Which company is the most recognized as surface ship and submarine builder ?

[taijing]

The Taiwanese Cabinet has recently passed the NT$601.8 billion (US$17.2 billion) special budget to purchase eight electric-diesel subs, twelve P3 Orion and six sets of PAC-3.
It is said that Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics might compete in winning the governmental bid to take on the responsibility to build those subs for Taiwan.
Which one of these two do you think that is the most recognized as "the one" really specialized to build reliable subs ?

Thanks everyone !

 

[P.A.F]

i don't have no idea but i think tha general dynamics is best for this job.

 

[gf0012-aust]

i don't have no idea but i think tha general dynamics is best for this job.

N-Grumman are one of the sub builders, they have been buying out other US companies and have thus inherited the skillsets from Electric Boat etc... The other is GD Electric Boat (who are the prime contractor for the Virginias)

GDEB are the longest running nuke submarine builder in the world. The US hasn't built a conventional sub since the late 50's.

That means that NG are building a vessel under license The largest conventional builders are the Germans, Danes and Russians (Germany has bought out the swedes), also the French. Germany and Denmark have refused to allow Taiwan access to Conv Sub technology due to pressure from China. Work the rest out for yourself. Which country sells to Taiwan, China, India, and Pakistan and seems to get away with ignoring "demands" not to sell to one clients "notional" enemy???

Can anyone here say.....f......?

 

[turin]

The largest conventional builders are the Germans, Danes and Russians (Germany has bought out the swedes), also the French.

Sorry, but the Danes are no major sub builders at all. All subs in danish service are foreign designs (mostly german) bought or build under license.
There is a new sub program in Denmark, the Viking Class, yet it is a trilateral project in cooperation with Norway and Sweden (actually by far the largest scandinavian sub manufacturer, though the Kockums Shipyards now belong to german HDW).

As for the taiwanese sub deal: The current situation seems to be that the US is not able to keep up with the promised provision of the vessels. As was noted before, the US relies on providing a foreign design since they have not build conventional subs for about 50 years.
It was planned to use the german type 212 or 214 design (with the 212 considered the most advanced conventional design in existence), after HDW has been purchased by US One Equiety Partners, yet to prevent technology transfer, the german government has pressed for reintegrating the shipyards back in a german-only consortium, what now has taken place some time ago.

Now Germany refused already in the beginning of the 1990's to deliver subs to Taiwan since there exist very strict rules for exporting german weaponry to conflict zones and this is regularly a big issue of domestic politics, especially among the current government of the social democratic/green coalition (same case with Turkey and their interest in german Leopard 2 MBT), so the chinese factor is but a part in the reasons.

As for France: They also refused to deliver ships some years ago.
France is considered the most serious rival of Germany in the field of conventional submarines. Although they still might change their mind about the deal, it seems unlikely at the moment.

So the last possiblity to get new subs would be Russia with their Kilo class. Yet some meetings about a deal have already taken place and ended in no solution. This may be due to the considerable transactions of military hardware between Russia and China and the influence, that China can use because of this.

Last possiblities I heard of where the purchase of used subs soon to be phased out in other countries. That would be the Gal-Class of Israel (yet it seems that Israel decided to keep these units) or the Spears-class of South Africa (french Daphne-Class). Since both solutions would only result in the purchase of rather old vessels with limited capabilites, it is rather doubtful that Taiwan will take this way.
I dont know about Australia and their willingness to allow a purchase of the Collins class, yet that is pure speculation on my own.


All in all the three most recognized countries/manufacturers are Germany, Russia and France, with Germany having a slight edge in terms of variety and technology over its competitors (though Russia with the large and capable Kilo class is little bit in a field of its own).

 

[gf0012-aust]

Turin:

the Danes are no major sub builders at all

The Danes are in there because they have a license to build some other nations vessels. My response was geared towards the issue of Taiwan. In a number of recent Proceedings articles the issue of using the Danes as a backdoor to resolve Taiwan’s sub dilemma was touted. The US was seriously looking at a jumped license. Hence Denmark (up until the last 6 months) was a serous contender (as far as building loopholes was concerned)

France will build for anyone. Again, up until the last 6 months the French have had people in Taiwan for a variety of issues, skimmers, modifications to their mirages and finally subs.

Russia has also been considered as a potential, but for some reason it has always been light on serious contention. The most obvious way through was seen as India, they have a fractious relationship with China, are capable of building them, would still be making Russia money and lastly Taiwan would pay in hard currency. The latter isn't such a biggee as India is cashed up to a certain extent - but it's still a carrot.

Part of the interest in the US building conventionals was the fact that they were (and are) still interested into buying into the Australian Sub Corp. The side benefits are:

1) The Collins is the largest long range conventional in the world. The long term intent in the 1980's was that it was actually designed to travel with and support US Battle Groups - it thus contributes to an interoperability dynamic which Taiwan might want

2) Taiwan wanted to buy 8. Australia failed the courage test and said no. Those negotiations were active and still being attempted up until 18 months ago

3) The Collins are able to handle cruise missiles and act as SPECOPs taxis. As they have done a number of times in the last 5 years.

4) The Collins have a lot of interactivity and operational closeness to US nukes. In fact the new combat area of the Collins and Seawolf could be "sisters" (Thus reducing familiarisation and learning errors. In fact US AWO's from their nukes undertake Perisher training on Aust Subs and are regularly exchanged for 2 year rotations.

5) Both Aust and the US have exchanged an agreement to co-operate on design work in shipbuilding. If you wanted to simplify it, they want our LCS concepts, Combat Centre design exp (now being picked up in future builds) and also want access to some of our acoustic warfare technology (currently being trialed on some USN nukes at the moment). Their attention was lifted after we periodically but regularly breached USN defences on war games held in our sub training area in the west. The AW mods are serious and I say that from personal involvement with the technology. It's also been picked up for 3 navies in Europe and 3 others in the "rest of the world". That tech is the biggest carrot, and was the main reason for the exchange agreement being initiated.

For the purposes of the forum, I gave a compressed version before, but the issue is far bigger than your post and my two responses put together.
The US has only one conventional in operation (Hawaii), but it is slowly moving towards a conventional littoral war fighting capability. Whether it makes the final steps, it decides to stay nuke exclusive is another issue though.

 

[turin]

The Danes are in there because they have a license to build some other nations vessels. My response was geared towards the issue of Taiwan. In a number of recent Proceedings articles the issue of using the Danes as a backdoor to resolve Taiwan’s sub dilemma was touted. The US was seriously looking at a jumped license.

Can you specify, to build which classes exactly? The vessels currently in service are rather unsuitable for Taiwan in terms of capabilities. The best sub currently in service is the former swedish Nacken-Class, yet even that design seems to be way too small IMO.

Also even if the Danes have a license to build other types, I would imagine it being rather difficult to use that license for practically exporting/selling such a ship to another country.
Usually license agreements try to avoid such a possibility.

 

[tatra]

The Danes are in there because they have a license to build some other nations vessels. My response was geared towards the issue of Taiwan. In a number of recent Proceedings articles the issue of using the Danes as a backdoor to resolve Taiwan’s sub dilemma was touted. The US was seriously looking at a jumped license.

Can you specify, to build which classes exactly? The vessels currently in service are rather unsuitable for Taiwan in terms of capabilities. The best sub currently in service is the former swedish Nacken-Class, yet even that design seems to be way too small IMO.

Also even if the Danes have a license to build other types, I would imagine it being rather difficult to use that license for practically exporting/selling such a ship to another country.
Usually license agreements try to avoid such a possibility.

Danes don't build subs. Think you mean Swedes, they design an build their onw subs.

 

[turin]

tatra:
Please read the posts above. I think the issue has been clarified there already. Yes, the Danes build no own design, they never did. Yet they have the necessary capabilities to build SSK's.
I made a clear difference between Denmark and Sweden/Kockums in my first post and I was also expressing my doubts about the Danes being a provider for to-be-build-SSK's.
Still I am interested in learning more details about the licenses for building SSK's posessed by Denmark (sry, if thats goes little bit OT).

 

[gf0012-aust]

The Danes are in there because they have a license to build some other nations vessels. My response was geared towards the issue of Taiwan. In a number of recent Proceedings articles the issue of using the Danes as a backdoor to resolve Taiwan’s sub dilemma was touted. The US was seriously looking at a jumped license.

Can you specify, to build which classes exactly? The vessels currently in service are rather unsuitable for Taiwan in terms of capabilities. The best sub currently in service is the former swedish Nacken-Class, yet even that design seems to be way too small IMO.

Also even if the Danes have a license to build other types, I would imagine it being rather difficult to use that license for practically exporting/selling such a ship to another country.
Usually license agreements try to avoid such a possibility.

The license was to build 209's, it was apparently seen as a way for Germany to circumvent restrictions in place by the German Govt to sell to some countries. In an oblique sense I guess it was like some of the German engineering companies that were selling services into Iraq during Saddams time. They picked third parties to act as jump points. The Danes have never exercised the capability, but on a license issue it is considered a latent ability.

I remember it being discussed at a UDT conference in Hawaii two years ago. People were looking at theoretical scenarios at how Taiwan (and Pakistan as another example) would be able to build their own subs in light of external diplomatic pressure. Taiwans was the most complex due to China. At that stage Taiwan was vigorously trying to get Collins class and even were after second hand 471's from Sweden. The issue of trying to build in the US was discussed as it was apparent that Electric Boat was looking at buying into ASC or trying to get a friendly Euro to co-partner an offshore build. The Italians were alos thrown into the mix, as they are seen as one of the best midget/mini sub builders in the world.

 

[turin]

Thx for the info.
Here is some new stuff I picked up on another forum:

"Spain’s IZAR to build submarines for Taiwan?

The US Navy is reported to be on the point of awarding a contract, worth at least US$4.1 billion (E3.4 billion), to Spanish State-owned shipbuilder IZAR, to build eight diesel-electric powered S-80 class submarines with Air Independent Propulsion for the Republic of China (Taiwan) Navy. The boats would be delivered to the USA for fitting out, prior to delivery. The US itself has no non-nuclear submarine building capability.

Under a E1.7 billion contract, IZAR is currently building four S-80 submarines, the first totally designed in Spain, for the Spanish Navy. The reaction of the new Spanish Socialist Government to the proposed US Navy contract is awaited with interest. The German Government has refused to allow an HDW design to be exported to Taiwan, for fear of alienating Beijing.

The Tawanese Cabinet on June 2 passed a special NT$610 billion budget for the purchase of military equipment, including NT$412 billion (US$12.3 billion) for the eight diesel-electric submarines. These were promised to Taipei in 2001 by President George W. Bush, but never previously budgeted by Taiwan. The Taiwanese Government is attempting to push the deal through now, fearing that the offer may be withdrawn if John Kerry wins the US presidential election in November.

Deputy Defence Minister Ho Shou-yeh said that “There are still many uncertain factors and the price is only a rough preliminary evaluation. A more concrete figure will be given after the US Navy has identified a shipbuilder as well as the various suppliers in Europe.â€

US authorities are waiting for the special budget to be approved by the Taiwan Legislature before discussing related issues, said Ho.

According to Democratic Progressive Party legislator Tang Ho-sheng, who attended the Cabinet’s special budget meeting, the submarine package includes 144 Raytheon Mk48 torpedoes and 72 Boeing submarine-launched Harpoon anti-ship missiles. “The construction of the submarines themselves would only cost around NT$290 billion [US$8.67 billion],†said Tang.

If the Spanish Government approves the deal with the US Navy, therefore, IZAR would appear to have ample room to negotiate its price. © DAPSS S.A., 2004, Switzerland "

Should be a very attractive way for Taiwan to get some state-of-the-art SSK's. Yet it remains to be seen if the spanish government is willing to approve such a deal.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Just a little piece of trivia to add into the mix.

The 2 hydraulic presses that were used to stamp some panels for the Aust Collins Class subs were called Big Bazan and Little Bazan (Bazan was the company merged with Izar)

 

[pezfez]

northrop grunman subsidiary Ingalls and Bath (mississippi and connecticut)

they make the a/c carriers, subs, and other surface ships for the us navy, and also get contracts from other countries of vessels and ships that they don't produce for the us navy, i think they're the largest military dockyard builder in the world