKMS Type-212CD and the KSS-III-batch-2.

Other aspects

Further, I believe schedule was a key consideration.

I note eurasiantimes has some words on the five companies that initially proposed submarines to Canada, with some quotes from the article, where it notes what were the remaining three companies:

Five industrial designs were considered before the final decision was made. The other designs in the fray were Saab’s oceanic/extended-range A26, Navantia’s S-80 Plus, and Naval Group’s Blackfin Barracuda.

According to the official statement published by the Canadian government, the decision was based on an evaluation of the CPSP criteria, which included the new submarine flotilla’s construction and delivery schedules.

I put the words "delivery schedule" in bold. This is my speculation, and I speculate that schedule and development risk were big factors in the decision to short list to only KSS-III-batch-2 and TKMS Type-212CD.