Type 214 and S80 Submarines for Project 75I:
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
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.
Last edited: