SSN-AUKUS Future Astute Replacement (2030s) (RN) [News Only]

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Clive F
Member
Posts: 176
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 12:48
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Clive F »

Just an idea. Build in UK. Refurbish in Aus? They could also Refurbish US boats at the same place.

Zeno
Member
Posts: 170
Joined: 12 Jun 2022, 02:24
Australia

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Zeno »

Its probably quicker for Australia to acquire a nuclear submarine (there are some coming towards end of life and could just be refueled) than it is to train all of the crew for these
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/makin ... age%20rate.

Dobbo
Member
Posts: 121
Joined: 08 Apr 2021, 07:41
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Dobbo »

Speculation seems to be that the SSN (or SSGN) for Australia will be a U.K. boat with (at least some) US systems.

How this relates to SSN(R) will be intriguing and may offer a template for how to grow the U.K. SSN force back to and above 10 boats, and a perhaps to make the Type 83 economical to increase hills beyond 6-8…
These users liked the author Dobbo for the post:
dmereifield

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Ron5 »

Dobbo wrote: 08 Mar 2023, 21:25 Speculation seems to be that the SSN (or SSGN) for Australia will be a U.K. boat with (at least some) US systems.

How this relates to SSN(R) will be intriguing and may offer a template for how to grow the U.K. SSN force back to and above 10 boats, and a perhaps to make the Type 83 economical to increase hills beyond 6-8…
Partnership with a nation that's not out to rip you off?? That's so crazy it just might work!

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1311
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by inch »

Don't worry it's going to be a Virginia boat for Australia and they will stick to that design once they get a few , no matter what the announce now about SSNR,once American Virginia class infrastructure built in Australia for both countries to operate same class,be mad to change everything for SSNR , especially if just to put same systems in a new UK designed boat ,why bother, may as well build Virginia modules in Australia,reality and pragmatism will prevail even if they announce something different now , they might think that now or just saying that to appease the UK for some future project never going to happen,yes SSNR for the UK but no point for Australia ,cost and big dog in the room (USA) never going to let it happen but way easier to say it will now lol, just my take if this is what they truly announce , we will have to wait and see 👍
These users liked the author inch for the post:
donald_of_tokyo

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 2006
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Jake1992 »

inch wrote: 09 Mar 2023, 13:04 Don't worry it's going to be a Virginia boat for Australia and they will stick to that design once they get a few , no matter what the announce now about SSNR,once American Virginia class infrastructure built in Australia for both countries to operate same class,be mad to change everything for SSNR , especially if just to put same systems in a new UK designed boat ,why bother, may as well build Virginia modules in Australia,reality and pragmatism will prevail even if they announce something different now , they might think that now or just saying that to appease the UK for some future project never going to happen,yes SSNR for the UK but no point for Australia ,cost and big dog in the room (USA) never going to let it happen but way easier to say it will now lol, just my take if this is what they truly announce , we will have to wait and see 👍
I’ve been thinking maybe the USA will actually be on board with the RAN choosing the UK design. Now hear me out on this.
1- The UK is currently under armed sub wise far below min capacity this effects the US as they need to operate more subs in places that would other wise be fill by the UK so it’s in their intrest for UK sub numbers to increase but how ?

2 - US sub building slots are booked solid and it’s unlikely they’ll expand said build to accommodate the small over all RAN order.

So what’s the answer to both issues above ? Have the RAN choose a UK design helping expanded UK sub build in the short term and in doing so allow the UK needed economies of scale to increase our own fleet at a more reasonable cost.
This gets the RAN their subs without the US having to some how expand there own build just for the short term or sacrifice their own slots, it will also allow the US to move their deployed subs to areas they really want with the now increased UK sub fleet taking over the gaps. They’ll also get to sell the systems fitted so will make money there, it could be a win win win.
These users liked the author Jake1992 for the post (total 2):
SD67serge750

jedibeeftrix
Member
Posts: 509
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:54

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by jedibeeftrix »

think about it this way; the UK SSNR is already the 'export approved' submarine for US allies. vis-a-vis PWR3. Virginia Payload Module probably ok by 2050 too.
the US SSNX is going to be too big, too manpower intensive, too expensive, and packed with too much sensitive technology. virginia has the same issues today.

SD67
Senior Member
Posts: 1036
Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 09:49
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by SD67 »

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/ ... ign-aukus/

Torygraph's take. 3 interim Virginia's then aussie built SSN(R)

IMHO there is no way that the US will allow offshore build of a Virginia, even in Australia. The terms would be so strict it would defeat the purpose of domestic production. I question whether it would get through Congress. Suspect the US is quietly happy to have the UK project manage the build of a SSN with alot of US tech in it, but one step removed so it's less of a political hot potato
These users liked the author SD67 for the post (total 2):
tomukMercator

SD67
Senior Member
Posts: 1036
Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 09:49
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by SD67 »

Jake1992 wrote: 09 Mar 2023, 14:27
inch wrote: 09 Mar 2023, 13:04 Don't worry it's going to be a Virginia boat for Australia and they will stick to that design once they get a few , no matter what the announce now about SSNR,once American Virginia class infrastructure built in Australia for both countries to operate same class,be mad to change everything for SSNR , especially if just to put same systems in a new UK designed boat ,why bother, may as well build Virginia modules in Australia,reality and pragmatism will prevail even if they announce something different now , they might think that now or just saying that to appease the UK for some future project never going to happen,yes SSNR for the UK but no point for Australia ,cost and big dog in the room (USA) never going to let it happen but way easier to say it will now lol, just my take if this is what they truly announce , we will have to wait and see 👍
I’ve been thinking maybe the USA will actually be on board with the RAN choosing the UK design. Now hear me out on this.
1- The UK is currently under armed sub wise far below min capacity this effects the US as they need to operate more subs in places that would other wise be fill by the UK so it’s in their intrest for UK sub numbers to increase but how ?

2 - US sub building slots are booked solid and it’s unlikely they’ll expand said build to accommodate the small over all RAN order.

So what’s the answer to both issues above ? Have the RAN choose a UK design helping expanded UK sub build in the short term and in doing so allow the UK needed economies of scale to increase our own fleet at a more reasonable cost.
This gets the RAN their subs without the US having to some how expand there own build just for the short term or sacrifice their own slots, it will also allow the US to move their deployed subs to areas they really want with the now increased UK sub fleet taking over the gaps. They’ll also get to sell the systems fitted so will make money there, it could be a win win win.
Also reduces the ability of China to take umbrage and sabre rattle.

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 539
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
United States of America

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Halidon »

Jake1992 wrote: 09 Mar 2023, 14:27 2 - US sub building slots are booked solid and it’s unlikely they’ll expand said build to accommodate the small over all RAN order.
The US Navy, US Congress, and US submarine industry have all expressed some level of desire to see US SSN production increase from (less than) 2 SSNs a year now to 3 SSNs a year. They wouldn't be expanding "just" to accommodate a small RAN order, they'd use the money from RAN sub purchases to fund the infrastructure investment required to make that third hull happen.
These users liked the author Halidon for the post (total 2):
SD67Mercator

Zeno
Member
Posts: 170
Joined: 12 Jun 2022, 02:24
Australia

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Zeno »

How many years does it take to train a crew for a nuclear submarine from scratch ? and then how long to train for transferring to a different class of submarine ,there have been so many suggested Im wondering where these ideas are being pulled from

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3958
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Zeno wrote: 10 Mar 2023, 08:17 How many years does it take to train a crew for a nuclear submarine from scratch ? and then how long to train for transferring to a different class of submarine ,there have been so many suggested Im wondering where these ideas are being pulled from
The reports than the RAN are going to buy up to 5 Virgin class followed by a full purchase of SSNR seems highly unlikely.

Where is the USN build schedule is there 5 unrequired boats?

I suspect the truth is somewhat different to the reports in the media thus far.

SD67
Senior Member
Posts: 1036
Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 09:49
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by SD67 »

The rumor mill in Australia is that the agreement is quite detailed on this point, and the Australian government will be making a substantial cash and human capital contribution to support the increase of Virginia class production.

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3958
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Poiuytrewq »

SD67 wrote: 10 Mar 2023, 10:38 The rumor mill in Australia is that the agreement is quite detailed on this point, and the Australian government will be making a substantial cash and human capital contribution to support the increase of Virginia class production.
In which case why do the Aussies need SSNR?
These users liked the author Poiuytrewq for the post:
inch

SD67
Senior Member
Posts: 1036
Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 09:49
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by SD67 »

Poiuytrewq wrote: 10 Mar 2023, 11:29
SD67 wrote: 10 Mar 2023, 10:38 The rumor mill in Australia is that the agreement is quite detailed on this point, and the Australian government will be making a substantial cash and human capital contribution to support the increase of Virginia class production.
In which case why do the Aussies need SSNR?
Because they want a Submarine building industry and there is no way the US is going to countenance foreign production of a US SSN (assuming that it is even technically possible) the security risk

I suspect the sub factory is in South Australia for a reason - the state contains 30% of the world's uranium. Not politically viable yet to set up a full cycle Australian enrichment industry but ib the 2050s who knows

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Dam_mine
These users liked the author SD67 for the post (total 3):
Poiuytrewqdonald_of_tokyojedibeeftrix

SouthernOne
Member
Posts: 122
Joined: 23 Nov 2019, 00:01
Australia

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by SouthernOne »

SD67 wrote: 10 Mar 2023, 11:56
Poiuytrewq wrote: 10 Mar 2023, 11:29
SD67 wrote: 10 Mar 2023, 10:38 The rumor mill in Australia is that the agreement is quite detailed on this point, and the Australian government will be making a substantial cash and human capital contribution to support the increase of Virginia class production.
In which case why do the Aussies need SSNR?
Because they want a Submarine building industry and there is no way the US is going to countenance foreign production of a US SSN (assuming that it is even technically possible) the security risk

I suspect the sub factory is in South Australia for a reason - the state contains 30% of the world's uranium. Not politically viable yet to set up a full cycle Australian enrichment industry but ib the 2050s who knows

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Dam_mine
Reactors won’t be built in Aus, at least for a very long time. Australia does have a functioning reactor, but it’s in NSW and used for “research” and production of isotopes,

What’s the security risk when the ADF will already be operating the boats, and currently uses USN combat systems and weapons in its submarines?

The F-35 is very sensitive technology, but there are two final assembly lines outside the US.

AUKUS is also about the UK accessing US technology for its submarine programs.

SD67
Senior Member
Posts: 1036
Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 09:49
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by SD67 »

SouthernOne wrote: 12 Mar 2023, 01:57
SD67 wrote: 10 Mar 2023, 11:56
Poiuytrewq wrote: 10 Mar 2023, 11:29
SD67 wrote: 10 Mar 2023, 10:38 The rumor mill in Australia is that the agreement is quite detailed on this point, and the Australian government will be making a substantial cash and human capital contribution to support the increase of Virginia class production.
In which case why do the Aussies need SSNR?
Because they want a Submarine building industry and there is no way the US is going to countenance foreign production of a US SSN (assuming that it is even technically possible) the security risk

I suspect the sub factory is in South Australia for a reason - the state contains 30% of the world's uranium. Not politically viable yet to set up a full cycle Australian enrichment industry but ib the 2050s who knows

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Dam_mine
Reactors won’t be built in Aus, at least for a very long time. Australia does have a functioning reactor, but it’s in NSW and used for “research” and production of isotopes,

What’s the security risk when the ADF will already be operating the boats, and currently uses USN combat systems and weapons in its submarines?

The F-35 is very sensitive technology, but there are two final assembly lines outside the US.

AUKUS is also about the UK accessing US technology for its submarine programs.
Yeah I know about the Lucas Heights reactor. I’m suppositioning that there may long term be a bigger picture here, involving Osborne, Olympic Dam, Woomera, civilian nuclear powering desalination projects in the dryest state on the planet, even waste storage in a part of the world that has very stable geology.
Short term sure the reactors will arrive in a sealed box but long term the question is “well we’re already operating them, why not fuel them here with our own uranium”. I understand from mining industry contacts that studies have been done, way OTT apologies

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Mercator »

The politics of that just isn't there yet. There is no overwhelming public desire in Australia for civilian nuclear power or any other parts of the nuclear fuel cycle. Environmentalists going back 50 years or more have spooked the shit out of them. Plenty of people have tried to change that dynamic, and there is a reasonable chance that may change in the future, but we just aren't there yet. You can blame the Green Party in Australia – they've never supported nuclear power. Once we start operating nuclear submarines, however, it should become easier to make some inroads into public opinion – but no one is prepared to be that brave just yet.

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3958
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Poiuytrewq »

These users liked the author Poiuytrewq for the post (total 2):
bobpserge750

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by SW1 »

The sun so take with a pinch of salt

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/ ... eet-biden/

BRITAIN’S fleet of hunter killer submarines is to more than double by the end of the next decade as part of a landmark deal with the USA and Australia to protect against China.

A new generation of nuclear powered subs will be designed and built in the UK with shared US technology - and the designs shared with the Aussie Navy to build their own fleet of new elite SSN-AUKUS boats.

They will replace the Royal Navy’s seven Astute-class boats when they enter into operation.

The Sun understands as many as 20 of the new boats could be commissioned by the Royal Navy - with a final decision on numbers still to come.

Australia’s boats will be built in South Australia, using some components manufactured in the UK, and will be in service in the early 2040s.

Jdam
Member
Posts: 922
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Jdam »

This would be the most serious change in direction under this government (increase rather than cuts). :shock:

Even if you said the 20 in total, that means 4 would be Dreadnought plus another 16 as attack subs, that still more than double what we have now.

I mean Wallace did say that maybe we needed more subs a while ago but I never expected anything to come of it. It will be interesting to see if this comes together, I have my reservations that we will ever hit that number. There are a few elections till the Astute's start to go out of service and in that time there is a lot of work to do to be able to run that amount of subs again.

Side question does a lot of American tech go into the Astute's?

Dobbo
Member
Posts: 121
Joined: 08 Apr 2021, 07:41
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Dobbo »

20 would be extraordinary / unrealistic. Suspect that might mean a total run of 8 RAN boats and 12 RN boats?

(I’m assuming there is some truth in the objective number, but the backdrop to it has been misunderstood)

tomuk
Senior Member
Posts: 1409
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by tomuk »

Jdam wrote: 13 Mar 2023, 21:12 Side question does a lot of American tech go into the Astute's?
No AFAIK most of the systems on Astute are UK tech, accepting that the Rolls Royce reactors are derived from earlier US designs. A lot of US (Electric Boat) know how was taken onboard at Barrow to aid the construction of the boats as there was lack of sub construction experience due to the long gap since the T and V boats.

matt00773
Member
Posts: 301
Joined: 01 Jun 2016, 14:31
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by matt00773 »

Jdam wrote: 13 Mar 2023, 21:12 This would be the most serious change in direction under this government (increase rather than cuts). :shock:

Even if you said the 20 in total, that means 4 would be Dreadnought plus another 16 as attack subs, that still more than double what we have now.

I mean Wallace did say that maybe we needed more subs a while ago but I never expected anything to come of it. It will be interesting to see if this comes together, I have my reservations that we will ever hit that number. There are a few elections till the Astute's start to go out of service and in that time there is a lot of work to do to be able to run that amount of subs again.

Side question does a lot of American tech go into the Astute's?
My expectation is that the "American tech" thing is just lip service to the 1958 UK/US technology agreement. In my mind this is effectively a UK submarine that will be shared with Australia in the same way as the Type 26 frigate.

I think the number includes both UK and Australia but wouldn't speculate any further.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: SSN(R) Future Astute Replacement (2040s) (RN) [News Only]

Post by SW1 »

I suspect if there is a vls it will be america. I think there was also mention that the CIC system will be america.

Post Reply