Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6241
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

If one takes a step back, the best solution for the UK that meets the needs of the RAN would be for the SSN(r) to be an evolution of the Astute design rather than one from a clean sheet. Similar to how the Trafalgars evolves from the Swiftsure class. This would speed up the design process and hopefully allow much of the existing tooling to be used. designing the boat to be able to take whatever CMS, Sonar etc. the customer wants should the a high priority and this would also increase commonality between say RN and RAN boats.

Barrow should be more than capable now of building submarines to a drumbeat, well as long as the problems encountered at the beginning of the Astute programme do not some how resurface with the Dreadnought programme. In an ideal world after an initial surge to get the first two Dreadnoughts built construction should start begin. to concurrently build both Dreadnoughts and evolved Astutes simultaneously. In RN service, the Evolves Astutes would be operated along with the last four Astutes, with six of the former being built. The last three would replace the first three Astutes giving the RN an SSN fleet of ten boats, and design work for the replacements for the remaining Astutes would be begin before the last Evolved Astute was delivered.

Once the last two Dreadnought are built along with the first two Evolved Astutes, the next four boats would be two for the RN and two for the RAN, the design now being mature. At the same time a solid core of engineers would have been trained during the build of the last two Dreadnoughts and first Evolved Astutes, and this would be further expanded with these next four boats. At the same time the construction hall for construction of the remaining four RAN boats would have been completed as would that of the tooling and rigs needed. This Australian work force would gradually move to Australian over the building of the second RAN boat in Britain and begin building the third boat at the Australian yard, as well as training the first apprentices. Work at teh Australian Yard could theoretically be accelerated if the UK built boats had their final fitting out also in Australian. Could an SSN sail without its CMS for example, or its torpedo handling system if the RAN wanted a US designed one for the weapons they have chosen?

I am no expert of submarine construction so some of the above suggestions may not be realistic or feasible, but it is a senario I would like to see. (I often type teh in stead of the, i apologise)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6241
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

Out of interest, how long were the Resolution Class SSBNs in service for?

tomuk
Member
Posts: 334
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Post by tomuk »

Not that one should be discussing submarine/deterrence matters but we've only had at most three SSBN for the last six years as Vanguard has been at Devonport having a glowup and a vajazzle. :lol:

On building more Ozstute Flight XXXX after Agincourt in parallel with the SSBNs it might not be as difficult as one thinks there has been investments at BAE Barrow and Rolls Derby, there is the efficiencies from the a pipeline of work building Astute, the DNA of the SSN and SSBN has definitely become mixed, is an Astute not a Vanguard without the missile compartment, and is a Dreadnought not an Astute with a Missile compartment, PWR3 and CMC have a varying amount of US support, there is a nice shipyard in Oz and an apparent barrowful of cash.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2335
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Post by Caribbean »

Bring Deeps wrote:To be known as the 'Beach Class'.
And hopefully not the "On the Beach" class
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

SD67
Member
Posts: 341
Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 09:49
United Kingdom

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Post by SD67 »

Cameron’s 5 year delay was a stinker of a decision and is going to put a lot of pressure on CASD in the early 2030s.

Trying think this through, it doesn’t actually affect Barrow, it adds work to Devonport where HMS Vanguard deep refit has become much more extensive than normal - effectively a Lifex. Likewise the Collins class were going to get a Lifex whatever happened, Shofin Barracuda wasn’t going to hit the water much before 2040 either.

Barrow manufacturing capacity should be freed up by the mid 2030s as the last Dreadnought/s by then will be in the commissioning phase which takes a different class of labour than cutting metal. There’ll be a large trained workforce by then who will have just built 4 x 18,000 t boats in 10 years. Logically it shouldn’t be difficult to then build 10 x 8,000 t boats including two for the ozzies.

Likewise BAE design capacity should be available right now as design work in Dreadnought should be basically done.

The other question is reactor core. But the PWR3 is supposedly easier to mass produce,, and Dreadnought only has one each so there should be spare capacity.

I’m not sure there’s an insurmountable problem the jigsaw pieces may fit quite nicely

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 747
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
United Kingdom

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Post by Defiance »

tomuk wrote:is an Astute not a Vanguard without the missile compartment, and is a Dreadnought not an Astute with a Missile compartment,
No.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

SD67 wrote:adds work to Devonport where HMS Vanguard deep refit has become much more extensive than normal - effectively a Lifex.
This is what I was coming at; there is only one dock for this. Will the other three get similar, prolonged 'treatments' and hence will there be three available when the first retirement comes around - around 2030
SD67 wrote:the PWR3 is supposedly easier to mass produce,, and Dreadnought only has one each so there should be spare capacity.
Yes, it has 30% fewer parts, but the whole build facility is under reconstruction/ reconfiguring, under a 10-yr budget of £ 1.5bn
- the last cumulative figure I saw was 1.9, up from the above
- a yearly max so far close to £ 200 mln

As it is a close variant of the US one, I come back to my latest hobby horse: British (designed) boats, with US reactors in them
- I am not so close to industry as to being able to say anything about (transfer of) tooling, after the first two ozzie boats will have sailed out of Rosyth

May I add :) that this bright future for Astutes part in the post is PURE speculation...
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)

SD67
Member
Posts: 341
Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 09:49
United Kingdom

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Post by SD67 »

Lord Jim wrote:If one takes a step back, the best solution for the UK that meets the needs of the RAN would be for the SSN(r) to be an evolution of the Astute design rather than one from a clean sheet. Similar to how the Trafalgars evolves from the Swiftsure class.
I can see the attraction, if the Ossies really are in a hurry. Astute Boat 7 is scheduled to hit the water around 2026, just keep production going with a boat 8 and 9 involving Australian contractors, then move the whole line to Adelaide.

The problem/challenge is that Astute is built around PWR2 and PWR2 is dead. How much effort is required shove a PWR3/ the US equivalent in an Astute? I'm guessing that's what the next 18mnths is about - figuring that out.

If this OzTute has a US reactor and US CMS then Biden will be getting plenty out of the deal I'm guessing at least 10billion +

All pure speculation of course.

TheLoneRanger
Member
Posts: 93
Joined: 01 Jul 2020, 19:15
United Kingdom

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Post by TheLoneRanger »

If the Aussies do select the Astute as the starting point - then while it would be good news for the UK defence - it will be even better if that causes Macron to choke on the large frog that will undoubtly jump down his throat.

That has to be worth something just on it's own!! :clap: :clap:

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

SD67 wrote: How much effort is required shove a PWR3/ the US equivalent in an Astute? I'm guessing that's what the next 18mnths is about - figuring that out.
One 1/8th for that?

For those who have gone metric, that's 12.5 %.
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)

SD67
Member
Posts: 341
Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 09:49
United Kingdom

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Post by SD67 »

Well going back to my old PRINCE 2 notes the recommendation is 10-15% of project spend should be on scoping / risk reduction activity.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6241
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

If the PWR3 is a version of a US reactor, could any common UK/Oz core submarine design be such that it could take either, the same with the CMS?

tomuk
Member
Posts: 334
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Post by tomuk »

Lord Jim wrote:If the PWR3 is a version of a US reactor, could any common UK/Oz core submarine design be such that it could take either
The reality is only people with very high clearance would know how close the UK version is.

PWR1/PWR2 were based on the general arrangement of the US reactor but always contained a UK designed core. The overall design evolving over time and moving away from the original.

With PWR3 have the US given us a copy of the 'blueprints' allowing us to build copies or have they just provided the design principles/outline allowing us to design a broadly similar but not identical reactor.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7181
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Post by SKB »

Have created a new Future Astute Replacement thread.

Post Reply