Moray-class submarine
| Class overview | |
|---|---|
| Name | Moray class |
| Builders | Rotterdamsche Droogdok Maatschappij, Rotterdam |
| Preceded by | Zwaardvis class |
| Cost | ƒ220 million per unit (1989)[1] |
| Planned | 2[2] |
| Cancelled | 2[2] |
| General characteristics | |
| Type | Submarine |
| Displacement | |
| Length |
|
| Beam | 6.4 m (21 ft 0 in)[3] |
| Draft | 5.5 m (18 ft 1 in) |
| Propulsion |
|
| Speed | 20 knots (37 km/h; 23 mph)[3] |
| Endurance | 65 days[4] |
| Test depth | >300 m (980 ft) |
| Crew | 26 to 41 |
| Armament | 6 × 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes |
Moray[lower-alpha 1] was the name of a proposed new class of submarines developed by the Rotterdamsche Droogdok Maatschappij (RDM).[5][6] While a Moray class submarine was never actually built, the detailed design of the submarine class was fully completed.[7]
Design
A Moray-class submarine could be built in several sizes depending on the type of submarine that was needed.[8] For smaller submarines that would patrol off the coast, there was a design that ranged from 1,100 tons to 1,400 tons displacement, whereas oceangoing submarines ranged from 1,800 tons to potentially 2,000 tons displacement.[9][10] Besides customization, RDM also offered three standard types of Moray-class submarines which were called the 1100, 1400 and 1800.[11] The number stood for roughly the amount of tonnage of the submarine. The three types had a length of 55.7 meters (182 ft 9 in) (1100), 64 m (210 ft 0 in) (1400) and 75.9 m (249 ft 0 in) (1800), while the beam was 6.4 m (21 ft 0 in) and the draft 5.5 m (18 ft 1 in).[citation needed] The smallest submarine, the 1100, had space for a crew of 26.[12] The 1800 had space for a crew of 41.[1] While the Moray class was derived from the Walrus class, it had several differences with that class.[13][6] The main difference was that the size of a Moray-class submarine was significantly smaller than a submarine of the Walrus class, which displaced around 2,800 tons.[14][15] Another difference was that the hull of the Moray class was, unlike both the Zwaardvis and Walrus-class submarines, not in the shape of a tear drop.[1] The more straight-lined hull of the Moray class made it possible to extend or shorten the submarine.[2] It also allowed the insertion of a hull section that included an air-independent propulsion (AIP) system.[2] The insertion of the AIP module would increase the tonnage of the submarine by 200 tons.[4] A submarine of the Moray class could also dive less deep than a Walrus-class submarine.[16] The Moray-class submarines had an estimated diving depth of more than 300 m (980 ft).[1][11] The Moray 1800 had the same amount of battery cells as the Walrus-class submarines and an endurance of 65 days.[4] When it comes to armaments, the Moray class was equipped with six 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes that could launch a variety of weapons, such as Mark 48 torpedoes and Harpoon missiles.[3] The price of a Moray-class submarine was estimated to cost around 220 million Dutch guilders in 1989.[1]
Electric Moray 1800
In June 2018, a concept of a fully electric submarine based on the Moray 1800 design was presented at the submarine symposium UDT in Glasgow.[17] In the revealed concept, the diesel engines and all related equipment were removed from the Moray 1800 design together with the lead-acid batteries; these components were instead replaced with lithium batteries.[18][17] The lithium batteries allowed the 1,800-ton submarine to stay at sea for three weeks before needing to return to recharge its batteries.[18] In addition, there were several advantages and disadvantages to using only lithium batteries to power a submarine.[17]
See also
Submarines of similar era and comparison
Notes
Citations
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Henk Knoop (22 April 1989). "Moray kleiner dan de Walrus en geen druppelvorm: Nieuwste onderzeeboot van levensbelang voor RDM". De Telegraaf (in Dutch).
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) - ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Jaime Karremann (16 February 2016). "Zwaardvisklasse niet vervangen: hoe Nederland belangrijke onderzeebootbouwkennis verloor". Marineschepen.nl (in Dutch).
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) - ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 Darman (2004), p. 33.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 van den Pol (1989), p. 358.
- ↑ Martijn Delaere (9 June 1989). "De Nederlandse onderzeedienst wordt met opheffing bedreigd". Het Parool (in Dutch).
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) - ↑ 6.0 6.1 Schoonoord (2012), p. 291.
- ↑ Jaime Karremann (14 February 2019). "'Voor nieuwe onderzeeboten zou Defensie nu keuze voor één partij moeten maken'". Marineschepen.nl (in Dutch).
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) - ↑ "Beleidsplan over Marinebasis: Privatisering Rijkswerf in Den Helder niet wenselijk". Nederlands Dagblad (in Dutch). 17 March 1986.
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) - ↑ Onno Buiter (27 June 1990). "Afgedankte Zeehond is 'spoorloos': Oudgediende wordt proefdier voor het experiment 'Snorkelloos varen'". Het Vrije Volk (in Dutch).
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) - ↑ "Walrus of Zeeleuw? Dat is de kwestie". Het Vrije Volk (in Dutch). 19 June 1987.
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) - ↑ 11.0 11.1 Frans Peeters (24 June 1988). "Moray-onderzeeër perfect voor Israël bij kust-operaties". Het Parool (in Dutch).
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) - ↑ Frans Peeters (9 June 1994). "RDM heeft nieuwe order nodig". Het Parool (in Dutch).
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) - ↑ Theo Nijenhuis (21 April 1986). "Vertrouwelijke brief Nevesbu: Bundeling marine-werven obstakel voor nieuwe orders". De Volkskrant (in Dutch).
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) - ↑ "RDM wil compensatie voor afstel van Walrus". NRC Handelsblad (in Dutch). 20 September 1988.
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) - ↑ "RDM: hoe nu verder na het stoppen van Walrus?". Het Vrije Volk (in Dutch). 21 September 1988.
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) - ↑ "Werf RDM zoekt naar Europese partner voor bouw onderzeeboten". NRC Handelsblad (in Dutch). 3 May 1989.
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) - ↑ 17.0 17.1 17.2 Jaime Karremann (17 January 2019). "Do conventional submarines need diesels in the future?". Navies Worldwide.
- ↑ 18.0 18.1 Erik van Huizen (19 December 2018). "Goede vooruitzichten voor elektro onderzeeboot". Maritiem Nederland (in Dutch).
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link)
References
- Darman, Peter, ed. (2004). Twenty-first Century Submarines and Warships. Military Handbooks. Rochester: Grange Books. ISBN 1-84013-678-2.
- Schoonoord, D.C.L. (2012). Pugno pro patria: de Koninklijke Marine tijdens de Koude Oorlog (in Dutch). Franeker: Van Wijnen. ISBN 978-90-5194-455-6.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) - van den Pol, E. (1989). "Aspects of submarines - Part I: Some notes on development". Schip en Werf. Vol. 56, no. 10. Rotterdam: Wyt & Zonen. pp. 352–358. ISSN 0036-6099.