TR Naval Programs

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,070
Reactions
122 15,003
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Well! If you check it out, the price of each S80 is near 1 billion Euros. That means 4billion Euros for four S80s. (It was estimated that in 2012 the cost of 4 subs to be around 2.2 billion Euros)
Our 6 Reis class ships’ total cost, at the time of contract, was to be 2.06 billion Euros. So there is a European product cost base saving, Navantia is thinking about. Yes! The S80 is bigger and may contain newer and more expensive technologies. But producing the subs in Turkey will prove to be a big cost saving exercise.
BAE Systems is also involved in manufacturing and supplying the pressure hull domes from its shipyard in Barrow UK adding to the cost.
As Turkish Reis Class AIP subs are being built entirely in Turkiye with most of it’s sub components being sourced locally; Probably apart from the Siemens BZM PEM unit (Proton Exchange Membrane) and the Austrian hull steel -soon to be of Turkish origin - , the submarines can be classed as of indigenous origin. This means we have means and an eco-system to build high tech submarines at a reasonable cost base to make them competitive in world markets. That is a big advantage for us and for a partner like Navantia!

The S80 Plus is as indigenous as it can get for the Spanish. Most of its critical systems are local. The electric motors and generators used in its propulsion system are made by Gamesa Electric of Spain. The diesel engines are MTU licensed production by Navantia in Cartagena Spain.


1699875648810.png

1699875681525.png

1699875735639.png


The partnership with Navantia on S80, could be a short track to Milden!
 
Last edited:

Quasar

Contributor
The Post Deleter
Messages
586
Reactions
34 2,593
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Well! If you check it out, the price of each S80 is near 1 billion Euros. That means 4billion Euros for four S80s. (It was estimated that in 2012 the cost of 4 subs to be around 2.2 billion Euros)
Our 6 Reis class ships’ total cost, at the time of contract, was to be 2.06 billion Euros. So there is a European product cost base saving, Navantia is thinking about. Yes! The S80 is bigger and may contain newer and more expensive technologies. But producing the subs in Turkey will prove to be a big cost saving exercise.
BAE Systems is also involved in manufacturing and supplying the pressure hull domes from its shipyard in Barrow UK adding to the cost.
As Turkish Reis Class AIP subs are being built entirely in Turkiye with most of it’s sub components being sourced locally; Probably apart from the Siemens BZM PEM unit (Proton Exchange Membrane) and the Austrian hull steel -soon to be of Turkish origin - , the submarines can be classed as of indigenous origin. This means we have means and an eco-system to build high tech submarines at a reasonable cost base to make them competitive in world markets. That is a big advantage for us and for a partner like Navantia!

The S80 Plus is as indigenous as it can get for the Spanish. Most of its critical systems are local. The electric motors and generators used in its propulsion system are made by Gamesa Electric of Spain. The diesel engines are MTU licensed production by Navantia in Cartagena Spain.


View attachment 62912
View attachment 62913
View attachment 62914

The partnership with Navantia on S80, could be a short track to Milden!
guess they aslo have combat managment system by Lockheed Martin and some sonars from Atlas. after comparing our type 214 with South Korean subs and Spanish S 80 it shows how much we have achieved at nationalizing vital sub systems
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,276
Reactions
68 7,952
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
guess they aslo have combat managment system by Lockheed Martin and some sonars from Atlas. after comparing our type 214 with South Korean subs and Spanish S 80 it shows how much we have achieved at nationalizing vital sub systems

Doesn't Turkish Type 214 boats also use ISUS 90-72 integrated sensors and CMS from Atlas? Or were they replaced by CMS Muren?
 

Quasar

Contributor
The Post Deleter
Messages
586
Reactions
34 2,593
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Doesn't Turkish Type 214 boats also use ISUS 90-72 integrated sensors and CMS from Atlas? Or were they replaced by CMS Muren?
it is an eventuality There is only one guy who can give an aswer to this question @Anmdt but Reis class is still an ongoing programme
What I mean by eventuality is;
logic dictates that integrating AKYA, sub ATMACA and GEZGIN to a foreign Combat management system should be not very desirable for the Navy anymore
 
Last edited:

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,414
Reactions
28 4,256
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
( i asked my clever friend)

The AIP BEST system of Spanish S80 submarines, known as the AIP BEST system, offers several advantages over the AIP system of German 214 submarines. Here are the pros of the AIP system of Spanish S80 submarines:

The AIP BEST system of Spanish S80 submarines uses bioethanol as a fuel source for air-independent propulsion. This technology provides some advantages over other AIP systems.
The use of bioethanol as a fuel source enhances the submarines' ability to avoid vulnerability when snorkeling, allowing for longer periods of submerged operation.
The AIP BEST system generates electrical power from a fuel cell, which is a novel and efficient method of propulsion.

On the other hand, the AIP system of German 214 submarines has its own set of advantages and disadvantages when compared to the AIP system of Spanish S80 submarines. Here are the cons of the AIP system of German 214 submarines in comparison to Spanish S80 submarines:

The AIP system of German 214 submarines uses two different technologies: Fuel Cell and Stirling. While these technologies have their benefits, they may not offer the same level of efficiency and performance as the AIP BEST system of Spanish S80 submarines.
The use of two different technologies in the AIP system of German 214 submarines may introduce additional complexity and maintenance requirements.
It is important to note that the specific pros and cons of the AIP system of German 214 submarines compared to Spanish S80 submarines may vary depending on the specific operational requirements and capabilities of each submarine class.

Overall, both the AIP system of Spanish S80 submarines and the AIP system of German 214 submarines have their own strengths and weaknesses, and the choice between them would depend on various factors such as operational requirements, technological preferences, and cost considerations.

The cons of the AIP system of Spanish S80 submarines compared to the AIP system of German 214 submarines are:

The main problem with the S80 design was the issue of buoyancy, specifically related to the weight of the combat system and the addition of heavy, complex ethanol. This issue led to the cancellation of the AIP system for the first two submarines.
Another drawback of the S80 submarines is that they have only one diesel engine, which means they do not have a real backup system. While they can use the AIP system to propel the ship, it does not provide the same level of redundancy as having multiple diesel engines.

The pros of the AIP system of German 214 submarines compared to the AIP system of Spanish S80 submarines are:

The AIP system of German 214 submarines uses two different technologies: Fuel Cell and Stirling. These technologies offer advantages such as longer submerged operation and increased efficiency compared to traditional diesel-electric systems.
The Fuel Cell technology used in the AIP system of German 214 submarines utilizes Siemens polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) hydrogen fuel cells, which provide a novel and efficient method of propulsion.
The Stirling technology, which is a closed-cycle heat engine, is also used in the AIP system of German 214 submarines. This technology generates power using a Stirling engine, further enhancing the submarines' performance.

It is important to note that the specific pros and cons of the AIP systems may vary depending on the operational requirements and capabilities of each submarine class. The choice between the AIP system of Spanish S80 submarines and the AIP system of German 214 submarines would depend on various factors such as operational requirements, technological preferences, and cost considerations.
 

Lool

Experienced member
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
2,739
Reactions
11 4,760
Nation of residence
Albania
Nation of origin
Albania
You wanted some details, DefenceTurkey got you some:


View attachment 62909

View attachment 62910

Yeah bro, we are getting S80:



There goes our first electric motor that is suitable for UUVs / midget submarines. This shall be noted, it is quite primitive compared to Permasyn by SINAVY (Siemens Navy). But it is water-cooled, and sufficiently quite (for its size) and compared the platform it will be deployed with.
Does that mean that Turkey will soon have its own national engines to power their own submarines?
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,227
Solutions
2
Reactions
100 23,361
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Doesn't Turkish Type 214 boats also use ISUS 90-72 integrated sensors and CMS from Atlas? Or were they replaced by CMS Muren?
It is a little confusing but some parts of the CMS is provided by Havelsan (alongside with some other systems related or connected to the CMS). Müren and SEDA projects were commenced later, so likely Havelsan uses some part of these CMS with ISUS.

Does that mean that Turkey will soon have its own national engines to power their own submarines?
Already got one, though it is tiny, it is sufficient to power UUV, LUUVs, Midget submarines, SDV, etc.

my damaged brain, is wondering if this little baby can be deployed by TCG Anadolu :cool:
Technically yes, but not as is, it is primarily a test submarine likely not complying with all military certifications.
I really like what I'm seeing, though I'm curious about placement of torpedoes, it looks like it is right were crew is shown in the diagram. Can't wait to see the finished product.

Btw, you really think we're getting S80? Engine is great news and can be tied to S80, if we develop a bigger version I guess, but that would suggest there is a major problem somewhere either Reis project or something changed with MİLDEN, wouldn't it?
The torpedoes lie on top of the pressure hull (outside, between the fairing and pressure hull). I even think, with little modification and additional buoyancy it can be made to carry 2 HWT. (since torpedoes are nearly self buoyant).
it is an eventuality There is only one guy who can give an aswer to this question @Anmdt but Reis class is still an ongoing programme
What I mean by eventuality is;
logic dictates that integrating AKYA, sub ATMACA and GEZGIN to a foreign Combat management system should be not very desirable for the Navy anymore
I believe, not in short term but in near future TN would like to introduce Sub-Atmaca and AKYA in Reis Class.
Denizaltı itki sistemi should be the motor used in DATUM's mini submarine. Though it is depicted to be large (because of the 3D model preference in the video), it should be occupying little weight and volume (assuming this based on approximated installed power and torque requirement of the corresponding mini sub).
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,227
Solutions
2
Reactions
100 23,361
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Well! If you check it out, the price of each S80 is near 1 billion Euros. That means 4billion Euros for four S80s. (It was estimated that in 2012 the cost of 4 subs to be around 2.2 billion Euros)
Our 6 Reis class ships’ total cost, at the time of contract, was to be 2.06 billion Euros. So there is a European product cost base saving, Navantia is thinking about. Yes! The S80 is bigger and may contain newer and more expensive technologies. But producing the subs in Turkey will prove to be a big cost saving exercise.
BAE Systems is also involved in manufacturing and supplying the pressure hull domes from its shipyard in Barrow UK adding to the cost.
As Turkish Reis Class AIP subs are being built entirely in Turkiye with most of it’s sub components being sourced locally; Probably apart from the Siemens BZM PEM unit (Proton Exchange Membrane) and the Austrian hull steel -soon to be of Turkish origin - , the submarines can be classed as of indigenous origin. This means we have means and an eco-system to build high tech submarines at a reasonable cost base to make them competitive in world markets. That is a big advantage for us and for a partner like Navantia!

The S80 Plus is as indigenous as it can get for the Spanish. Most of its critical systems are local. The electric motors and generators used in its propulsion system are made by Gamesa Electric of Spain. The diesel engines are MTU licensed production by Navantia in Cartagena Spain.


View attachment 62912
View attachment 62913
View attachment 62914

The partnership with Navantia on S80, could be a short track to Milden!
The only form that can go through is a partnership. It also fits to logic and feasibility.
 

dBSPL

Experienced member
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Ambassador
Messages
2,108
Reactions
86 10,937
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
How long will we have to wait for a submarine delivery if we go through with the partnership ?
In addition to this, question 2: Can this (speculated) possible cooperation proceed as a parallel project with a private shipyard or public private partnership, independent of MILDEN? Lets say STM-TAIS-Navantia.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,227
Solutions
2
Reactions
100 23,361
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
How long will we have to wait for a submarine delivery if we go through with the partnership ?
Just my humble opinion, it would differ by 2 years between each. But we would have a greater benefit following the path of MILDEN.

In addition to this, question 2: Can this (speculated) possible cooperation proceed as a parallel project with a private shipyard or public private partnership, independent of MILDEN? Lets say STM-TAIS-Navantia.
I would say lesslikely, unless SSB-MSB is desiring to kill Gölcük Shipyard and transfer entire know-how to private shipyards.
Gölcük shipyard has the only experience, and the best personnel to work on the submarines (for production, testing, assisting with direct feedback from the field, direct access to field personnel and ease of having no borders on subjects to exchange - no security restrictions between personnel).
Considering this experience was gained through decades, and a culture was adapted, it would be challenging similar one to be established in private shipyards. Also i shall emphasize this again, a submarine shipyard can not be focused on making profits, neither for repairs, nor for production. These vessels are strategical, and may not be exported or may not find a customer or this shipyard may not have been occupied to make a design to sell more, since its primary objective is to provide cutting edge submarines to TN flotilla. This is not feasible for private shipyards and this is why: A private shipyard would shut the submarine division or transfer personnel to another division once it stops profiting, since submarine business requires continuity and consistency, this would be devastating. That would be like we are going all in in roulette, playing on a single number.

However, this is not valid for submarines below certain dimensions with conventional capabilities, such as STM500, Dearsan's mini submarine or the as we have seen in the last example, DATUM. These kind of designs can be handled by private shipyards/companies. for both having an export potential and ease of design / construction / production / testing / necessity of facility / equipment / or personnel contiunity.
 

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,070
Reactions
122 15,003
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Considering this experience was gained through decades, and a culture was adapted, it would be challenging similar one to be established in private shipyards. Also i shall emphasize this again, a submarine shipyard can not be focused on making profits, neither for repairs, nor for production. These vessels are strategical, and may not be exported or may not find a customer or this shipyard may not have been occupied to make a design to sell more, since its primary objective is to provide cutting edge submarines to TN flotilla.
Noted!
But in the coming years, if we want to sell submarines to other parties, we need to manufacture them somewhere. Especially if a partnership is realised with the Spanish.
We know that STM carried out Pakistani submarine modernisation programme. Again, STM, Aselsan, HAVELSAN and ASFAT carried out the Preveze modernisations. So they are capable to handle technical work on submarines.
Navantia is a state owned entity that manufactures submarines, LHDs and frigates for Spanish navy. HMAS Adelaide was manufactured by Navantia shipyard Ferrol. HMAS Canberra’s hull was manufactured in Span then towed to Australia for fitting.
Can a similar approach be adopted whereby the hull of the subs can be readied in modules and then moved to another site to be put together by STM etc. and know how and design input can be provided by Gölcük?
Just a thought!!
In such a partnership there are so many positives that we can acquire in terms of know how and new technologies that it would be absolutely priceless. Having come from a German School of submarine manufacturing and then marrying that with Spanish tech will be invaluable to us.

These vessels may be strategic assets. But we seem to be quite prepared to part with these strategic platforms whilst giving away their building know how as well; as seen in Milgem sales. Also to be noted is the fact that if this partnership is to be realised, the Spansh are too, prepared to part with their know how and tech. So it works both ways.
As they say; if there is a will, there is always a way.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,227
Solutions
2
Reactions
100 23,361
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Can a similar approach be adopted whereby the hull of the subs can be readied in modules and then moved to another site to be put together by STM etc. and know how and design input can be provided by Gölcük?
Just a thought!!
For this part, Section 50 of Reis is manufactured by STM-Gurdesan and transferred to Golcuk. This will likely happen so for Milden as well, and i expect propulsion deck to be produced as whole by a contractor and delivered to Golcuk. STM already involves in Reis and they will also do so in Milden, but when it comes to merging blocks, preparing the hull and equipping it and moreover managing it all, i believe it is Golcuk's expertise.
So in the end we might get some parts done outside (fiber glass hull, non critical steel parts, individual parts like sail) but critical parts (pressure hull) and assembly,equipping made in Golcuk.

Preveze upgrade was also done in Golcuk. What we as 'Asfat' is Golcuk for shipyards, Pendik for surface vessels. STM's agosta was remarkable, but again they worked with KSEW who has certain shipbuilding capabilities. Outsourcing hull production is common, but submarine is a niche business.
 

Sanchez

Experienced member
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
1,737
Reactions
61 7,844
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Developed within the framework of the Technology Acquisition Obligation of the DIMDEG project led by the SSB, the Multipurpose Mini Submarine (MMSS), which will be the first indigenous submarine to be classified by Türk Loydu, is being built by Sefine Shipyard and ITU subsidiary DATUM.


 
Top Bottom