UK Defence Forum

Long term numbers of 12 SSN (or even better 2 batches of 8) at rate of 1 per year and 4 SSBN at 1 per 2 year.
Lifetime of 20-24 years gives a nice drumbeat for construction.

So short term 7ssn 5ssk 4ssbn works. My vote is soryu class from Japan.

andrew98 wrote: My vote is soryu class from Japan.

Hmm, yes, Soryu's are great boats, but they are, IMHO, too close to SSNs ( and too close with a price to real SSN ), so something smaller like Type 214 or Scorpene would be better for the RN.

abc123 wrote:

andrew98 wrote: My vote is soryu class from Japan.

Hmm, yes, Soryu's are great boats, but they are, IMHO, too close to SSNs ( and too close with a price to real SSN ), so something smaller like Type 214 or Scorpene would be better for the RN.

According to wiki ( yes wiki lol ) they coming in at around £400m each, that only a 1/3 of the average astute price so not close at all really.

With a range of only around 6,000nm and a tonnage half that of an astute they would be perfect for home waters / North Sea / North Atlantic

Doesn't even come close to an SSN, the only thing that does is another SSN

shark bait wrote:The only feasible option would be an import

I agree, but this thread seems pretty focused on the Type 214 being the import of choice. I'd have thought partnering with Sweden and the Netherlands on the Gotland/Walrus replacement programme might be a better option since we might get to have some input in to the design and some workshare.

shark bait wrote:Doesn't even come close to an SSN, the only thing that does is another SSN

Well, obviously, closest out of currently existing SSKs. That's what I meant.

Jake1992 wrote:

abc123 wrote:

andrew98 wrote: My vote is soryu class from Japan.

Hmm, yes, Soryu's are great boats, but they are, IMHO, too close to SSNs ( and too close with a price to real SSN ), so something smaller like Type 214 or Scorpene would be better for the RN.

According to wiki ( yes wiki lol ) they coming in at around £400m each, that only a 1/3 of the average astute price so not close at all really.

With a range of only around 6,000nm and a tonnage half that of an astute they would be perfect for home waters / North Sea / North Atlantic

I don't have problems with Wiki ( in 99% of cases they are as accurate as any other source ), but, I would say that 400 mil. pounds number is for Japan. Any other country would have to pay more. Maybe even much more. Because having both Type 214 and Soryu costing about the same amount of money ( but not with same capabilities )- that's a bit strange to me.

Pseudo wrote:

shark bait wrote:The only feasible option would be an import

I agree, but this thread seems pretty focused on the Type 214 being the import of choice. I'd have thought partnering with Sweden and the Netherlands on the Gotland/Walrus replacement programme might be a better option since we might get to have some input in to the design and some workshare.

I still think we would be better off with a off the self buy if we get into a project the risk of mission creep and added cost will follow. I feel the type 214 offers what we would need however if a price cap was placed as part of the project then maybe it could be looked at

SSK discussion thread here: http://ukdefenceforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=383

shark bait wrote:Doesn't even come close to an SSN, the only thing that does is another SSN

Not 100% correct the SSN has obvious capability gains in power generation and the indiscrestion rates(hold down)and the like, but all submarines length of patrols are dictatated by food and crew well being.

But in saying that smaller long endurance submarine's can go further into the littoral's, a nuc boats will allways give off small amount of radiated noise of some description, they can reduce it but its allways there.it's not about just endurance in the big blue. It's about conops for any given nation.

I’ve also seen reports that on exercise with the USN off Florida coast Astute was able to ‘hold’ an American Virginia class for longer than the Americans thought possible. Really surprised everyone. I think these are top class boats. Been involved with complex programmes for 35 years. They all take about 10 to 15 years to settle down and deliver as originally intended and in most cases, they end up working far better than intended. My only disappointment is our failure to fit vertical launch tubes for TLAM. Let’s hope we actually order the seventh boat!

Sceptical Richard wrote:Astute was able to ‘hold’ an American Virginia class for longer than the Americans thought possible

Could you please explain what this means, in civvy type lingo? Many thanks

I thought the original report mentioned 'held at such range'? So I presume this was referring to the range at which Astute was able to counter the New Mexicos manoeuvres? Of course i could be totally wrong!

I think it is referring to the fact that the Astute was able to track the Virginia class far better and at greater range than the USN thought it would be able to.

Lord Jim wrote:I think it is referring to the fact that the Astute was able to track the Virginia class far better and at greater range than the USN thought it would be able to.

Thanks. More effectively than the Virginia class could track the Astute?

dmereifield wrote:

Lord Jim wrote:I think it is referring to the fact that the Astute was able to track the Virginia class far better and at greater range than the USN thought it would be able to.

Thanks. More effectively than the Virginia class could track the Astute?

Implication was yes.

But as with anything, even the "reported" stuff never contains full details and could be "any".

dmereifield wrote:

Lord Jim wrote:I think it is referring to the fact that the Astute was able to track the Virginia class far better and at greater range than the USN thought it would be able to.

Thanks. More effectively than the Virginia class could track the Astute?

Indeed, this seems to be the case. The "holding at range" reference refers to a submarine ASW lexicon where one submarine has the ability to detect and track a target submarine at a distance without itself being detected/tracked. An interesting article about this is below:

https://fas.org/spp/eprint/snf03222.htm

The actual quote from the navy commander is: "Our sonar is fantastic and I have never before experienced holding a submarine at the range we were holding USS New Mexico. The Americans were utterly taken aback, blown away with what they were seeing".

^^^^Thanks

matt00773 wrote:

dmereifield wrote:

Lord Jim wrote:I think it is referring to the fact that the Astute was able to track the Virginia class far better and at greater range than the USN thought it would be able to.

Thanks. More effectively than the Virginia class could track the Astute?

Indeed, this seems to be the case. The "holding at range" reference refers to a submarine ASW lexicon where one submarine has the ability to detect and track a target submarine at a distance without itself being detected/tracked. An interesting article about this is below:

https://fas.org/spp/eprint/snf03222.htm

The actual quote from the navy commander is: "Our sonar is fantastic and I have never before experienced holding a submarine at the range we were holding USS New Mexico. The Americans were utterly taken aback, blown away with what they were seeing".

Equally glowing reports have been reported on the US side. The Astutes are pretty, well, astute

Would it be possible to make a conventional version of an Astute powered by diesel,electric,AIP or lithium rather than a reactor?

Similar to the French Shortfin Barracuda Class that is being built for the Australian Navy.

I am sure the costs would be difficult to quantify but if it was viable and costs where at a similar level to a T26 might it be worth a look?

I asked this previously and was told that submarines are designed around the propulsion system. You cant change the propulsion without changing the whole submarine.

PapaGolf wrote:I asked this previously and was told that submarines are designed around the propulsion system. You cant change the propulsion without changing the whole submarine.

Thanks

It makes you wonder how the French are doing it then

Poiuytrewq wrote:

PapaGolf wrote:I asked this previously and was told that submarines are designed around the propulsion system. You cant change the propulsion without changing the whole submarine.

Thanks

It makes you wonder how the French are doing it then

By being clever and by good marketing. Shortfin isn't so much "A Barracuda with AIP" as it is a Barracuda that has been cut off forward of the reactor compartment and had a new, SSK-spec stern fitted. Eveb that may be generous in the end, but we'll see. Scorpène's MESMA has some interesting ideas on a more common drivetrain for nuke and non, but they seem to be moving pretty decisively away from that avenue.

Anyone with any insight or views as to why the RN SSN in the Eastern Med did not participate in the Syrian strikes?

Lots of press about the boat playing hide and seek with two Kilos, a Russian MPA and two frigates. Do we think the boat was detected or that the risk of detection during a TLAM firing was simply too great to participate?

It might have deliberately dragged russian attention away from the USS Warner, which fired 6 TLAMs.