Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Clive F · Post by **Clive F** » 12 Mar 2018, 14:23

Deal with Japan/France/Germany/Sweden. We buy 3 SSK, you buy some of our kit?

shark bait · Post by **shark bait** » 12 Mar 2018, 14:31

Germany cant build frigates for shit, maybe we can do swapsies

Tempest414 · Post by **Tempest414** » 12 Mar 2018, 17:20

if the UK were to buy say 4 SSK would we be able to extend the Astute class life though reduced use and if so by how long

Post by **Timmymagic** » 12 Mar 2018, 17:43

Is there no way with investment to increase over all national capacity in building SSNs over the next 20 years odd ??[/quote]

One of the major constraints is the reactor production time. You could increase production capacity, but unless you could guarantee holding the fleet at a certain level it may not be worth it.

KyleG · Post by **KyleG** » 14 Mar 2018, 14:54

shark bait wrote:How?

Can't do anything without impacting dreadnought, which is an immovable object.

The design work and the knowledge of how to build them is already there, aside from a number of updates that'd no doubt be installed. This would llikely allow them to be in the water sooner compared to the current Astutes, and make it easier to squeeze a couple of builds in around the SSBN build schedule. I'm not saying it'd work perfectly but if we want to keep to just nuclear boats it would seem to be a good option.

Of course if the RN goes for SSKs (which personally I think they should) it'd be another story.

ArmChairCivvy · Post by **ArmChairCivvy** » 14 Mar 2018, 15:11

KyleG wrote: allow them to be in the water sooner compared to the current Astutes, and make it easier to squeeze a couple of builds in around the SSBN build schedule

On the money... and I'd wager (somebody else's) salary; not mine, on it

abc123 · Post by **abc123** » 14 Mar 2018, 19:45

shark bait wrote:Germany cant build frigates for shit, maybe we can do swapsies

Yeah, you could sell them your faulty destroyers for their faulty frigates...

benny14 · Post by **benny14** » 14 Mar 2018, 20:55

abc123 wrote:Yeah, you could sell them your faulty destroyers for their faulty frigates...

Comparing the Type 45, which has manageable engine issues to a completely broken class of frigates is a terrible comparison.

ArmChairCivvy · Post by **ArmChairCivvy** » 14 Mar 2018, 21:00

benny14 wrote:
abc123 wrote:Yeah, you could sell them your faulty destroyers for their faulty frigates...
Comparing the Type 45, which has manageable engine issues to a completely broken class of frigates is a terrible comparison.

As abc has adopted the position of a broker, what can he deliver into the deal, for any mismatch ( or as "loose change")?
- I am sure it is something that says to the defence industries of the UK and Germany "eat my dust

"?

benny14 · Post by **benny14** » 14 Mar 2018, 21:11

ArmChairCivvy wrote: As abc has adopted the position of a broker, what can he deliver into the deal, for any mismatch ( or as "loose change")

They give us the Frigates for free, we melt them down and turn them in to Type 31s for a small fee.

ArmChairCivvy · Post by **ArmChairCivvy** » 15 Mar 2018, 05:20

And having created the gap in the market, BAE then partners with a "local" yard to build T26s (for them) as replacements

The profits from this operation are used to fill up the Boat7 funding gap...

abc123 · Post by **abc123** » 15 Mar 2018, 21:13

benny14 wrote:
abc123 wrote:Yeah, you could sell them your faulty destroyers for their faulty frigates...
Comparing the Type 45, which has manageable engine issues to a completely broken class of frigates is a terrible comparison.

I'm sure that they will also find a way to manage their shortcomings.

abc123 · Post by **abc123** » 15 Mar 2018, 21:14

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
benny14 wrote:
abc123 wrote:Yeah, you could sell them your faulty destroyers for their faulty frigates...
Comparing the Type 45, which has manageable engine issues to a completely broken class of frigates is a terrible comparison.
As abc has adopted the position of a broker, what can he deliver into the deal, for any mismatch ( or as "loose change")?
- I am sure it is something that says to the defence industries of the UK and Germany "eat my dust "?

Truth hurts, eh?

Maybe my contribution is a dash of common sense and decency- not to mock others, when you have a lot of your own problems.

benny14 · Post by **benny14** » 15 Mar 2018, 23:00

abc123 wrote: Truth hurts, eh?
Maybe my contribution is a dash of common sense and decency- not to mock others, when you have a lot of your own problems.

The only thing that hurt was your terrible comparison

. People always like to bring up the issues with the RN, and then act like everyone elses Navy is perfect. I dont see a problem with pointing out how bad another countries ship building program is compared to ours.

Post by **Ron5** » 16 Mar 2018, 00:16

abc123 is very careful to keep his country secret. No doubt they have a perfect Navy (eyes roll).

ArmChairCivvy · Post by **ArmChairCivvy** » 16 Mar 2018, 05:00

Ron5 wrote:No doubt they have a perfect Navy (eyes roll).

You wouldn't mean that huffing and puffing carrier, by any chance? The one that has been relegated to training use, just to keep the skills alive for the dream project of a replacement to be started - in 10 or 20 years' time.

abc123 · Post by **abc123** » 16 Mar 2018, 21:33

Ron5 wrote:abc123 is very careful to keep his country secret. No doubt they have a perfect Navy (eyes roll).

No, in fact just the opposite. But, you should hear me ranting about them, in fact, I'm so depressed that I'm way beyond rant ( it's hopeless ).
But, soon the RN will also be beyond repair and need to rant, so that's a bit of relief to me.

abc123 · Post by **abc123** » 16 Mar 2018, 21:36

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Ron5 wrote:No doubt they have a perfect Navy (eyes roll).
You wouldn't mean that huffing and puffing carrier, by any chance? The one that has been relegated to training use, just to keep the skills alive for the dream project of a replacement to be started - in 10 or 20 years' time.

a) I'm not Russian nor from Russia ( as I have said 100x over and over again ), so I really don't care about Kuznetsov

b) the fact that Russia has 1 training carrier is not good OFC, but Russia is land power, she can live even without carriers. Current sad state of the RN, on the other hand, is very worryng ( or should be ) for traditionally maritime power like the UK.

abc123 · Post by **abc123** » 16 Mar 2018, 21:43

benny14 wrote:
abc123 wrote: Truth hurts, eh?
Maybe my contribution is a dash of common sense and decency- not to mock others, when you have a lot of your own problems.
The only thing that hurt was your terrible comparison .

Terrible is to say things like: "Germany can't build frigates for shit". By that standard, I could say that say UK can't build destroyers for shit. Just because there are problems with one class of destroyers. Never mind all other previous classes of frigates/destroyers built well, just one faulty class is enough to say that.

benny14 · Post by **benny14** » 17 Mar 2018, 02:27

abc123 wrote:a) I'm not Russian nor from Russia

Thats what a Russian would say.

Opinion3 · Post by **Opinion3** » 17 Mar 2018, 06:46

gotta say both german and russian subs are pretty good. As for these faults, or deficiencies the real problem more usually a lack of understanding, experience, openness and budget to develop and learn from the mistakes.

i'd say that is one of the challenges with the astute, the problems are secret. this could be for a number of reasons, some entirely valid but it will still be better to design and build in an open fashion if you want progress.

are we not too negative? i think our design and build processes being so slow must make things hard? technology moves on, so is the astute's computer operating system, or the design program the same as used in astute 1 as astute 3? it can't be great using different versions or old versions

Lord Jim · Post by **Lord Jim** » 17 Mar 2018, 09:00

Regarding SSNs and SSBNs one thing we must avoid is a large gaps in production, and the same goes for surface vessels. If it means we stick to single designs and adapt them no problem. I would like to see the Dreadnoughts alternate with Astute Mk2s in the production schedule and try to get 2 or 3 extra hulls into service. The SSK idea is also a good one, especially if fitted with AIP or the Battery idea Japan is pursuing. This would allow them to carry out many of the roles currently carried out by the SSNs. All comes down to money though, as it always does, and the Navy is already getting a significant number of new toys over the next couple of decades.

Opinion3 · Post by **Opinion3** » 17 Mar 2018, 22:35

Lord Jim's sentiment is spot on. Simply we do need to spend more on defence though

Post by **Repulse** » 18 Mar 2018, 09:23

Agree the RN is getting “new toys”, but what will have more strategic impact for the U.K., when combined with other NATO allies - a light Battlegroup stationed in Poland or additional SSNs to secure the Artic / North Atlantic?

Lord Jim · Post by **Lord Jim** » 18 Mar 2018, 09:31

I agree to a certain extent, but the Army for example is so out of whack that it need serious investment and a re think on existing programmes in order to get in any sort of shape to be relevant in the 21st century. Money is the key to everything we discuss here regarding what needs to be done, and hopefully the ongoing review will decide logical priorities rather than simply listing the Wish Lists of the three services and additional money will be forthcoming to realise them rather than leave them on the to do list. The Astute, has the potential to be one of if not the best SSN in service anywhere and an improved version incorporating the lessons learned would make it more so. We have to avoid the gap in the production of nuclear boats to avoid the mess we got into with the Astute programme where we had to go the Americans for help.

Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)