UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
downsizer
Member
Posts: 714
Joined: 02 May 2015, 08:03

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby downsizer » 28 Oct 2017, 12:42

Paaartyyyy....

Naughty shippers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41786237

Online
indeid
Member
Posts: 261
Joined: 21 May 2015, 20:46

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby indeid » 29 Oct 2017, 13:32

downsizer wrote:Paaartyyyy....

Naughty shippers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41786237


Maybe the RN recruitment team are trying a different approach to temp people.....

No PR is bad PR?

Smokey
Member
Posts: 272
Joined: 18 Feb 2017, 13:33
Location: Cyprus

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby Smokey » 29 Oct 2017, 13:35


Spinflight
Member
Posts: 576
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby Spinflight » 27 Nov 2017, 22:44

All four Vanguards now need refueling apparently. My understanding was that only one was previously planned for.

Which is going to have some pretty serious repercussions and likely indicates that Dreadnought is going to be late.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 28 Nov 2017, 07:17

Spinflight wrote:repercussions and likely indicates that Dreadnought is going to be late.


The unplanned re-corings for nuclear boats have put an extra 51-52 months to the work queue, which is strictly sequential. I believe - but do not know - that the same line will need to be "retooled" when they make the switch between reactor types. So a build project in its own right.

The navy has been saying all along that extending the boats beyond their planned lives is not a good idea (no matter what type, SSN or with an extra "B", they are.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5292
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby shark bait » 28 Nov 2017, 07:48

Makes you wonder why they make our subs so difficult to refuel.

The French, Russians and Chinese all have refueling hatches, whereas the UK and Americans believe we can work with full life cores, which is fine until the replacement is inevitably delayed.
@LandSharkUK

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 576
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby Spinflight » 28 Nov 2017, 08:53

Because it's cheaper to design for a certain life on the assumption it's replacement will be ready.

This will cost billions.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 28 Nov 2017, 09:43

Spinflight wrote: it's cheaper to design for a certain life on the assumption it's replacement will be ready.

This will cost billions


You may have Cabinet Office running the MoD, you may have the Submarine Enterprise (where Treasury gets to sit), you have all these wise people, but with only partial knowledge/ understanding and either lacking comms skills or lacking incentives to talk to each other,

So that they could make also the politicians, with plenty of one of the skills listed above and with less of all the others, to understand the real costs equation. It does not require differential calculus, may be calculating fractions and percentages, at times :roll: .

Poiuytrewq
Member
Posts: 790
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 13 Apr 2018, 13:26

Is there any chance that the Vanguard class boats could be life extended and added to the SSN fleet possibly with vertically launched TLAM capability?

I suspect even if it was possible it would prove to be cost prohibitive but at present given the building schedule at Barrow it's hard to see how SSN numbers could increase in the coming decades unless the Vanguard and\or Trafalgar boats are life extended or a new class of SSK's are introduced.

Are any of these options even remotely possible?

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5292
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby shark bait » 13 Apr 2018, 13:30

Very unlikely, they're already being pushed out beyond their original design life any further extension would likely be prohibitively expensive.

The RN wont be short of cruise missiles when the T26 comes into service any way. Each frigate has the capacity for more missiles than the RN has ever used in a single conflict.
@LandSharkUK

RetroSicotte
Site Admin
Posts: 2041
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby RetroSicotte » 13 Apr 2018, 15:16

shark bait wrote:The RN wont be short of cruise missiles when the T26 comes into service any way.


If the Type 26 actually comes into service with TLAMs in its Mk41, then I'll owe you a drink for optimism affecting reality, cos I very much doubt that will happen. :P

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3251
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby Ron5 » 13 Apr 2018, 16:40

I agree. I'm sure anti-ship missiles and/or ASROC would be higher on the priority list. And the UK/French missile under development is supposed to be anti-ship and land attack. So Tomahawk would be long odds.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 1738
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby abc123 » 13 Apr 2018, 18:11

RetroSicotte wrote:
shark bait wrote:The RN wont be short of cruise missiles when the T26 comes into service any way.


If the Type 26 actually comes into service with TLAMs in its Mk41, then I'll owe you a drink for optimism affecting reality, cos I very much doubt that will happen. :P



Seconded.
:thumbup:
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 1738
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby abc123 » 13 Apr 2018, 18:13

shark bait wrote:
The RN wont be short of cruise missiles when the T26 comes into service any way.


Each frigate has the capacity for more missiles than the RN has ever used in a single conflict.



Tell me, how exactly do you think that these two sentences can stand there, one by another, and not being in contradiction?
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5292
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby shark bait » 13 Apr 2018, 23:22

The RN has never used more than 24 cruise missiles in a single conflict. It will soon have Astutes, F35, and T26, all of which should carry cruise missiles, a far greater capacity than in the past.

Paying through the roof to keep the V Boats going as cruise missile ships is totally unnecessary.
@LandSharkUK

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 2540
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 14 Apr 2018, 02:21

Ron5 wrote:I agree. I'm sure anti-ship missiles and/or ASROC would be higher on the priority list. And the UK/French missile under development is supposed to be anti-ship and land attack. So Tomahawk would be long odds.
TLAM block 4 can do anti ship. They are not stealthy, but has two way data link, as I understand.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 14 Apr 2018, 09:32

shark bait wrote:Paying through the roof to keep the V Boats going as cruise missile ships is totally unnecessary


True on its own, and we have already seen the upset to (single) supply chains caused by suddenly a re-coring need "jumping the queue"
- so there are other costs than purely monetary, too
- if we were still getting the "full-format" NAO major projects reports, such would appear under "Capability Risks" header

User avatar
Repulse
Senior Member
Posts: 1343
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby Repulse » 14 Apr 2018, 09:41

I’ve said before, but I think the new Dreadnoughts should be built in larger numbers as hybrid SSBNs and SSGNs, though only in one role at any time (3 SSBNs and 3 SSGNs). It sounds fantasy but a fully loaded sub with Cruise Missiles is a Big Stick that would compliment perfectly or act independently from the CSG.
"For get this quite clear, every time we have to decide between Europe and the open sea, it is always the open sea we shall choose." - Winston Churchill

Poiuytrewq
Member
Posts: 790
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 14 Apr 2018, 09:50

Repulse wrote:I’ve said before, but I think the new Dreadnoughts should be built in larger numbers as hybrid SSBNs and SSGNs, though only in one role at any time (3 SSBNs and 3 SSGNs). It sounds fantasy but a fully loaded sub with Cruise Missiles is a Big Stick that would compliment perfectly or act independently from the CSG.
How much is that likely to cost?

User avatar
Repulse
Senior Member
Posts: 1343
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby Repulse » 14 Apr 2018, 10:11

30bn for the 4 Dreadnoughts is the published figure, but how much of this is for design / extra stuff is not known. My guess £6bn for the extra two. Sounds a lot, but in a world that is getting more dangerous the conventional deterrent effect when coupled with the CSG would save a lot more IMO.
"For get this quite clear, every time we have to decide between Europe and the open sea, it is always the open sea we shall choose." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 14 Apr 2018, 10:16

Howabout a "Virginia" SSGN module, attached to the back of the 7th Astute's conning tower?
- the boat is likely to be slowed down in its construction, in order not to empty the nuclear contingency altogether
- would be much cheaper (the module exists, and we have been part of working on its "inners")

Talk about spiral development philosophy :)

Poiuytrewq
Member
Posts: 790
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 14 Apr 2018, 11:35

Repulse wrote:30bn for the 4 Dreadnoughts is the published figure, but how much of this is for design / extra stuff is not known. My guess £6bn for the extra two. Sounds a lot, but in a world that is getting more dangerous the conventional deterrent effect when coupled with the CSG would save a lot more IMO.
It's an interesting idea, how many TLAM's would you expect these boats to carry, more than the 12 tubes planned for the SSBN version?

Online
Jake1992
Member
Posts: 833
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby Jake1992 » 14 Apr 2018, 13:00

Repulse wrote:I’ve said before, but I think the new Dreadnoughts should be built in larger numbers as hybrid SSBNs and SSGNs, though only in one role at any time (3 SSBNs and 3 SSGNs). It sounds fantasy but a fully loaded sub with Cruise Missiles is a Big Stick that would compliment perfectly or act independently from the CSG.


Interesting idea 2 quick questions though,
1 - would we be able to have 2 on patrol at all times out of the 6 ( one as SSBN and the other as SSGN ) since it's said 4 are needed for just one on patrol at all times ??

2 - is there any info on how many TLAMs the new tubes can carry each is it just one each or more ? As 12 TLAM for the cost of each of these is not much of a deterent or good value for cost in my opion.

User avatar
Repulse
Senior Member
Posts: 1343
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby Repulse » 14 Apr 2018, 14:49

Jake1992, 4 SSBNs is needed in case one breaks down / has an accident which would prevent a continuous deterrent. If one had an accident then one of the SSGNs could be re-roles.

Ohio class can fit 7 TLAM per tube, so technically 7*12 = 84 TLAMS. Enough to ruin anyone’s day, and enough to make the UKs enemies think twice with this capability lurking anywhere in the world.
"For get this quite clear, every time we have to decide between Europe and the open sea, it is always the open sea we shall choose." - Winston Churchill

Online
Jake1992
Member
Posts: 833
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Vanguard Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN) (RN)

Postby Jake1992 » 14 Apr 2018, 14:58

Repulse wrote:Jake1992, 4 SSBNs is needed in case one breaks down / has an accident which would prevent a continuous deterrent. If one had an accident then one of the SSGNs could be re-roles.

Ohio class can fit 7 TLAM per tube, so technically 7*12 = 84 TLAMS. Enough to ruin anyone’s day, and enough to make the UKs enemies think twice with this capability lurking anywhere in the world.


Are the dreadnoughts going to use the same tubes as the Ohio class, as I know went in with the US to develop a new all perpouse tube ? If so then that load out is very nice indeed.

If they extra 2 could be got for a reasonable price I quite like the idea, and as said could serve as a very useful conventional deterent like the QEs


Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jake1992 and 5 guests