I'd think that using the word "potentially" in the first sentence pretty clearly points toward what follows being speculation.jonas wrote:Perhaps you should have said speculated rather than explained.
Dreadnought Class SSBN
Re: RE: Re: UK's successor submarines
Re: UK's successor submarines
"Warspite'' has to be the ultimate SSBN name, so W's for me.arfah wrote:Maybe the next Ark Royal could be a SSBN ?
Last edited by The Armchair Soldier on 30 Sep 2015, 22:03, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Removed the duplicate quotes
Reason: Removed the duplicate quotes
Re: UK's successor submarines
It wont be called Warspite if Jeremy is elected ,the names of R.N ships may be more politically correct
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: UK's successor submarines
HMS Impotenceseaspear wrote:It wont be called Warspite if Jeremy is elected ,the names of R.N ships may be more politically correct
HMS Infecund
HMS Inferior
HMS Insignificant
@LandSharkUK
-
- Retired Site Admin
- Posts: 2657
- Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Re: UK's successor submarines
I've personally always liked the idea of an "I" Class.
HMS Indomitable
HMS Implaceable
HMS Invincible
And my favourite for an SSBN...HMS Indefatigable
HMS Indomitable
HMS Implaceable
HMS Invincible
And my favourite for an SSBN...HMS Indefatigable
Re: UK's successor submarines
Ambush and Artful are excellent names for submarines and what they do ,would suggest retribution and revenge for boats with other purposes if you dont have to be politically correct
Re: UK's successor submarines
RetroSicotte wrote:I've personally always liked the idea of an "I" Class.
HMS Indomitable
HMS Implaceable
HMS Invincible
And my favourite for an SSBN...HMS Indefatigable
I'm guessing the second was meant to be "Implacable", right...?
I think Illustrious might be higher on the list, in the case. But an I class, with Indefatigable in the four, would be my suggestion as well.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
-
- Retired Site Admin
- Posts: 2657
- Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Re: UK's successor submarines
Curses, if you hadn't quoted it I coulda edited it and pretended nothing happened.Gabriele wrote:I'm guessing the second was meant to be "Implacable", right...?
I think Illustrious might be higher on the list, in the case. But an I class, with Indefatigable in the four, would be my suggestion as well.
That always works, right? :p
Illustrious is a fantastic name, but I personally feel it has a very "proud and overt" tone to the name, not befitting an unseen but enormous power.
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: UK's successor submarines
I think your right.RetroSicotte wrote: Illustrious is a fantastic name, but I personally feel it has a very "proud and overt" tone to the name, not befitting an unseen but enormous power.
HMS Imperceptible? sounds sneaky but probably not bold enough
@LandSharkUK
Re: UK's successor submarines
How about naming new Successors (or another new sub class) after some of the former RN submarine shorebases? HMS Vernon, HMS Dolphin etc?
Re: UK's successor submarines
Hello, first time poster from Canada. I love this new forum, was a lurker for many years at the old one.
These powerful new subs should have strong names. How about the Admiral class....HMS Hood, HMS Nelson, HMS Rodney, and HMS Barham? It's about time another Hood sailed the ocean. I'm sure one of our close allies might get their noses out of joint about some of the names though!
Jay
These powerful new subs should have strong names. How about the Admiral class....HMS Hood, HMS Nelson, HMS Rodney, and HMS Barham? It's about time another Hood sailed the ocean. I'm sure one of our close allies might get their noses out of joint about some of the names though!
Jay
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: UK's successor submarines
I wouldn't call this one a strong name anymore, not after a certain comedy any waypapajay wrote:HMS Rodney
Hello to Canada as well!
@LandSharkUK
Re: UK's successor submarines
Welcome. Come in the water's quite tepid.papajay wrote:Hello, first time poster from Canada. I love this new forum, was a lurker for many years at the old one.
Being the curmudgeonly sort that I am I quite like this idea, but just one? How about we call the class the Diplomatic Class and the boats could be HMS Falkland (there's a nice get out because it'll really be named after a town in Fife), HMS Gibraltar, HMS Trafalfar (though Waterloo or Agincourt would be acceptable alternatives) and HMS Bismark (Blenheim might work quite well too).I'm sure one of our close allies might get their noses out of joint about some of the names though!
- GibMariner
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1351
- Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17
Re: UK's successor submarines
I also like the idea of an Admiral-class, however I don't think HMS Nelson could be used as that is currently in use for HMNB Portsmouth. HMS Drake for Devonport and HMS Collingwood is also taken. Hood, Howe, Barham, Benbow/Rodney would be good in my opinion.papajay wrote:Hello, first time poster from Canada. I love this new forum, was a lurker for many years at the old one.
These powerful new subs should have strong names. How about the Admiral class....HMS Hood, HMS Nelson, HMS Rodney, and HMS Barham? It's about time another Hood sailed the ocean. I'm sure one of our close allies might get their noses out of joint about some of the names though!
Jay
I wouldn't want to "waste" more illustrious ( )names such as Ark Royal, Eagle, Invincible, Indomitable, or indeed Illustrious, on vessels that are normally kept out of the limelight.
Re: UK's successor submarines
Just to keep things nicely antagonistic and jingoistic, may I suggest a 'new' admiral be commemorated. The HMS Woodward has a nice ring to it don't you think?GibMariner wrote:I also like the idea of an Admiral-class, however I don't think HMS Nelson could be used as that is currently in use for HMNB Portsmouth. HMS Drake for Devonport and HMS Collingwood is also taken. Hood, Howe, Barham, Benbow/Rodney would be good in my opinion.papajay wrote:Hello, first time poster from Canada. I love this new forum, was a lurker for many years at the old one.
These powerful new subs should have strong names. How about the Admiral class....HMS Hood, HMS Nelson, HMS Rodney, and HMS Barham? It's about time another Hood sailed the ocean. I'm sure one of our close allies might get their noses out of joint about some of the names though!
Jay
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: UK's successor submarines
How would we derive them? After William (of Danish descent, but swearing allegiance to the king of France), we would have to go to Sven (a true Dane), Harold (nope, a failed conquest project)... Caesar next... still one shortseaspear wrote:To subtle try Conqueror class
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: UK's successor submarines
Conqueror, Cromwell, Churchill and Culloden? :pArmChairCivvy wrote:How would we derive them? After William (of Danish descent, but swearing allegiance to the king of France), we would have to go to Sven (a true Dane), Harold (nope, a failed conquest project)... Caesar next... still one shortseaspear wrote:To subtle try Conqueror class
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: UK's successor submarines
Cameron?? Or perhaps CorbinPseudo wrote: Conqueror, Cromwell, Churchill and Culloden? :p
@LandSharkUK
Re: UK's successor submarines
Just come across this on the 'MOD Media blog'. Can anyone throw any more light on this, or perhaps has access to the full article. I am assuming that it will once again be the 'Electric Boat Company' who helped out on the Astute programme.
"Trident replacement
The Sunday Times (Business) reports that the MOD may consider a US contractor to run the Successor programme to replace the UK’s Trident nuclear submarines, a role which has traditionally been completed by UK firms.
An MOD spokesperson said:
The Managed Service Providers are a key element of the DE&S transformation programme, including to help improve DE&S project delivery to time, cost and performance. As one of the largest and most important programmes, Successor should benefit from this process."
"Trident replacement
The Sunday Times (Business) reports that the MOD may consider a US contractor to run the Successor programme to replace the UK’s Trident nuclear submarines, a role which has traditionally been completed by UK firms.
An MOD spokesperson said:
The Managed Service Providers are a key element of the DE&S transformation programme, including to help improve DE&S project delivery to time, cost and performance. As one of the largest and most important programmes, Successor should benefit from this process."
Re: UK's successor submarines
As far as I know they still had a team at Barrow until recently, don't know if they are still there or not, but wouldn't be surprised if they are not already involved in successor. That is we know they are with the missile tubes, but I was thinking more along the lines of the programme as a whole.Halidon wrote:Wouldn't have to twist EB's arm too hard to get them to sign up
Re: UK's successor submarines
Like it Jay, great idea!These powerful new subs should have strong names. How about the Admiral class....HMS Hood, HMS Nelson, HMS Rodney, and HMS Barham? It's about time another Hood sailed the ocean. I'm sure one of our close allies might get their noses out of joint about some of the names though!
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: UK's successor submarines
The critical question for the whole programme (cost/ timeline/risk) is marrying up the tubes modules and the Astute design, which by necessity will give you a fatter boat. And as the calculations that derive from the shape of the pressure tube hull are a dictator-like force (not to be overruled easily), who would be better placed than the company that has been involved with both key elements. Last time around they provided a Prgrm Director, and then slices of work went to Electric Boat as arm's length contracts, which in my books is the right way to do it: reap the synergies, but avoid conflicts of interest.jonas wrote:That is we know they are with the missile tubes, but I was thinking more along the lines of the programme as a whole
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)
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: UK's successor submarines
Writing my post above reminded me of the alliance formed for building UK's nuclear boats. Three major UK companies in it; one could ask why not add a 4th (non-UK)? I would still favour the way it has been done before... enough Chinese Walls preserved.
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)