South Korea-19 (Dosan Ahn Chang-ho class x 2, Son Won-Il class x 9)
Sweden-6 (Södermanland-class x 1)
Italy-8 (Todaro x 4)
So across the pool of proposed countries we have a total of 36 submarine hulls of seven 21st century classes. Color me skeptical that they could meet their own navy's needs for construction and maintenance along with a hypothetical US demand. We should maybe purchase from our adversaries who seem to have a bit more capacity even if they lack quality controls.
PLAN - 59 (Type-035B x 5, Type-039 x 13, Type-039A x 17)
It's still better than 1-2 boats a year from EB and NPN. Remember this is an addition to what the US builders are doing with SSNs not a replacement.
And you're under counting the shipbuilding capacity.
France has capability to build they just lack funding. May smooth over
ruffled feathers after AUKUS.
Germany Siemens -Thyssenkrupp builds for many other countries: Israel, ROK, Greece, Egypt, Italy, Norway, Greece, Portugal, Turkey, Singapore. They have capacity.
Same thing with Sweden's Kockums, Japan's Kawasaki-Kockums and ROK's Hyundai HI and Daewoo SME.
Just license the 212, 214, Scorpiene and/or KSS III designs and send the order and funding to any allied ship building firm that will take the contract.
The point is to rapidly build up the fleet with combat credible boats.
Lets say Korea, Japan and Europe each deliver two hulls a year. In two years that 12 subs - doable once they start building. Some say that the Korea and Japanese shipyards are all in range of China's missiles. My response is that if we don't have those boats in the water before the shooting starts we are already too late.
What they build for themselves is what they can afford, we string out our own procurement over multiple fiscal years. It also does not account for what they export or reflect capacity. Japans and Korea's combined shipyard capacity exceeds China's. We sadly are hardly a blip on the statistical chart. I think wee rank 19th in the world. Hard to call yourself a maritime power with that stat.
A license build of one class in different countries is not that far fetched.
Look at our Constellation class frigates. Nor is operating different classes of ships /boats. Look at our WWII fleet.
Spain's S-80 is a 21st Century design
The Latest version of the French Scorpène is certainly a 21st century design. 12 hulls built 6 more on the way all for export.
Sweden's design are good and upgradable. and they have built for export - Australia, Demark and Singapore.
Spain-2 (21st century design x 0)
Japan-22 (Sōryū-class x 12, Taigei-class x 2)
Germany-6 (Type 212A x 6)
France-8 (21st century design x 0)
South Korea-19 (Dosan Ahn Chang-ho class x 2, Son Won-Il class x 9)
Sweden-6 (Södermanland-class x 1)
Italy-8 (Todaro x 4)
So across the pool of proposed countries we have a total of 36 submarine hulls of seven 21st century classes. Color me skeptical that they could meet their own navy's needs for construction and maintenance along with a hypothetical US demand. We should maybe purchase from our adversaries who seem to have a bit more capacity even if they lack quality controls.
PLAN - 59 (Type-035B x 5, Type-039 x 13, Type-039A x 17)
Russia - 49 (Improved Kilo x 10, Lada x 1)
It's still better than 1-2 boats a year from EB and NPN. Remember this is an addition to what the US builders are doing with SSNs not a replacement.
And you're under counting the shipbuilding capacity.
France has capability to build they just lack funding. May smooth over
ruffled feathers after AUKUS.
Germany Siemens -Thyssenkrupp builds for many other countries: Israel, ROK, Greece, Egypt, Italy, Norway, Greece, Portugal, Turkey, Singapore. They have capacity.
Same thing with Sweden's Kockums, Japan's Kawasaki-Kockums and ROK's Hyundai HI and Daewoo SME.
Just license the 212, 214, Scorpiene and/or KSS III designs and send the order and funding to any allied ship building firm that will take the contract.
The point is to rapidly build up the fleet with combat credible boats.
I am sure all these manufacturers will jump into the SUBSAFE program to. Or was the intent that foreign builds wouldn't require that?
Buy French subs, run'em in the Med.
About SUBSAFE - Metallurgist Admits To Falsifying Navy Submarine Steel Strength Test Results For 36 Years
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43069/metallurgist-admits-to-falsifying-navy-submarine-steel-strength-test-results-for-36-years
Lets say Korea, Japan and Europe each deliver two hulls a year. In two years that 12 subs - doable once they start building. Some say that the Korea and Japanese shipyards are all in range of China's missiles. My response is that if we don't have those boats in the water before the shooting starts we are already too late.
What they build for themselves is what they can afford, we string out our own procurement over multiple fiscal years. It also does not account for what they export or reflect capacity. Japans and Korea's combined shipyard capacity exceeds China's. We sadly are hardly a blip on the statistical chart. I think wee rank 19th in the world. Hard to call yourself a maritime power with that stat.
A license build of one class in different countries is not that far fetched.
Look at our Constellation class frigates. Nor is operating different classes of ships /boats. Look at our WWII fleet.
Spain's S-80 is a 21st Century design
The Latest version of the French Scorpène is certainly a 21st century design. 12 hulls built 6 more on the way all for export.
Sweden's design are good and upgradable. and they have built for export - Australia, Demark and Singapore.