Dreadnought Class SSBN

[jonas]

Another promise that will be very hard to keep.

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

[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]

...................

[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)

[Pseudo]

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

[SKB]

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

[Pseudo]

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.

[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

[The Armchair Soldier]

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



Edit: Ninja'd by SKB.

[Phil R]

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

Phil R

[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.

[arfah]

....................

[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]

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]

.......................

[arfah]

.....................

[jonas]

Not seen this before :-

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/success ... ine-guide/

[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.

[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.

[shark bait]

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.

[Pseudo]

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.

[shark bait]

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

[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

[shark bait]

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

[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

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.