Dreadnought Class SSBN

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Post Reply
jonas
Member
Posts: 976
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Dreadnought Class SSBN

Post by jonas »

Another promise that will be very hard to keep.

http://www.nwemail.co.uk/home/video-we- ... -1.1209043

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7182
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by SKB »

Is 'Successor' the actual name of the class of future SSBN's, or a project name leading to a differently named class?

'Successor' noun - a person or thing that succeeds another.

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2295
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Contact:
Niue

Re: Dreadnought Class SSBN

Post by arfah »

...................
-<>-<>-<>-

Forum signature removed. - Miss Armchair Soldier

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7182
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by SKB »

I agree, the 'S' initial would nicely fit with a 's'ubmarine. In fact the 'Swiftsure' class SSN's used it quite recently too. (Swiftsure, Sovereign, Superb, Sceptre, Spartan, Splendid/Severn)

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1730
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by Pseudo »

My guess is it'll be the Fearless or Formidable class, something starting with 'F' anyway.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7182
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by SKB »

I was hoping 'F' would be used on the T26 'f'rigates. They used 'D' on the T45 'd'estroyers.

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1730
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by Pseudo »

SKB wrote:I was hoping 'F' would be used on the T26 'f'rigates.
I'm guessing they'll start with Edinburgh and go through major cities such as Cardiff, Belfast, Sheffield, Coventry etc. basically just repeating the Type 42 names in a different order.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7182
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by SKB »

Found some 'Successor' concept design images on a Taiwanese site. The bottom one looks very futuristic.
http://www.mdc.idv.tw/mdc/navy/royalnavy/successor.htm

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1699
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by The Armchair Soldier »

The most recent concept image of the "Successor"-class, courtesy of BAE Systems:

Image

Edit: Ninja'd by SKB. :lol:

User avatar
Phil R
Member
Posts: 82
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:10
United Kingdom

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by Phil R »

For Successor SSBN I am hoping for the B class:
1) Boadicea
2) Bellerophon
3) Banshee
4) Basilisk

Phil R

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by Gabriele »

Indefatigable,
Indomitable,
Invincible,
Illustrious

Considering the type of mission the SSBN has, always out on patrol, i find Indefatigable to be a great name. But that maybe is just me.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2295
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Contact:
Niue

Re: Dreadnought Class SSBN

Post by arfah »

....................
-<>-<>-<>-

Forum signature removed. - Miss Armchair Soldier

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by RetroSicotte »

I Class is certainly the way to go.

Indominable <- Class name
Indefatigable
Implaceable
Invincible

Last one is recent, sure, but it's a dear name to people. Having one recent one to tie over is a near thing.

FiringOrder
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Joined: 01 May 2015, 18:53

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by FiringOrder »

I always thought the next class of Submarine was to begin with W but Astute class messed this up. Maybe some of the older saltier types could explain why W, Y and Z wasn't taken up.

Recently
S - Swiftsure
T - Trafalgur
U - Upholder
V - Vanguard

So B might be right.

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2295
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Contact:
Niue

Re: Dreadnought Class SSBN

Post by arfah »

.......................
-<>-<>-<>-

Forum signature removed. - Miss Armchair Soldier

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2295
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Contact:
Niue

Re: Dreadnought Class SSBN

Post by arfah »

.....................
-<>-<>-<>-

Forum signature removed. - Miss Armchair Soldier

jonas
Member
Posts: 976
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by jonas »


User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7182
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by SKB »

If the Successors were built larger in a way to carry four months worth of food (instead of three), then theoretically, you could operate a year-round cover with three boats instead of four.

User avatar
Old RN
Member
Posts: 226
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:39
South Africa

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by Old RN »

Confused? The standard cycle with a double crewed SSBN would be 8 weeks on patrol, 4-5 weeks maintenance and work up and then 8 week patrol. In theory two SSBNs in full commission could maintain one on station, with third in deep maintenance.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by shark bait »

SKB wrote:If the Successors were built larger in a way to carry four months worth of food (instead of three), then theoretically, you could operate a year-round cover with three boats instead of four.
I don't believe we have 4 boats because of the the deployment length, its because if the risk of not maintaining a continuous patrol. As oldRN says it's possible with 2 but the risks would be unacceptable.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1730
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by Pseudo »

shark bait wrote:
SKB wrote:If the Successors were built larger in a way to carry four months worth of food (instead of three), then theoretically, you could operate a year-round cover with three boats instead of four.
I don't believe we have 4 boats because of the the deployment length, its because if the risk of not maintaining a continuous patrol. As oldRN says it's possible with 2 but the risks would be unacceptable.
There's also a political consideration in that once you drop CASD deploying an SSBN on patrol has the potential to escalate a crisis.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by shark bait »

Pseudo wrote:There's also a political consideration in that once you drop CASD deploying an SSBN on patrol has the potential to escalate a crisis.
yes that too. I think no matter how you put it 4 boats is the correct option, and so far the only commitment from the government about defence. In a way that's great because this will be the most politically sensitive defence procurement for the next 40 years, and its been given the green light
@LandSharkUK

jonas
Member
Posts: 976
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by jonas »

Is this article as massive a game changer as it sounds, or is it more of a 'Blue sky thinking' exercise.

http://www.nationalinterest.org/feature ... r-be-13103

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by shark bait »

jonas wrote:Is this article as massive a game changer as it sounds, or is it more of a 'Blue sky thinking' exercise.

http://www.nationalinterest.org/feature ... r-be-13103

Much more blue sky thinking, making the statement sub's can be detected based on heat or sea life is a bit out there. What sensors do you use for that ?
Also heat given off would be minute compared to the thermal mass of the oceans.

Luckly the British are great at making quiet sub's, and excellent sonar, reportedly the best in the world so we're on top of the game, plus propulsion is continually getting quieter. Successor will utilise the PWR 3 and a new propeller system, either jets or propellers that are built inside the hull to mask their noise.

As long as they can get quieter as quick as sonar gets better we are OK. This is unlike aircraft where radar is getting better quicker than stealth.

The concept of a submarine carrier is not way off though, they already carry the special forces swimmer delivery vehicle on their back so that's a concept likley to be advanced. Successor is to be built with the common missile comportment, which is large with the purpose of not just housing missiles, but also UAV's and UUV's so the concept discussed in the article is well underway in both the US and UK navy's
@LandSharkUK

jonas
Member
Posts: 976
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: UK's successor submarines

Post by jonas »

shark bait wrote:
jonas wrote:Is this article as massive a game changer as it sounds, or is it more of a 'Blue sky thinking' exercise.

http://www.nationalinterest.org/feature ... r-be-13103

Much more blue sky thinking, making the statement sub's can be detected based on heat or sea life is a bit out there. What sensors do you use for that ?
Also heat given off would be minute compared to the thermal mass of the oceans.

Luckly the British are great at making quiet sub's, and excellent sonar, reportedly the best in the world so we're on top of the game, plus propulsion is continually getting quieter. Successor will utilise the PWR 3 and a new propeller system, either jets or propellers that are built inside the hull to mask their noise.

As long as they can get quieter as quick as sonar gets better we are OK. This is unlike aircraft where radar is getting better quicker than stealth.

The concept of a submarine carrier is not way off though, they already carry the special forces swimmer delivery vehicle on their back so that's a concept likley to be advanced. Successor is to be built with the common missile comportment, which is large with the purpose of not just housing missiles, but also UAV's and UUV's so the concept discussed in the article is well underway in both the US and UK navy's

"Much more blue sky thinking, making the statement sub's can be detected based on heat or sea life is a bit out there. What sensors do you use for that ?
Also heat given off would be minute compared to the thermal mass of the oceans."

Yes it is a bit out there, although advances in technology nowadays is so rapid that anything is possible. So I wouldn't be in too much of a hurry to dismiss it out of hand.

In regards to a new propulsion system for successor whatever it is will be highly classified, so I take it that you are making a guess. Orherwise you can be expecting a knock on your door from some gentlemen in grey suits. 8-)

Post Reply