Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Is there any update on the progress of HMS Audacious? How much longer until we get back up to 7 SSN?
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Aren't the T-boat "decommisionings" front-running the commissioning of A-boats by a year?
- which would make it a long time (ref: the question in the post above)
- which would make it a long time (ref: the question in the post above)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Alamein for the GermansRepulse wrote:Agincourt could have been for the French, plus we need something to call the eighth...Clive F wrote:I would have preferred Ajax.
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Sometime this year for Audacious, she is doing trials. Then Trenchant decoms next year and we go back down to 6.dmereifield wrote:Is there any update on the progress of HMS Audacious? How much longer until we get back up to 7 SSN?
It is going to go up and down each year until 2024 when the 7th Astute is complete. So 6 years until we are fixed at 7 subs again.
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Still time to order an 8th boat and sort out the long lead items.
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Yes, but the RN previously rarely had all boats in operation at any one time as at least one would be in deep maintenance/refuelling. If I understand the current schedule correctly, the T boats are decommissioned as they come up for what would otherwise be a refuelling period, anyway. The crews are then able to rotate through their normal work cycle and the next Astute boat commissions a year later thereby replacing the outgoing T boat.benny14 wrote:Sometime this year for Audacious, she is doing trials. Then Trenchant decoms next year and we go back down to 6.dmereifield wrote:Is there any update on the progress of HMS Audacious? How much longer until we get back up to 7 SSN?
It is going to go up and down each year until 2024 when the 7th Astute is complete. So 6 years until we are fixed at 7 subs again.
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Audacious is in the water outside the main hall. I think it's been there since autumn last year IIRC. If all is going well I would expect her to sail for sea trails very soon but I haven't seen any progress reports. You would think they would be trying to push the last 3 boats a bit quicker as the Dreadnought program ramps up.
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
I don't expect they'll be speeding anything up.
Dreadnought 1 should be entering the water around 2026, meaning 4 boats to launch in 8 years, roughly the same pace things have been happening.
Dreadnought 1 should be entering the water around 2026, meaning 4 boats to launch in 8 years, roughly the same pace things have been happening.
@LandSharkUK
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
I'd say that the Astutes are nearer to every 3 years rather than 2. Certainly the first few were but whether this can be sped up a bit with the later builds as the initial problems are ironed out. I think the last 'Artful' was commissioned in 2016. Audacious will probably leave this year but probably won't be in service until 2019.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
The initial problems with the Astutes were just the start to the "perfect storm". They gave rise to slowing down the prgrm, then the broad fiscal troubles (mind you, not just in Britain, but bad enough) slowed down the prgrm further. Everything was slowed down, so when the single bottleneck (reactors, including their cores for making old ones run for longer) got swamped with the unplanned recorings (at least one precautionary one was included in the work queue) then you suddenly were facing a cumulative delay, due to this single bottleneck, of 51 months, affecting both prgrms. That's why boat 7, had it not to been funded, would have been standing on those blocks within the constrauction hall for a very long timeRambo wrote:I'd say that the Astutes are nearer to every 3 years rather than 2. Certainly the first few were but whether this can be sped up a bit with the later builds as the initial problems are ironed out.
- no wonder they pay DG Nuclear £500k/ yr, to sort it all out, as tinkering by the Treasury has only made bad things worse... it's not all in the spreadsheet . If that were the case, I could have applied for the post
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Yesterday I saw a pic of a bow section of one of the Astutes outside Cammell Laird next to the new Polar research ship. It is said to be the 7th boat HMS Agincourt. I wasn't aware until recently that BAE were subcontracting work to other yards especially sections of the boats. But a newsletter for CL confirms that they have been doing work for the last 3 boats for a few years now but it isn't well publicised. This opens up questions about the capacity at Barrow and whether block building could have been more successful / cheaper from the start possibly leading to boats 8 & 9.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Don't know, but the expansion of the hall in Barrow (to hold three boats during their various stages of construction/ assembly/ fitting out) may have been an enabling factor for the change (mentioned above)?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
No idea if this programme has been shown previously, even so some may have missed it. Tonight 20th at 2100 on BBC4 "How to build a Nuclear Submrine". The construction of the Astute class.
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Its on page 1 of this thread. Still there.jonas wrote:No idea if this programme has been shown previously, even so some may have missed it. Tonight 20th at 2100 on BBC4 "How to build a Nuclear Submrine". The construction of the Astute class.
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Nonetheless, thanks for the heads-up, Jonas
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Is there a successor to the Astute class as in the same progression of the Virginia class to the Columbia class with a quieter electric drive without pump jet propulsion inclusion of x shaped stern for increased manoeuvrability
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
They just "saved" £2 bn by moving that project out of the 10-yr horizon. One way to create "uncommitted funds" within the given total.seaspear wrote:Is there a successor to the Astute class as in the same progression of the Virginia class to the Columbia class with a quieter electric drive without pump jet propulsion inclusion of x shaped stern for increased manoeuvrability
- that was, of course, for design only
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Looking at how long it has taken on average from first dive to sea trials, Audacious may sail October time, 10 months, there or thereabouts.
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Can anyone tell me, if after the 4 SSBN's have been made they made some more but without the "Trident" stuff how much more expensive would they be than new design SSN's? I know there is a lot of "unknowns". Would they be to big?. Could we fit TLAM's in the back? Better accommodation? SBS berths? Just curious, any opinions?
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Its certainly possible to build a shortened dreadnought without all the missile silos. Might be a nice idea, recycle the design and save billions in the process!
@LandSharkUK
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
"How much more expensive than a new design SSN" depends heavily on what the desired specs for the new SSN are. Versus something like a reasonably upgraded repeat of the Astute, there would definitely be a premium to be paid.Clive F wrote:Can anyone tell me, if after the 4 SSBN's have been made they made some more but without the "Trident" stuff how much more expensive would they be than new design SSN's? I know there is a lot of "unknowns". Would they be to big?. Could we fit TLAM's in the back? Better accommodation? SBS berths? Just curious, any opinions?
I don't think such a sub would be "too big" in operational terms. Over on this side of the big blue ball, the 688/774-size hull is just about maxed out and the next class of subs seems very likely to be larger. Whether a return to Seawolf dimensions or just going ahead and adopting the Columbia class plant and hull cylinders remains to be seen, but a large-diameter SSN future seems inevitable. And yes, embracing it would make it easier to cram additional payloads, from missiles to UUVs to SBS gear, into the envelope. Whether the UK can embrace a large-diameter SSN program and see it through past competing budget priorities, I couldn't say.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
- so just pick up the propulsion innovations, and integrate them to the "as such" good hunter-killer design?Halidon wrote: [over and beyond] something like a reasonably upgraded repeat of the Astute, there would definitely be a premium to be paid.
Or would doing so force a change of the hull form... making it a new design?
Anyone who has watched the "slow motion" film of what entries are in (within the 10-yr horizon) the EP plan may have noticed the removal (shunting ) of the Astute replacement item...
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
My statement was meant to refer to something like the S-boat to T-boat evolution, which I'd loosely describe as improvements to systems and quieting in essentially the same hull. I don't now enough about the hull or the drive to get too wordy on whether it could be lengthened adequately to accommodate the SSBN's electric drive, if so I'd definitely put that as being in the high end of an "upgraded Astute" range rather than a new design. If the pressure hull's diameter need to be increased and/or new reactor is used you're pretty much in a "new design" space.ArmChairCivvy wrote: - so just pick up the propulsion innovations, and integrate them to the "as such" good hunter-killer design?
Or would doing so force a change of the hull form... making it a new design?