Go ahead for new Swedish stealth sub - Submarines - Warships1 and NavWeaps Discussion Boards - Warships1 and NavWeaps Discussion Boards - Message Board - Yuku

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Go ahead for new Swedish stealth sub

Author	Comment
Per Nordenberg	Go ahead for new Swedish stealth sub	Lead	[-]
Posts: 718 (24-Dec-2007 01:44:01) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	21 Dec 07: The Swedish government has decided today that the armed forces can order the construction phase of the next generation of submarine NGU or A26 as it is also called ("NGU = Nästa Generation Ubåt" in Sw). An acquisition of NGU or A26 presuppose that the government during 2008 decides to go ahead with the actual construction work. If this is not decided the construction phase can be discontinued for a limited fee. The decision to build the new submarine or not also depends on whether Kockums can affiliate partners to the submarine program to share development costs. Norway and Singapore are believed to be likely candidates for partners. http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/fordon_motor/fartyg/article57517.ece (from nyteknik.se in Sw) Regards, Per Nordenberg Last Edited By: Per Nordenberg 24-Dec-2007 01:49:29. Edited 1 time.
splott	It's also mentioned in a previous article	#1	[-]
Registered Member Posts: 30 (24-Dec-2007 13:05:01) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	that the US have shown a great interest in Swedish sub technology. Probably unlikely as the third non disclosed country but not impossible.
bager1968		#2	[-]
Posts: 2710 (26-Dec-2007 08:36:49) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Well, the Aussies seem to be a third partner... http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/5016 Note the following requirements: "Defence has confirmed that one of the options to be considered for the new submarine fleet will be small unmanned mini-subs that can be launched from the "mother" submarines. "Technological developments such as unmanned vehicles would probably offer complementary capabilities to any future underwater warfare platform," a Defence spokesman said. These unmanned mini-submarines, crammed with high-tech sensors, could travel remotely tens of kilometres away from the mother vessel to conduct surveillance, detect enemy submarines or carry an SAS team. Another priority for the new submarines will be the new generation air-independent propulsion systems, which allow conventional submarines to stay underwater for longer periods, greatly increasing operational effectiveness. Defence says the new post-Collins submarines will have more flexible designs, allowing them to be quickly reconfigured for different types of missions, from intelligence gathering to strategic strikes."
splott	Aussies!?	#3	[-]
Registered Member Posts: 31 (26-Dec-2007 14:03:07) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	That's an interesting third country. I didn't think the Aussies and Kockums where on speaking terms after the Collins. Will the A26 have enough range for the Australian needs, it is even smaller than the U212 and less than half the size of Collins? Perhaps there will be an A26 extended that is longer and have better range and endurance similar to the U214.
rabid stoat AUS		#4	[-]
Posts: 55 (27-Dec-2007 05:50:05) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I've never heard Kockums caught up in the controversy. In fact I think they'd like dealing with them again. Valued customer status?
Michael ODonnell	Possible Aussie connection	#5	[-]
Posts: 1910 (27-Dec-2007 06:07:38) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	The previous government may not have been on terms with Kockums, but the other side of politics were. Now that they are back in power, Labor looks like it will turn to it's old "friends" again, including Kockums. Let's just hope that they do a better job this time, and that the next government (?) doesn't have to spend the next decade and several billion dollars more fixing up the faults. I don't imagine that Australia will be interested in the actual model of submarine that is being proposed here, but certainly the technology will be utilised. I can't imagine any new submarine being smaller than the current Collins class, especially when they add in an AIP capability, as they have (predictably) almost completely ruled out nuclear power for extended underwater operations.
NewGolconda		#6	[-]
Posts: 3001 (10-Jan-2008 00:20:45) Commonwealth Moderator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Kockums were most certainly caught up in the controversy, at one point wanting to sue the Commonwealth for calling in the USN to fix the propeller issues. There was also a protracted intellectual property dispute that potentially effected the ability to maintain the submarines in an operational condition. These issues were more or less patched up in prolonged negotiations. http://www.abc.net.au/pm/stories/s260911.htm http://defence.gov.au/minister/2004/ACF74A3.doc Last Edited By: NewGolconda 10-Jan-2008 00:24:46. Edited 1 times.
WarshipAdmin		#7	[-]
Posts: 1040 (10-Jan-2008 03:08:59) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	There's always a difference between the contract disputes and the relationship at the working level. The latter is the one that matters so far as future contracts go, the former is just a case of writing better contracts and proposals and so on.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Quick Reply