U-214/S-80 vs Hangor

[DDG-80]

Spanish S-80 Plus Submarine Viable Candidate to Replace Aging Indian Kilo-Class : Source – Indian Defence Research Wing

idrw.org

This may help your answer

The size advantage
The existing relationship because scorpene is french Spanish design
The cost
For me the Germans have too many conditions they have critical of Indian foreign policy in past especially Ukraine war

I go with s80 and I think they will win contract
Btw six is the initial order it's believed India will order second batch six more post 2030

Type 214 and S80 Submarines for Project 75I:

1.Type 214
●Fuel Cell AIP System: Diesel-electric with Siemens polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells for AIP.

▪︎Endurance: Up to 84 days

S80

●Propulsion: Diesel-electric with Ethanol Reforming Fuel Cell AIP system.

▪︎Endurance: Up to 50 days

Non-Magnetic Hull

2. Type 214

Material: The non-magnetic hull greatly reduces the likelihood of detection by ASW aircraft, including the P-3C Orion, which is equipped with MAD sensors. This makes the Type 214 much more difficult to locate and target.

•S80

●Material: The S80 uses conventional steel for its hull, which has a higher magnetic signature compared to the Type 214.

▪︎Analysis: The Type 214’s non-magnetic hull is a critical advantage in stealth, providing superior protection against detection by enemy ASW aircraft like the P-3C Orion.

Type 214

●Stealth Technologies: In addition to the non-magnetic hull, the Type 214 features advanced anechoic coatings and sound-isolating technologies to minimize noise. This makes it very hard to detect using passive and active sonar systems employed by ASW forces.

●Hydrodynamic Design: The hull design minimizes hydrodynamic noise, further enhancing its stealth capabilities.

•S80

●Stealth Technologies: The S80 also incorporates stealth features, including anechoic coatings and noise reduction technologies, but the overall effectiveness is slightly less than the Type 214 due to its larger size and conventional hull materials.

▪︎Analysis: The Type 214's combination of a non-magnetic hull, advanced noise reduction technologies, and proven electronic warfare systems provide a higher level of stealth and survivability.

Cost and Maintenance

●Type 214

Cost Efficiency: The Type 214 is considered cost-effective due to its widespread adoption and standardized production processes.

▪︎Its components and systems have been field-tested and refined over multiple iterations.

Maintenance and Logistics: With a significant number of Type 214 submarines in service worldwide, there is a well-established supply chain and maintenance infrastructure.

•This reduces the lifecycle costs and ensures easier access to spare parts and technical support.

●Conclusion

The Type 214 submarine appears to be a more advanced and reliable option compared to the S80 based on several key factors:

Size and Agility: More compact design offers better maneuverability and stealth.

Endurance: Superior AIP system provides longer submerged endurance, enhancing operational effectiveness.

Stealth: Lower acoustic signature due to advanced design and materials.

Firepower: More torpedo tubes and a proven combat system.

Proven Track Record: Extensive operational history with multiple navies around the world.

▪︎The S80 submarine project has had issues with going over budget and not sticking to the planned schedule.

▪︎This means it has ended up costing more money than originally expected.

▪︎The S80 has many new and advanced technologies that haven't been used much before.

▪︎Because these systems are so new, they tend to be more expensive at the start.

▪︎Since the S80 uses newer, less proven technologies, it might cost more to keep it in good working condition.

▪︎The support system for maintaining and repairing the S80 isn't fully set up yet.

▪︎This can make it harder and more expensive to get the parts and expertise needed for maintenance.

 

[harpy1]

German engineering I guess

 

[harpy1]

The Indian navy have done fine job with the surface fleet..carriers destroyers frigates
The air arms are good when you consider p8
Romeo
Predator drones soon
Rafale soon

But sub warfare has been neglected

 

[Falcon26]

INS Kalvari will receive its indigenous AIP system next year

DRDO’s Fuel Cell-Based AIP Technology will Revolutionize India’s Submarine Capabilities The underwater trials of indigenous fuel based Air Independent Propulsion system is expected to start next year. The trial will be conducted by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO). AIP...

defencepk.com

The largest indigenous component designed and developed will be the DRDO PAFC AIP. DRDO’s AIP system relies on the innovative Phosphoric Acid Fuel Cell technology. This process is more rugged, tolerant of fuel impurities, offers longer life and efficiency, and is much safer since it does not require hazardous hydrogen to be stored onboard.

While based on a proven fuel cell technology type, i.e., PAFC, NMRL’s AIP system, nonetheless, incorporates a set of innovations that make it a rather contemporary system. For one, NMRL’s AIP package has an onboard hydrogen generation plant, which produces hydrogen ‘in situ,’ unlike many other AIP configurations where hydrogen for a mission has to be carried onboard.

Moreover, onboard hydrogen production in NMRL’s/DRDO's AIP does not require any kind of combustion. NMRL’s AIP supplies hydrogen ‘in situ’ by reacting hydrogen ‘rich’ sodium borohydride with water to generate hydrogen and sodium metaborate. The advantages of this kind of ‘borohydride hydrolysis’ (BH) to generate hydrogen vis-a-vis other forms of onboard hydrogen generation. NMRL’s/DRDO's BH process generates a considerable amount of hydrogen without entailing the release of any gaseous effluents which add to system noise and can compromise submarine stealth. Moreover, BH plants also have long operational lives.

What NMRL/DRDO has done is further develop basic PAFC-related know-how to come up with indigenous PAFC stacks that are ruggedized and compact enough to be suitable for underwater marine applications with the relevant safety margins. NMRL has registered a number of innovation patents on its way to the development of indigenous PAFC stacks related to the catalysts used, sealants, acid holder matrix, carbon paper, etc.

Doesn’t change the fact that India today has no active AIP-equipped submarine while Pakistan has had this technology for decades.

 

[Falcon26]

Type 214 and S80 Submarines for Project 75I:

1.Type 214
●Fuel Cell AIP System: Diesel-electric with Siemens polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells for AIP.

▪︎Endurance: Up to 84 days

S80

●Propulsion: Diesel-electric with Ethanol Reforming Fuel Cell AIP system.

▪︎Endurance: Up to 50 days

Non-Magnetic Hull

2. Type 214

Material: The non-magnetic hull greatly reduces the likelihood of detection by ASW aircraft, including the P-3C Orion, which is equipped with MAD sensors. This makes the Type 214 much more difficult to locate and target.

•S80

●Material: The S80 uses conventional steel for its hull, which has a higher magnetic signature compared to the Type 214.

▪︎Analysis: The Type 214’s non-magnetic hull is a critical advantage in stealth, providing superior protection against detection by enemy ASW aircraft like the P-3C Orion.

Type 214

●Stealth Technologies: In addition to the non-magnetic hull, the Type 214 features advanced anechoic coatings and sound-isolating technologies to minimize noise. This makes it very hard to detect using passive and active sonar systems employed by ASW forces.

●Hydrodynamic Design: The hull design minimizes hydrodynamic noise, further enhancing its stealth capabilities.

•S80

●Stealth Technologies: The S80 also incorporates stealth features, including anechoic coatings and noise reduction technologies, but the overall effectiveness is slightly less than the Type 214 due to its larger size and conventional hull materials.

▪︎Analysis: The Type 214's combination of a non-magnetic hull, advanced noise reduction technologies, and proven electronic warfare systems provide a higher level of stealth and survivability.

Cost and Maintenance

●Type 214

Cost Efficiency: The Type 214 is considered cost-effective due to its widespread adoption and standardized production processes.

▪︎Its components and systems have been field-tested and refined over multiple iterations.

Maintenance and Logistics: With a significant number of Type 214 submarines in service worldwide, there is a well-established supply chain and maintenance infrastructure.

•This reduces the lifecycle costs and ensures easier access to spare parts and technical support.

●Conclusion

The Type 214 submarine appears to be a more advanced and reliable option compared to the S80 based on several key factors:

Size and Agility: More compact design offers better maneuverability and stealth.

Endurance: Superior AIP system provides longer submerged endurance, enhancing operational effectiveness.

Stealth: Lower acoustic signature due to advanced design and materials.

Firepower: More torpedo tubes and a proven combat system.

Proven Track Record: Extensive operational history with multiple navies around the world.

▪︎The S80 submarine project has had issues with going over budget and not sticking to the planned schedule.

▪︎This means it has ended up costing more money than originally expected.

▪︎The S80 has many new and advanced technologies that haven't been used much before.

▪︎Because these systems are so new, they tend to be more expensive at the start.

▪︎Since the S80 uses newer, less proven technologies, it might cost more to keep it in good working condition.

▪︎The support system for maintaining and repairing the S80 isn't fully set up yet.

▪︎This can make it harder and more expensive to get the parts and expertise needed for maintenance.

Using ChatGPT?

 

[Yasser76]

Doesn’t change the fact that India today has no active AIP-equipped submarine while Pakistan has had this technology for decades.

Don't you get it yet?

PN Agosta 90Bs with AIP and heavy torpedos are roaming the Indian Ocean right now, but they will be defeated as Indian posters here are posting about AIP Subs they may acquire 5 years from now, as soon as PN Sub captains log on and read this forum games up for us all!

 

[Awwad]

A submarine is most vulnerable when its at surface or at snorkeling depth. All diesel electric subs are quiet and deadly but the ones with AIP can stay submerged 7 to 10 times more than non-AIP ones. An ordinary diesel electric sub has to surface in 1 to 2 days. The AIP one can stay submerged for upto 2-3 weeks. That's the whole difference.

As far as U-214/S-80 vs Hangor are concerned, I think very seldom these may face off each other. Most of the times, these subs will go after each other's surface fleet and do max damage.

 

[Pingle]

A submarine is most vulnerable when its at surface or at snorkeling depth. All diesel electric subs are quiet and deadly but the ones with AIP can stay submerged 7 to 10 times more than non-AIP ones. An ordinary diesel electric sub has to surface in 1 to 2 days. The AIP one can stay submerged for upto 2-3 weeks. That's the whole difference.

As far as U-214/S-80 vs Hangor are concerned, I think very seldom these may face off each other. Most of the times, these subs will go after each other's surface fleet and do max damage.

Do submarines have first look first shoot thing like fighter jets against each other? If yes Hangor vs these both western submarines which should pass with top rank here?

 

[Awwad]

Do submarines have first look first shoot thing like fighter jets against each other? If yes Hangor vs these both western submarines which should pass with top rank here?

There is no info out there which can specify which type will detect the other first. The tactics of submarine commander & crew depends a lot here. Diesel electric subs are very quiet. Whichever sub makes first mistake will be exposed, like colliding with any under sea object, or crew making unintentional noise etc. However, as soon as torpedo is fired, the other sub will know about the first one too.

However, its not neccessary that submarine will face off opponent's submarine. Submarines will try to go after surface fleet wherever they can.

 

[Pingle]

There is no info out there which can specify which type will detect the other first. The tactics of submarine commander & crew depends a lot here. Diesel electric subs are very quiet. Whichever sub makes first mistake will be exposed, like colliding with any under sea object, or crew making unintentional noise etc. However, as soon as torpedo is fired, the other sub will know about the first one too.

However, its not neccessary that submarine will face off opponent's submarine. Submarines will try to go after surface fleet wherever they can.

Thanks bro for such valuable information....

 

[S.Y.A]

what is the total range of Hangor class subs that PN is getting (aip, snorkeling, submerged combined)?

 

[Guru Dutt]

Type 214 and S80 Submarines for Project 75I:

1.Type 214
●Fuel Cell AIP System: Diesel-electric with Siemens polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells for AIP.

▪︎Endurance: Up to 84 days

S80

●Propulsion: Diesel-electric with Ethanol Reforming Fuel Cell AIP system.

▪︎Endurance: Up to 50 days

Non-Magnetic Hull

2. Type 214

Material: The non-magnetic hull greatly reduces the likelihood of detection by ASW aircraft, including the P-3C Orion, which is equipped with MAD sensors. This makes the Type 214 much more difficult to locate and target.

•S80

●Material: The S80 uses conventional steel for its hull, which has a higher magnetic signature compared to the Type 214.

▪︎Analysis: The Type 214’s non-magnetic hull is a critical advantage in stealth, providing superior protection against detection by enemy ASW aircraft like the P-3C Orion.

Type 214

●Stealth Technologies: In addition to the non-magnetic hull, the Type 214 features advanced anechoic coatings and sound-isolating technologies to minimize noise. This makes it very hard to detect using passive and active sonar systems employed by ASW forces.

●Hydrodynamic Design: The hull design minimizes hydrodynamic noise, further enhancing its stealth capabilities.

•S80

●Stealth Technologies: The S80 also incorporates stealth features, including anechoic coatings and noise reduction technologies, but the overall effectiveness is slightly less than the Type 214 due to its larger size and conventional hull materials.

▪︎Analysis: The Type 214's combination of a non-magnetic hull, advanced noise reduction technologies, and proven electronic warfare systems provide a higher level of stealth and survivability.

Cost and Maintenance

●Type 214

Cost Efficiency: The Type 214 is considered cost-effective due to its widespread adoption and standardized production processes.

▪︎Its components and systems have been field-tested and refined over multiple iterations.

Maintenance and Logistics: With a significant number of Type 214 submarines in service worldwide, there is a well-established supply chain and maintenance infrastructure.

•This reduces the lifecycle costs and ensures easier access to spare parts and technical support.

●Conclusion

The Type 214 submarine appears to be a more advanced and reliable option compared to the S80 based on several key factors:

Size and Agility: More compact design offers better maneuverability and stealth.

Endurance: Superior AIP system provides longer submerged endurance, enhancing operational effectiveness.

Stealth: Lower acoustic signature due to advanced design and materials.

Firepower: More torpedo tubes and a proven combat system.

Proven Track Record: Extensive operational history with multiple navies around the world.

▪︎The S80 submarine project has had issues with going over budget and not sticking to the planned schedule.

▪︎This means it has ended up costing more money than originally expected.

▪︎The S80 has many new and advanced technologies that haven't been used much before.

▪︎Because these systems are so new, they tend to be more expensive at the start.

▪︎Since the S80 uses newer, less proven technologies, it might cost more to keep it in good working condition.

▪︎The support system for maintaining and repairing the S80 isn't fully set up yet.

▪︎This can make it harder and more expensive to get the parts and expertise needed for maintenance.

Though german sub is far better than the spanish in every field but still the new deal is going to french as 3 Scorpene NG deal is already done then the Baracuda is bieng nagociated agressivelly and who knows the ones that Australia ditched for Nuclear ones from USA just might end up here if not already sold

 

[Pingle]

Though german sub is far better than the spanish in every field but still the new deal is going to french as 3 Scorpene NG deal is already done then the Baracuda is bieng nagociated agressivelly and who knows the ones that Australia ditched for Nuclear ones from USA just might end up here if not already sold

Are you saying we are negotiating for Shortfin Barracudas already with France? If true then I will anyday be happy to see we drop both S80 and U214 for this new French beast....
Have we signed 3 scorpean deal already or still pending?

 

[Guru Dutt]

Are you saying we are negotiating for Shortfin Barracudas already with France? If true then I will anyday be happy to see we drop both S80 and U214 for this new French beast....
Have we signed 3 scorpean deal already or still pending?

i guess the deal in principal is done and even MOD has cleared it only the money is to be released by CCS and deal officially signed for 3 scorpenes NG while they were in talks with french for bracuda and rafale both lets see the news is expected to be disclosed soon

 

[Pingle]

Though german sub is far better than the spanish in every field but still the new deal is going to french as 3 Scorpene NG deal is already done then the Baracuda is bieng nagociated agressivelly and who knows the ones that Australia ditched for Nuclear ones from USA just might end up here if not already sold

Another possibility is Australian subarines can go to Egypt as they were also looking for advanced scorpean.... If Egypt gets Barracudas then Turkish navy will be in great trouble....