Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
Engaging Strategy
Member
Posts: 775
Joined: 20 Dec 2015, 13:45
Contact:
United Kingdom

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

Post by Engaging Strategy »

GibMariner wrote:Until HMS Dreadnought was decommissioned, I believe there was a planning assumption for 18 nuclear boats + SSKs. The 1981 Defence White Paper stated that there were 12 SSNs in service and would go up to 17 + SSKs. The 12 figure came with the decommissioning of all the Valiant and Churchill-class boats and HMS Swiftsure in the post-Cold War "peace dividend" changes. This left 5 Swiftsure and 7 Trafalgar-class SSNs, for a total of 12. The 1998 SDR reduced the SSN force from 12 to 10.

IIRC, the 1990 Options for Change review called for 16 submarines, three quarters of which would be nuclear-powered (plus the 4 Trident boats) - which would be the 5 Swiftsure, 7 Trafalgar and 4 Upholder.
I suppose that's what spending nearly 5% of GDP on defence buys you! With less limited industrial constraints I'd say that a core force of 10 SSNs is probably about right for the UK's needs. If we were to go over that number then I think our options would open up a bit. I'd pretty much boil down to a choice between two more SSNs or four small SSKs. This would (imo) depend very much on the threats we would be facing at the time. If we're still especially worried about Russia I'd say go with the SSKs, if not then the SSNs would offer more all round utility.
Blog: http://engagingstrategy.blogspot.co.uk
Twitter: @EngageStrategy1

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

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

Post by shark bait »

The number really should go up, the sub is the modern battle ship and 7 is clearly an economical constraint rather than what we really need. We are quite constrained operationally with 7 which gives us 4 available on a good day. Then account for deterrent protection and at best you have 3 available on a good day.

The "5 Swiftsure, 7 Trafalgar and 4 Upholder" model would seem to be a good model to aim for in the future. If that was achieved it would justify the the reduction in the surface escort fleet.

I agree with ES, if we are are facing Russian tension again, then returning to the concept we had at the time of the Upholders of using SSK's for GIUK gap patrols, albeit a more modern SSK, could make a lot of sense. If not the all round juggernaut of an SSN makes more sense.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

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

Post by GibMariner »

Yes, with the recent news about savings and reduced build time for Anson (boat 5) - perhaps there will be even further time/cost savings for Boats 6 & 7 - and the likelihood that the 'Successor' submarines will be delayed, It seems, as an outsider, a bit short-sighted to not take advantage of a potential gap to place an order for an 8th Astute. If only to avoid a repeat of the problems that plagued the early Astute programme due to the gap between orders.

User avatar
Engaging Strategy
Member
Posts: 775
Joined: 20 Dec 2015, 13:45
Contact:
United Kingdom

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

Post by Engaging Strategy »

GibMariner wrote:Yes, with the recent news about savings and reduced build time for Anson (boat 5) - perhaps there will be even further time/cost savings for Boats 6 & 7 - and the likelihood that the 'Successor' submarines will be delayed, It seems, as an outsider, a bit short-sighted to not take advantage of a potential gap to place an order for an 8th Astute. If only to avoid a repeat of the problems that plagued the early Astute programme due to the gap between orders.
Unfortunately Astute 8 is dead, there really is no room in the build schedule for it even with much improved efficiency for boats 5 through 7. Thankfully the mistake of allowing gaps between the build schedules doesn't look set to be repeated, Astute boat 7 should lead straight into Successor boat 1 very rapidly. The issue with Astutes 8-10 was that crucial time was lost because of the severe delays (something like 4 years) at the front-end of the build. With boats 5-7 costing 1/4 less than boats 1-4 i'm confident that if the MoD hadn't gapped SSN production and allowed BAE's skills to atrophy we'd now likely be looking at a class of 10 Astutes.
Blog: http://engagingstrategy.blogspot.co.uk
Twitter: @EngageStrategy1

User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

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

Post by GibMariner »

Engaging Strategy wrote: Unfortunately Astute 8 is dead, there really is no room in the build schedule for it even with much improved efficiency for boats 5 through 7. Thankfully the mistake of allowing gaps between the build schedules doesn't look set to be repeated, Astute boat 7 should lead straight into Successor boat 1 very rapidly. The issue with Astutes 8-10 was that crucial time was lost because of the severe delays (something like 4 years) at the front-end of the build. With boats 5-7 costing 1/4 less than boats 1-4 i'm confident that if the MoD hadn't gapped SSN production and allowed BAE's skills to atrophy we'd now likely be looking at a class of 10 Astutes.
I agree with you in that Astute 8 is dead because of the reasons you cite. However, I'm not so optimistic about the growing gap between Astute 7 completion and 'Successor' 1. As it currently stands, the (apparently) recently un-named Boat 7 is expected in service around 2024. As per the 2015 SDSR, 'Successor 1' isn't due in service until "the early 2030s", revised from an earlier introduction date of 2028. Who knows if this date will slip even further.

As it currently stands (according to the wording of the SDSR), there could be up to 10 years between the commissioning of the last Astute and the first 'Successor'. The last Vanguard SSBN, HMS Vengeance was launched in 1998 and HMS Astute was laid down in 2001.

User avatar
Engaging Strategy
Member
Posts: 775
Joined: 20 Dec 2015, 13:45
Contact:
United Kingdom

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

Post by Engaging Strategy »

GibMariner wrote:I agree with you in that Astute 8 is dead because of the reasons you cite. However, I'm not so optimistic about the growing gap between Astute 7 completion and 'Successor' 1. As it currently stands, the (apparently) recently un-named Boat 7 is expected in service around 2024. As per the 2015 SDSR, 'Successor 1' isn't due in service until "the early 2030s", revised from an earlier introduction date of 2028. Who knows if this date will slip even further.

As it currently stands (according to the wording of the SDSR), there could be up to 10 years between the commissioning of the last Astute and the first 'Successor'. The last Vanguard SSBN, HMS Vengeance was launched in 1998 and HMS Astute was laid down in 2001.
HMS Vanguard took six years to build and seven to go from the laying of her keel to commissioning. If you assume a similar timescale for successor boat 1 you're looking at Astute #7 completing in 2024 and Successor #1 (following straight on from her) completing in 2030 and commissioning in 2031. Ties pretty closely with the "commissioned in the early 2030s" statement. No gaps and no messy skills atrophy necessary.
Blog: http://engagingstrategy.blogspot.co.uk
Twitter: @EngageStrategy1

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

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

Post by shark bait »

Unfortunately 8 boats just doesn't make good sense, as much as we would all like that. The astute program has clearly been a difficult process, which is why we have so few boats. But at least we now have a well established capability that could produce more than 7 in the next iteration.

It would be difficult to squeeze an extra one in without having a knock on effect on the successor program. That program is such a behemoth at £31 billion+ and should be left alone at all costs, anything that may disrupt the programme should be avoided as risk need to be kept as low as possible.

However we now have a strong, skilled and capable nuclear boat industry, one that after the successor build should have little problem increasing the build rate slightly and producing a larger fleet. A positive is now we seem to have leadership who value and understand the value of a strong native defence industry, unfortunately those lessons have had to be learned the hard way. It seems leadership wants to avoid a situation like we we're in at the start of the astute programme, which is good, and hopefully soon we will have a proper shipbuilding strategy that can secure industrial capabilities for decades to come.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
whitelancer
Member
Posts: 619
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:19
United Kingdom

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

Post by whitelancer »

Engaging Strategy wrote:HMS Vanguard took six years to build and seven to go from the laying of her keel to commissioning. If you assume a similar timescale for successor boat 1 you're looking at Astute #7 completing in 2024 and Successor #1 (following straight on from her) completing in 2030 and commissioning in 2031. Ties pretty closely with the "commissioned in the early 2030s" statement. No gaps and no messy skills atrophy necessary.

I would have to disagree, surly to maintain continuity the building of Astute 7 and Successor need to overlap. Otherwise at times, various trades will be sat around twiddling their thumbs.
How many Astute's are currently under construction?

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

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

Post by shark bait »

There is usually 4 in construction. 3 in assembly in the Devonshire dock hall and 1 at component level.

Image

That graphic is for the old build schedule now. The successor 1 build can be pushed back quite a bit and still overlap with the the astute build up. These boats are of course much bigger and newer than the Astute, so one successor will probably require the resources of 2 Astute's.

If we pushed successor 1 back to 2020 there would still be a decent work load going on at barrow. I have little concern in that department, it is critical it doesn't start later than that otherwise their is the risk we will end up with a river class situation.
@LandSharkUK

Clive F
Member
Posts: 176
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 12:48
United Kingdom

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

Post by Clive F »

Thanks Shark Bait, interesting info

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2784
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

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

Post by Caribbean »

Shark Bait - yes - a very useful graphic. Does that imply that we will need to start building an Astute successor somewhere around 2029 - 30, as it looks as if the SSNs take 9-10 years to build and the SSBNs are expected to be something similar, or are the Astutues expected to serve more than 30 years? (since Astute will be 30 years old in 2039)?
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

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

Post by shark bait »

Actually sooner than 2029 I should say. Astute is designed for a 25 year service life, because that is how long its reactor is designed to last. That would guesstimate HMS Astute's out of service date to be 2035, which seems ambitious to say the least, especially given the the slippage in the successor schedule.

You can see in the old schedule I posted above the astute replacement would be spot on ready for 2035. However that seems like it will no longer be the case, which may indicate they will have to go steady with Astute's fuel, or undergo a costly refueling and reactor refurbishment.

The tight schedule leads me to believe the Astute replacement may need to be a shortened successor, perhaps with just 2 launch tubes.

Lets continue to speculate with the above theme of increasing hulls; we could see;
  • 4 x Successor SSBN
  • 4 x Short Successor SSGN
  • 8 x Brand new SSN
Perhaps the Short Successor derivative makes sense. To design a new SSN ready for 2035 we would have to start the process within the next 5 years which seems impossible. Delay the design process by 8 years by building a short derivative and then we may have the resources to develop a clean sheet SSN design in the late 20's.

16 boats = 1 boat every 40 months.
@LandSharkUK

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2784
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

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

Post by Caribbean »

The short SSBN is an interesting idea. Doesn't the CMC come in 4 tube increments?
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

Clive F
Member
Posts: 176
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 12:48
United Kingdom

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

Post by Clive F »

For the uninitiated wont reducing the length cause problems with "sea keeping"? Or doesn't length / weight distribution matter "under water"? (this is not a sarcastic comment)

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

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

Post by shark bait »

Caribbean wrote:The short SSBN is an interesting idea. Doesn't the CMC come in 4 tube increments?
It does come as a 4 tube module, with the Americans it will come as a 4 tube module complete with that section of hull. I believe the plan is to build those hull sections complete with equipment and then weld together.

Image

I have no idea if the British plan is the same. One might guess it is similar.

If it does take the modular hull section approach it makes a shortened class seem simple. 12 tubes down to 2 would reduce the length by over 25m. The 4 tube module is just 4 individual tubes welded together so a 2 tube module is certainly feasible if not available initially.

I think it is very important to reduce the number of tubes, no only to save money, but to distinguish between the CAD mission and other submarine missions. Money is an important part though, by the time they get to a 5th boat they will be running nice and efficiently, and spreading design costs over more hulls is always a good thing.
Clive F wrote:For the uninitiated wont reducing the length cause problems with "sea keeping"? Or doesn't length / weight distribution matter "under water"? (this is not a sarcastic comment)
I'm no submariner, but I am a surfer and I know it is easier to go under big waves than over them, I guess the same applies to a submarine so I would assume sea keeping is less of an issue underwater.

Weight distribution however is very important in a submarine, in fact critical to the whole concept. It is controlling weight distribution that allows you to control the submarine. There is a system of balast tanks and valves between the inner and outer hull so the weight distribution can be controlled. There is a trip system that pumps water between the tanks to maintain thr correct weight distribution and keep the sub level when submerged. There are of course control surfaces that work alongside the trim system to control the boat.
@LandSharkUK

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

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

Post by seaspear »

Im slightly ot, but there are trials of large underwater remote submarine like drones,that can go to areas large submarines could not,whether the Royal Navy is interested in future vessels deploying these, who knows ,certainly a lot cheaper than a conventional submarine for certain tasks ,

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

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

Post by shark bait »

Image

I updated the estimated successor build schedule. Looks like Astute will have to be life extended, going out of service before successor 4 hits the water.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

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

Post by GibMariner »

HMS Ambush in Gibraltar after NATO exercise Dynamic Manta:


User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

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

Post by GibMariner »

Some photos of HMS Ambush at Gib


arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

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

Post by arfah »

....................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.


arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

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

Post by arfah »

..................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

zanahoria
Member
Posts: 234
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:21
United Kingdom

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

Post by zanahoria »

From BBC Radio 4:

"Food in Extreme Places: The Submarine (2/3)
Food Programme

Continuing our series of programmes on cooking and eating in challenging conditions in remote places: The Royal Navy's submarines make their own air and water so food is the one factor limiting how long they can remain at sea. Sheila Dillon explores life, and the role food plays in it, on board HMS Artful- a nuclear-powered but not nuclear-armed submarine. More than simply for nutrition, food acts as a marker of the day and time in a world without sunlight and is crucial in maintaining morale. So how do you order enough food for 140 crew for up to 3 months at sea, store it in confined spaces and cook for a 24 hour operation while coping with the vessel diving or having to keep silence in a stealth operation? Sheila learns about the naval favourites 'Cheesy Wham-bam' and 'Nelly's Wellies', how they mark an important occasion and works out if the chef if the most popular job to have on board."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0769qss

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2784
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

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

Post by Caribbean »

Don't think this has been posted yet - Artful testing its new CCS (originally scheduled to be installed on the 4th boat, but completed ahead of schedule)

http://www.gizmag.com/hms-artful-submar ... ult-widget
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

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

Post by GibMariner »

Submarines: Arctic:Written question - 37338

Asked by Emily Thornberry
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, on how many occasions a Royal Navy submarine was deployed to the Arctic region in each of the last six years.
Submarines :Written question - 37448

Asked by Emily Thornberry
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what assessment he has made of the capacity of the Royal Navy's Astute-class submarines for under-ice operations.
Armed Forces: Training:Written question - 37339

Asked by Emily Thornberry
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many Royal Navy personnel took part in under-ice training in each of the last six years.
Answered by: Penny Mordaunt
The Astute class submarines are the largest, most advanced and most powerful attack submarines ever operated by the Royal Navy, combining world-leading sensors, design and weaponry in a versatile vessel. The Royal Navy maintains world-wide deployability with its submarines, this includes under-ice capability.
We do not discuss the detail of such submarine operations, as this would, or would be likely to, prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of the Armed Forces.
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publi ... -18/37338/
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publi ... -18/37448/
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publi ... -18/37339/

Post Reply