Fateh Submarine | News & Discussions

[Penguin]

You should read about why the 212-A was not exported, I give you a hint, germany does not want to diclose its hydrogene AIP technology and much more (The Type 214 is a diesel-electric submarine developed by Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft GmbH (HDW). It features diesel propulsion with an air-independent propulsion (AIP) system using Siemens polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) hydrogen fuel cells. The Type 214 submarine is derived from the Type 212,[2] but as an export variant it lacks some of the classified technologies of its smaller predecessor most important of which is the non magnetic steel hull which makes the Type 212 submarine impossible to detect using a Magnetic Anomaly Detector.), that is why it has developped the 214 and 216 with different fuel cells technologies to respond to the market demands.Italy developped its 212-A alongside Germany it is a well known fact not to be mentionned everytime, the italian 212_A was adapted to the mediterannien waters.
For the Fateh submarine you should wait and see or hear, it is technologically in par with anything out there in its category, where you find none.Technology-wise, there is no reason not to believe the Iranians, one has only to check their scientific ranking in the world. if that is not enough , it is just talk for talk, since I repeated many times that iran is not disclosing its specs, it is like trying to compare with a ghost (that might be it), so it will be only speculation at best, which will give no tangible results or answers.

Another incorrect post. The 216/218 is of far more recent date than 214. I've already adressed the realtionship between 212a and 214, but you choose to ignore that, as well as the FACT that 212A is in Italian service and will be in Polish service, which - for a GERMAN submarine - in my book constitutes EXPORT. You are furthermore repeating items I have already put forward (non mangnetic steel e.g.) as if this somehow gives a new angle on the discussion in your favor..So bla on you. You are NOT a serious poster.

The U212's diesel propulsion system is combined with an air-independent propulsion (AIP) system, used for silent slow cruising.

The Class 214 submarine will have an increased diving depth and an improvement in AIP performance.

BOTH from U212 / U214 Submarines - Naval Technology

The latest additions to the German shipbuilder HDW's highly successful Type 209 family of submarines, the Type 212 (ordered by Germany and Italy), the Type 214 (ordered by Greece), and the Type 800, are all fuel cell powered. A submarine that uses fuel cells rather than a diesel engine to recharge its batteries produces much less sound while doing so, and consequently the effective detection range of many of the current passive acoustic sonobuoys is reduced.

Type 214

Type 214 submarines were developed in Germany to address the requirements form modern navies for more endurance, without using nuclear propulsion. Unlike classic diesel electrically powered subs, Type 214s are using a new fuel cell system providing an Air Independent Propulsion (AIP). The new propulsion system enables an increased diving depth and overall performance efficiency, through specially built hull and advanced weapons systems. Absence of a diesel engine also provides for minimizing acoustic, thermal and magnetic signatures.

Type 214 Submarine

The submarines involved are the Greek-built Type 214 boats HS Pipinos (121), HSMatrozos (122) and HS Katsonis (123), all launched by mid-2009, and the Type 209/1200 boat HS Okeanos (118). The latter was the only vessel of its class to be modernised under the Neptune II programme and fitted with an air-independent propulsion (AIP) plant, similar to those of the Type 214.

Greece to accept Type 214 submarines into service - IHS Jane's 360

The German HDW Type 214 export-design is a good example of the current state-of-the-art of SSK design in terms of P&PS. The design has evolved from the excellent Type 212A to become an export variant of notable success.
The use of two Siemens BZM 120 (120kW) Polymer Electrolyte Membrane (PEM) fuel cells units with onboard stores of oxygen and hydrogen gas has allowed a considerable performance to be achieved.
...
Figure 2 also shows that the future AIP-based Type 214 will be able to stay immersed for over 1 month. This compares with the Type 212A record of 2 weeks submerged without snorting with fuel-cells between Germany and Spain in April 2006 [Ref. 3].
...
The use of PEM Fuel Cells in SSK has been championed by the German firm of HDW [Ref. 9] in their Type 212A and Type 214 designs[Ref . 10].
...
The use of PEM Fuel Cells in SSK has been championed by the German firm of HDW [Ref. 9] in their Type 212A and Type 214 designs[Ref . 10]. In the Type 214A designs as used by Greece, the two Siemens BZM120 fuel cells are rated at 120kW each and weigh 900kg with a volume of 500 litres each.
...
The technology of batteries is undergoing a sea-change with the emergence of the Zebra product from Rolls-Royce and the development of lithium ion designs [Ref. 17]. This comes on top of the use of sodium sulphide batteries in the HDW Type 212A class.
...
In energy density and specific weight terms it promises to be better than the sodium sulphur batteries as used in the German 212A class.

http://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/media/50456...r-and-Propulsion-Conpaper-Pacific08-Jan08.pdf

Germans chose NOT to order the original 212 design but rather ordered the 212A design, which not only took German requirements but also Italian requirements into account. NO 212 WAS EVER PRODUCED.

Both 214 and 212A use PEM fuels cells but 214 has a smaller battery set.

 

[Penguin]

Fateh direct competitors:

Current market trends, however are now pushing submarine designers towards littoral and special operation support boats. Various offers are surfacing, including the roughly 900-tonne and 50-metre Andrasta from DCNS, the 1,150-tonne and 58-metre Type 210 from HDW, the 1,100-tonne and 56-metre S1000 from Fincantieri & Rubin – all featuring advanced solutions and able to conduct full-size conventional submarine missions. The same companies and Daewoo Shipbuilding and Maritime Engineering (DSME) are also working on platforms concepts for special operations, as exemplified by the DCNS SMX-26 showed at Euronaval 2012, the HDW Type 200 and the South Korean KSS 500A. The US Special Operations Command allowed foreign companies to participate and recently awarded General Dynamics Electric Boat a contract to design and build a prototype ‘dry’ submersible for evaluation by the US naval forces community, with the participation of Italy’s GSE company, builder of commercial diver lock-out submersibles.

Submarine technology - Armada

HDW in Germany has pioneered the development of air-independent systems based on fuel-cell technology, as used by German and Italian Type 212As, South Korean and Portuguese Type 214s and lately by the Israeli navy’s Dolphin. In late 2012, Sener engineering group and HDW signed an agreement for the industrial production of an air-independent propulsion system based on a fuel cell methanol reformer technology. The later provides an alternative for producing the hydrogen required by a fuel-cell system, which more suitable for larger platforms with long endurance. A fully engineered submarine system demonstrator is to be ready for end-2013.

Submarine technology - Armada

 

[Penguin]

Iranian Navy has inducted new 600-ton domestically produced Fateh (Conqueror) diesel-electric submarine which is far more capable then the Ghadir class submarines.

The Fateh class submarine has a displacement of 527-ton when surfaced and 600-ton when submerged. This submarine has a operational diving depth is 200 meters while its maximum diving depth is 250 meters. The Fateh submarine has range of over 5000 kilometers when snorting at slow speed.

The Fateh submarine has a top speed of 11 knots (20 km/h) when surfaced and 14 knots (26 km/h) when the submarine is submerged. Submarine has sea endurance of over 35 days.

Iranian Fateh class submarine are fitted with 4 × 533 mm torpedo tubes and can carry upto 12 torpedoes ( 4 in the tubes and another 8 on the racks as reloads) or 24 naval mines for for anti-submarine (ASW) and anti-surface ship (ASuW) warfare. Much larger 1,000-ton Bethat class submarine is still underdevelopment.

Iran Launches New Submarine Class | USNI News

PAL (Indonesia) midget submarine

• View topic - [All Pic+News] Military Product Made in Indonesia

HDW Type 200

TURKISH NAVY SHIPBUCKET: ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems Type 200 Submarine

Turkish navy has evaluated two midget submarine designs from German firm ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems, Type 200 and Type 300 classes:

• Type 200: Displacement: 200 t surfaced, length: 25 m, beam: 4.2 m, draft 3.1 m, speed: 8 kn surfaced, range: 2100 nmi @ 8 kn surfaced, endurance: 2 weeks, armament: 2 21-in torpedo tubes with a maximum of 4 torpedoes, crew: 6 + 12 divers.[31]
• Type 300: Displacement: 300 t surfaced, length: 30 m, beam: 4.2 m, draft 3.1 m, speed: 12 kn surfaced, range: 3100 nmi @ 8 kn surfaced, endurance: 2 weeks, armament: 2 21-in torpedo tubes with a maximum of 6 torpedoes, crew: 12.[

Midget submarine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

South Korea 510-ton KSS-500A due to replace Dolgorae-class midget submarines for special operations.
the KSS 500A has a beam of 4.5 m, surfaced displacement of 510 tons and maximum diving depth of 250 m.
defense-studies.blogspot.nl/2011/12/south-korea-displays-new-mini-sub.html

Fincantieri produces small submarines of less than 700 tons displacement.
NTI: Submarine: Italy Exports

DCNS Andastra Displacement surfaced about 900 tons
http://en.dcnsgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/61864.pdf

Aumur 950
http://www.ckb-rubin.ru/fileadmin/editor/listovki/Amur_950_eng.pdf

Amur / Lada Class - Project 677 (from russian Military Parade magazine)
Note the AMUR 550 and 750...

Fincantieri S1000 submerged displacement about 1100 tons
Submarine

Type 210/mod Ula
ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems

The HDW Class 216 merges the proven systems of the HDW Classes 212A and 214 with new developments.
http://www.udt-global.com/files/holger_isbrecht.pdf

 

[Penguin]

Isn't Fateh just a (single boat) step in the evolution from the smaller 150 ton Ghadir (Derivative of North Korean Yugo and Sango class submarines) to 400 ton Nahang (single boat) to the 1000 ton Qaa'em (design influenced by Russian Amur 950 class, yet another contemporary competitor) and 1200 ton Besat ? I.e. isn't the development aimed to produce aboat like 209-1400/212A/214?

 

[Hack-Hook]

well , it's no doubt that our Aim is to build the 1200ton Besat Submarine and Fateh is a step toward that direction but , it's far more mature than Nahang , I doubt it's just a prototype , I guess we are going to replace Ghadir with this one in long run for Persian Gulf and Caspian sea ,ad develop Besat to be used along our Kilo subs in Indian Ocean and Sea of Oman

 

[The SC]

Another incorrect post. The 216/218 is of far more recent date than 214. I've already adressed the realtionship between 212a and 214, but you choose to ignore that, as well as the FACT that 212A is in Italian service and will be in Polish service, which - for a GERMAN submarine - in my book constitutes EXPORT. You are furthermore repeating items I have already put forward (non mangnetic steel e.g.) as if this somehow gives a new angle on the discussion in your favor..So bla on you. You are NOT a serious poster.



BOTH from U212 / U214 Submarines - Naval Technology


Type 214


Type 214 Submarine


Greece to accept Type 214 submarines into service - IHS Jane's 360


http://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/media/50456...r-and-Propulsion-Conpaper-Pacific08-Jan08.pdf

Germans chose NOT to order the original 212 design but rather ordered the 212A design, which not only took German requirements but also Italian requirements into account. NO 212 WAS EVER PRODUCED.

Both 214 and 212A use PEM fuels cells but 214 has a smaller battery set.

So you are a serious poster, with wikipedia as your back thought, and besides you talk like if you have some copy rights on wikipidia, I just showed you that those facts you came up with are all known facts. I go by memory from articles I have read, you do not. you can argue what you want but the 212A wasn't for sale, the 214 is its commercial variant , you will find this fact everywhere you look, so if you've understood what commercial variant means you would have stopped argumenting for the sake of it.

Now you come up with all known concepts of midget submarines in the world, but none is operational as the Fateh is.
You know, you can find much more if you conduct another search, but for no avail, just concepts. Anyone can conceptualize a super hyper submarine with the latest best tech in the world and beyond, but it will be just a concept to be proven in real life.
This Fateh Submarine is operational right now, I hope you have seen the videos on you tube..it is a modern design by all known standards, and the interior tells a lot about it modern systems. It was designed to play a specific role in a specific place with optimum efficiency.
Who does not want to have a type 212-A, 214, 216, 218, a Scorpene a new kilo class or their competitors.
Most can not afford them, and Iran can not buy them.
So, by coming up with its own modern designs, Iran show its independence by designing an producing it own armaments to counter the best out there in mind, namely the US armaments. a daunting task is the least to say.
The Bessat will be bigger and as sophisticated as the Fateh if not more, optimized as the Fateh with the overhauled and modernized kilo class as a benchmark. By the way, very few countries can overhaul their submarine or modernize them by themselves, this should give you another hint about Iranian scientific capacities.
Since you mensionned the NK Song-O 400 tone submarine, not a very sophisticated and an old submarine, but managed to sink one of the best frigate or destroyer out there...
Caling a frigate a destroyer depends on where you live in this world, not every country goes by the NATO tonage standards, you can do some search on it and you'll find out.

 

[Penguin]

So you are a serious poster, with wikipedia as your back thought, and besides you talk like if you have some copy rights on wikipidia, I just showed you that those facts you came up with are all known facts. I go by memory from articles I have read, you do not. you can argue what you want but the 212A wasn't for sale, the 214 is its commercial variant , you will find this fact everywhere you look, so if you've understood what commercial variant means you would have stopped argumenting for the sake of it.

Now you come up with all known concepts of midget submarines in the world, but none is operational as the Fateh is.
You know, you can find much more if you conduct another search, but for no avail, just concepts. Anyone can conceptualize a super hyper submarine with the latest best tech in the world and beyond, but it will be just a concept to be proven in real life.
This Fateh Submarine is operational right now, I hope you have seen the videos on you tube..it is a modern design by all known standards, and the interior tells a lot about it modern systems. It was designed to play a specific role in a specific place with optimum efficiency.
Who does not want to have a type 212-A, 214, 216, 218, a Scorpene a new kilo class or their competitors.
Most can not afford them, and Iran can not buy them.
So, by coming up with its own modern designs, Iran show its independence by designing an producing it own armaments to counter the best out there in mind, namely the US armaments. a daunting task is the least to say.
The Bessat will be bigger and as sophisticated as the Fateh if not more, optimized as the Fateh with the overhauled and modernized kilo class as a benchmark. By the way, very few countries can overhaul their submarine or modernize them by themselves, this should give you another hint about Iranian scientific capacities.
Since you mensionned the NK Song-O 400 tone submarine, not a very sophisticated and an old submarine, but managed to sink one of the best frigate or destroyer out there...
Caling a frigate a destroyer depends on where you live in this world, not every country goes by the NATO tonage standards, you can do some search on it and you'll find out.

It is telling you criticize sources, which in the case of wiki (which is convenient, but onvisouly not the only source I have acces to) are only indicative / illustration i.e. caes in point. "just concepts' is balony, for in the casae of South Korea they are being built and a builder like Fincantieri only waits for a commercial order (no need to start building without customer, is there?). So, bla on your side.

I haven't mentioned any north korean subs in my list of contemptory minisubs.

A 1400 ton lightly armed ship, that is not a FAC, is a corvette by any standard, it is not a destroyer. In the time it was first produced (Alvand class) they were rated destroyer-escort, which us US terminology equivalent of Royal navy term 'frigate' in the era WW2-start of cold war. That is were the confusing originates from, plus it is in Iran's interest to hype those ships. But mind you e.g. Turkish Ada class (MILGEM) corvette is already nearly twice the displacement. Italian Folgosi class likewise. Even the Italian Minerva class corvettes are significantly bigger, so it is NOT a destroyer. That does not change depending on where you live or how you view the world, unless your name is Joseph Goebels.

Hollow rethoric.

 

[Penguin]

Caling a frigate a destroyer depends on where you live in this world, not every country goes by the NATO tonage standards, you can do some search on it and you'll find out.

I suppose you could technically call these aircraft carriers....

 

[Hack-Hook]

Come on Guys , how many time we must say in our language we don't have all those fancy categories for ships

we have "رزم ناو - Razm-Nav" which is equivalent to Battleship .
we have "ناو هواپیمابر - Nave-Havapeymabar" which is equivalent to Aircraft Carrier .
we Have "ناوشکن - Nav-Shekan" Which is translated to Destroyer but it mean all warship
we have "ناو - Nav" which can be translated to Ship and is used for all non combat ships.

smaller than these vessels are boats that are totally different categories .
I wonder when we can stop all these nonsense about tonnage and understand these term don't mean anything , they are just lack of equivalent term in translation .

 

[Penguin]

Come on Guys , how many time we must say in our language we don't have all those fancy categories for ships

we have "رزم ناو - Razm-Nav" which is equivalent to Battleship .
we have "ناو هواپیمابر - Nave-Havapeymabar" which is equivalent to Aircraft Carrier .
we Have "ناوشکن - Nav-Shekan" Which is translated to Destroyer but it mean all warship
we have "ناو - Nav" which can be translated to Ship and is used for all non combat ships.

smaller than these vessels are boats that are totally different categories .
I wonder when we can stop all these nonsense about tonnage and understand these term don't mean anything , they are just lack of equivalent term in translation .

This is the most honest and informative explanation I've come across thusfar. Thank you. Without a doubt, it is indeed proper to refer to the Alvand and Moudge classes as warships. I do hope you agree that there are warships and warships, though, i.e. that categories do mean something (they refer not so much to tonnage principally but to roles and capabilities. With more comprehensive roles come greater capabilities. Greater capabilities mean more as well as more advanced weapons and sensors and hence often greater ship tonnage. Time period also plays a role: in e.g. WW2 frigates and destroyers were often similar in size but with very different machinery, weapons and endurance parameters. In a sense, we are back in an era where size has become less of a distinctive feater as e.g. in the 1970-90s.

 

[Hack-Hook]

This is the most honest and informative explanation I've come across thusfar. Thank you. Without a doubt, it is indeed proper to refer to the Alvand and Moudge classes as warships. I do hope you agree that there are warships and warships, though, i.e. that categories do mean something (they refer not so much to tonnage principally but to roles and capabilities. With more comprehensive roles come greater capabilities. Greater capabilities mean more as well as more advanced weapons and sensors and hence often greater ship tonnage. Time period also plays a role: in e.g. WW2 frigates and destroyers were often similar in size but with very different machinery, weapons and endurance parameters. In a sense, we are back in an era where size has become less of a distinctive feater as e.g. in the 1970-90s.

well , there is no doubt that there is Warship and warship and I believe as Battleships have literally become obsolete our "فرهنگستان علوم و زبان فارسی " (The institute who is tasked with protecting persian language and such) must do something about that category for example decide that destroyer only called "ناوشکن " as this two are literally mean something and let the rest of Warships be called رزمناو which right now is only used for battleships

 

[Penguin]

well , there is no doubt that there is Warship and warship and I believe as Battleships have literally become obsolete our "فرهنگستان علوم و زبان فارسی " (The institute who is tasked with protecting persian language and such) must do something about that category for example decide that destroyer only called "ناوشکن " as this two are literally mean something and let the rest of Warships be called رزمناو which right now is only used for battleships

Would the language allow for such distinctions as e.g. 'light' and 'heavy' warships and/or 'coastal' and 'ocean going' warships and/or 'patrol' and 'combat' ships?

 

[Hack-Hook]

Would the language allow for such distinctions as e.g. 'light' and 'heavy' warships and/or 'coastal' and 'ocean going' warships and/or 'patrol' and 'combat' ships?

well there is no direct word for those class of ships , you must make the word by combining ship and boat with appropriate adjective and adverbs and get the words like "قایق گشتزنی - Patrol Boat" or "ناو جنگی - Nave-Jangi or Combat ship" and "کشتی اقیانوس پیما - Ocean Going Ship"


honestly its easier and more elegant to sum all of them together. unles they invent some word for those class of ships and even if they do that it take years for people to accept those word .
let put it like it people accept some word and don't accept some other , here everyone knew the new word for Helicopter is بالگرد - Bal-Gard but hardly anybody knew the accepted word for Pizza is کش لقمه - kesh-loghmeh

 

[Nishan_101]

I think its Korean design one...
Although I wish Pakistan would start up JV with China on:
700 Tons
1600 Tons
3500 Tons
7000 Tons

 

[Gilamard]

I think its Korean design one...
Although I wish Pakistan would start up JV with China on:
700 Tons
1600 Tons
3500 Tons
7000 Tons

Please show us a similar Nkorean submarine