UK Defence Forum

Yes, the most likely. But rather bare-bones
- perhaps doing any repairs will be beyond the remit
- just charging a big battery pack. so that when the sub comes back, it can be 'zapped' back to life?

written answers 21st July 2021:-

https://questions-statements.parliament ... 7-14/33156

Coincident?

No, not really a coincidence. A reminder - HMS Astute is already now eleven years old, being commissioned in August 2010. The Astute's design is already well over twenty years old, with the programme to replace the earlier Trafalgar class beginning way back in 1986!

So thinking about a preliminary next-generation boat design would naturally be underway by now anyway, even though all seven Astute's aren't yet completed, with three yet to be commissioned into RN service.



1. HMS Astute (S119) Laid Down: 31/01/2001. Launched: 08/06/2007. Commissioned: 27/08/2010. Status: In Service.
2. HMS Ambush (S120) Laid Down: 22/10/2003. Launched: 06/01/2011. Commissioned: 01/03/2013. Status: In Service.
3. HMS Artful (S121) Laid Down: 11/03/2005. Launched: 17/05/2014. Commissioned: 18/03/2016. Status: In Service.
4. HMS Audacious (S122) Laid Down: 24/03/2009. Launched: 28/04/2017. Commissioned: 23/09/2021. Status: In Service.
5. HMS Anson (S123) Laid Down: 13/10/2011. Launched: 20/04/2021. Commissioned: Not yet. Status: Fitting out and testing.
6. HMS Agamemnon (S124) Laid Down: 18/07/2013. Launched: Not yet. Commissioned: Not yet. Status: Under construction.
7. HMS Agincourt (ex-Ajax) (S125) Laid Down: ??/05/2018. Launched: Not yet. Commissioned: Not yet. Status: Under construction.

Didn't the "100 jobs in Derby" quote come up in the announcement about Oz, though?

Caribbean wrote:Didn't the "100 jobs in Derby" quote come up in the announcement about Oz, though?

I hope you're not suggesting the UK government would try and 'double dip' an announcement!

Unlike Tempest, whose £200m preliminary work has been announced so many times you'd think the programme was funded to completion...

SSN(R) has been ongoing for a couple of years (and MUFC before that) according to snippets on the internet so they aren't starting from scratch at least.

Jensy wrote:I hope you're not suggesting the UK government would try and 'double dip' an announcement!

Perish the thought!

Caribbean wrote:

Jensy wrote:I hope you're not suggesting the UK government would try and 'double dip' an announcement!

Perish the thought!

The number of times we were told "HMS D***** is one of six new destroyers ordered by the Royal Navy" the casual observer could be forgiven for thinking they have thirty by now!

HMS Audacious (S122) Commissioned

(Navy Lookout/Royal Navy) 23rd September 2021

The 4th Astute-class submarine was commissioned at Faslane on 23rd September at the ceremony. The Lady Sponsor of the boat is Mrs Sarah Jones, wife of the former First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Philip Jones GCB, ADC, DL (retired)

Clearly nothing to do with AUKUS.

We were just passing and decided to pop in…..

It does make you wonder which way Australia will go ,all the smart money says with the Virginia class but with larger crews will Australia want to go that way and it costs alot more ,or astute design but with a pwr3 reactor maybe which would push up its costs ?, still think Virginia still edging it in balance but would love to be wrong

Do they have to go with PWR3? Wasn't there a redesign of PWR2 (version H or something) that addressed the safety issues? Or was it only a partial mitigation?

HMAS Austute?!

inch wrote:…still think Virginia still edging it

I really can’t see the RAN swallowing the costs of 8 Virginias plus the infrastructure etc.

I think it will be a next generation AUKUS design heavily based on Astute.

Does anyone know the technical issues behind the shape of a sail on a submarine? Astute and Virginia class are examples of opposite approaches. One has a more slanty front than back and the other the reverse.

If heavily based on astute design ,new aukus boat won't that just be the same as the next generation design the RN designing SSN(r) ? If you see what I mean ,why develop 2 different designs off same base, wouldn't you just go for the SSN(r) ?,,I could see a SSN(r) with American systems installed instead of RN fit but can't see them develop the new boat twice ? .I know timelines might have something to do with it also ,who knows maybe USN might develop a smaller Virginia successor to cut down on crew numbers also ,we all in the hard to recruit numbers / cost game I quess .

inch wrote:….timelines might have something to do with it

To have them operational by 2040 time is very short to develop something new. I agree that SSN(R) is a good option if the RAN are happy to wait but Barrow won’t be building whatever SSN(R) turns out be before 2036/2037 at the earliest. Therefore the first of class is unlikely be commissioned before the mid 2040’s. The timeline looks too elongated for the RAN.

Therefore IMO the RAN would be best to proceed at pace with modified Astutes. Could a commitment for RN to purchase 2 or 3 Australian assembled Astutes seal the deal if the majority of the high value content was produced in the UK?

Pity the Aussies didn’t ask for help 10 years ago.

inch wrote:It does make you wonder which way Australia will go ,all the smart money says with the Virginia class but with larger crews will Australia want to go that way and it costs alot more ,or astute design but with a pwr3 reactor maybe which would push up its costs ?, still think Virginia still edging it in balance but would love to be wrong

American systems makes Virginia the overwhelming favorite in my view.

I do agree ron5 but would love you to be wrong lol

Moi aussi

I think it will come down to manufacturing capacity not design although the two are of course connected.

From what I have read there is no spare capacity in the UK and the US is similarly pressed at least on the maintenance side.

You derisk any technology related project by taking a tried and tested product so, at least for the first 2/3 boats, the RAN would be wise (although that is not a trait you would automatically associate with military procurement) to take the existing UK or US design exactly as is.

If the Aussies do select the current Astute design presumably all of the tooling still exists and could be shipped/duplicated as soon as boat 7 is largely complete which would be an advantage.

The good news is that any experienced nuclear engineer will be able to name their terms for a relocation package to Australia. I wonder if they will be required to take out Australian nationality as a security control.

Being creative it might be possible to use technology to create one virtual engineering team to provide the expertise and support needed by the Australians from experts based in both the UK and US. You might even want to tap into French expertise but there would be a fair few bridges to build before that could even be considered as an option.

With the US as keen as anyone to maintain their own construction program they might not want their yards doing any work for the Australians. It will be interesting to see how that strategic/commercial conflict works out.

Would the RAN want the Virginia Class as it will probably be in their timescale. The boats are getting quite a bit bigger with the aft launch tubes being installed. Is the RAN looking for something along the lines of TLAM and its ASM cousin for its SSN?

If they became involved in the SSN(r) programme, wouldn't it allow the RAN and Australian Boat Builders to gain the knowledge to design and develop SSNs using digital tools so most of the Australian Engineers could remain in Australia, rotating to the UK if desired. have the design able to easily be configured for either UK or US systems from the start, have the first boat built in the UK with a joint team of UK and Australian engineers whilst the facilities in Oz are built with UK help and then the second could be built in Australian. The first RN and RAN boats would undergo trial in UK waters to ensure follow on boats are up to spec.

I am not a naval engineer but there must be a way that benefits both countries and shares the development costs. We also need to try to ensure there is no stealing of knowledge, like UK Engineers being enticed down under, but rather build up Australia's knowledge base through teamwork. At least in a senario where the RAN goes for a UK boat rather then a US one.

Bring Deeps wrote:The good news is that any experienced nuclear engineer will be able to name their terms for a relocation package to Australia. I wonder if they will be required to take out Australian nationality as a security control.

Pretty certain that both the UK and US will make sure that the Australian's agree on not poaching staff as part of any co-operation, otherwise half of Barrow would re-locate...and half of the personnel in Faslane...neither service or industry is overwhelmed with qualified staff.