Royal Navy SSK?

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 2164
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 3 times
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Timmymagic wrote: Didn't realise it could have 12 VLS for Tomahawk...and an SDV onboard....I'm sold.
Thanks for posting this, what a great read :thumbup:

It looked like 18 VLS cells to me, I suspect a modest number of these boats would be a whole lot cheaper than a modified Astute or an SSGN.

Anyone got any idea of cost?

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Pitcairn Island

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by shark bait »

Without doubt it will be lots cheaper than a Nuke boat.

Looks like a great little design, it has everything you could think of to stick in a small sub. The VLS option is very nice, but of little interest to the UK. The more interesting feature is the multimission portal, turning it into a special mission submarine, which might be of some interest to the UK, alongside a training role.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3196
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 25 times
France

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by Tempest414 »

The UK should jump on this program as BAE and SAAB have histroy of working together it could be a good opportunity

Dahedd
Member
Posts: 613
Joined: 06 May 2015, 11:18
Has liked: 16 times
Been liked: 1 time

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by Dahedd »

The A26 Oceanic or even the ext version could be a great addition to the fleet. Perfect for sneaky ops in the Baltic & Gulf, ideal for protecting the north Sea & routes to the Atlantic. Allowing the Astutes to venture further out.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 2341
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 5 times
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by Timmymagic »

Dahedd wrote:The A26 Oceanic or even the ext version could be a great addition to the fleet. Perfect for sneaky ops in the Baltic & Gulf, ideal for protecting the north Sea & routes to the Atlantic. Allowing the Astutes to venture further out.
It could be used for training the ASW community as well, you could run Perisher aboard it. Basically do pretty much every routine tasking and free the SSN's up for the really important stuff. It will never happen... but with the UK, Netherlands and Sweden purchasing together there could be significant savings to be made. Pity that Norway went with the 212 (although that in itself is an excellent choice). 6, 7 or 8 of these would dramatically increase the RN's sub capability by freeing up the precious SSN's. SF would love the capability as well, at the present in the event of there being any major conflict the chances of them getting a lift on one of the few SSN's must be vanishingly small in reality.

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2009
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 3 times
Australia

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by R686 »

Timmymagic wrote:. SF would love the capability as well, at the present in the event of there being any major conflict the chances of them getting a lift on one of the few SSN's must be vanishingly small in reality.
That would come down to the importance of the mission, irrespective if you had 6 or 26 boats.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 2341
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 5 times
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by Timmymagic »

R686 wrote:hat would come down to the importance of the mission, irrespective if you had 6 or 26 boats.
True, but with a mere 7 Astutes the chances of 1 being available, from the small number we can put to sea and having time to be fitted with the Chalfont DDS are fairly slim at present.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Pitcairn Island

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by shark bait »

I think that hits on the main arguments for SSK, it would mostly be for training, with few special missions added on the side where an SSN may not be available.
@LandSharkUK

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6329
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United States of America

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by Ron5 »

shark bait wrote:I think that hits on the main arguments for SSK, it would mostly be for training, with few special missions added on the side where an SSN may not be available.
In other words, not worth it.

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1029
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 0

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by inch »

sorry to burst bubble time guys but no chance of a ssk as no budget no manpower and no plans ,that should about cover it I guess .like I said sorry folks :thumbdown: right whats for supper ,head in porridge again I think yey :wave:

User avatar
wirralpete
Member
Posts: 43
Joined: 01 May 2015, 11:16
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by wirralpete »

:clap: Jeez thank f@@k for that

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Pitcairn Island

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by shark bait »

Yes, clearly no money, and clearly no man power.

The RN dont have enough subs, and the navy does not use the subs it has very well. If the government did want to change that, perhaps in response to Russian activity, a small fleet of SSK's could provide a mechanism to get better use out of the top class SSN's, but it would not happen without new money.
@LandSharkUK

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6329
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United States of America

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by Ron5 »

inch wrote:sorry to burst bubble time guys but no chance of a ssk as no budget no manpower and no plans ,that should about cover it I guess .like I said sorry folks :thumbdown: right whats for supper ,head in porridge again I think yey :wave:
From the guy that thinks the UK should have bought Canberra's and not CVF (eyes roll)

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1029
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 0

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by inch »

aye maybe so ron5 if it maybe have given us more of a larger true escort fleet ? with a couple of Canberra type ships which would have been at least as good as an 21st century updated ocean and invincible class in my eyes that was my reasoning but its irrelevant point like the ssk sub talk I grant you that ,we gots what we gots ,2 fairly large carriers and a very small shrinking true escort fleet in my eyes and growing opv fleet,head in porridge time again pal :)

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Pitcairn Island

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by shark bait »

Image
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Poiuytrewq wrote:I am not convinced RN is going to go down the midget sub route in the near future but I could be wrong.

Obviously that would require new money as further places to cut seem to be in short supply. New money may come especially as 'what to do with the North Atlantic' seems to be a hot topic in the MDP.
Certainly is a hot topic, and conventional subs (for the RN) are in the margin of the big picture (I very much doubt that they are in the picture at all; whereas we, generally speaking, are when you look at the NATO exercises around or North of the Suwalki gap coming up during the rest of the year... and the UK playing more than a bit part in them):

NAME AND SCENARIO
ORGANIZING
NATO
COMMAND
DATE
LOCATION
DYNAMIC MONGOOSE
Annual NATO exercise to train submarine warfare,
antisubmarine warfare (ASW), ASW surface units and
maritime patrol aircraft.
Allied Maritime
Command
(MARCOM),
Northwood,
United Kingdom
25 June – 6
July
North Atlantic


BRILLIANT JUMP
This NATO exercise will involve some 4,000 – 5,000
troops and test the deployment functions of the Very High
Readiness Joint Task Force, the “spearhead force” within the
NATO Response Force (NRF).
Joint Forces
Command
Brunssum
(JFCBS),
Netherlands
10 – 20
October
Norway

TRIDENT JUNCTURE 2018

NATO’s biggest exercise in recent years, with participation
from more than 30 countries. The exercise will train the Very
High Readiness Joint Task Force and the NATO Response
Force 2019 (NRF 2019).
Allied Command
Transformation
(ACT), Norfolk,
VA, USA and
Joint Forces
Command
Naples (JFCNP),
Italy
25 October –
7 November
(LIVEX)
Norway, Baltic
Sea, North
Atlantic



ANAKONDA
A Polish exercise which will involve approximately 10,000
troops from around ten Allied nations.
National exercise
8 – 17
November
Poland
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)

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 2164
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 3 times
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by Poiuytrewq »

ArmChairCivvy wrote: Certainly is a hot topic, and conventional subs (for the RN) are in the margin of the big picture
North Atlantic underwater incursions are undoubtably a hot topic in the MDP discussions but I'm not convinced that a fleet of SSK's will be the chosen outcome to combat it. I think the easy win for HMG is to increase the P8 order by a few aircraft, that would help, but a broader approach would be much more effective.

Increased Nato activity is the cheapest solution for HMG and that would be a big help, but it's the UK's back yard and we should be able to secure what is effectively home waters without requiring help from Allies. Cuts have consequences, and cutting the MPA capability without replacement was a big mistake. At least something is now being done to restore the Maritime Reconnaissance capability albeit with insufficient aircraft numbers at present.

The North Atlantic issue again proves the point that 8 ASW Frigates and 6 or 7 SSN's simply aren't enough regardless of how world leading their capabilities may be. With no sign of increased hull numbers apart from additional MPA capability it's hard to see how things will improve in the short to medium term especially now that the emphasis is turning towards Carrier Strike and more resources will be channeled into that area of operations.

If HMG decide that additional Sub numbers are needed, without massive investment to improve and expand the infrastructure at Barrow the only realistic way to increase the number of hulls is to introduce a class of SSK's to the fleet.

To solve 'The North Atlantic Problem' RN simply need more resources. An increase of the following assets would go along way to solving the issue,

3 T26's
6 SSK's
7 P8 Poseidon's (16 in total)

This would probably cost around £6.5bn and that's the reason it probably won't happen.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Pitcairn Island

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by shark bait »

Poiuytrewq wrote:North Atlantic underwater incursions are undoubtably a hot topic in the MDP discussions but I'm not convinced that a fleet of SSK's will be the chosen outcome to combat it. I think the easy win for HMG is to increase the P8 order by a few aircraft, that would help, but a broader approach would be much more effective.
The only way to counter subs in the North Atlantic is with MPA's, SSK's are no good in that role, at least not directly.

Even Frigate are not much good out there. The sub will hear the Frigate 100 miles beyond detection range, and just head where the frigate isn't. Aircraft with a shit load of sonobuoy's are the only decent option.
@LandSharkUK

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2556
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 4 times
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by dmereifield »

shark bait wrote:The sub will hear the Frigate 100 miles beyond detection range, and just head where the frigate isn't. Aircraft with a shit load of sonobuoy's are the only decent option.
Isn't this sufficient in most cases? Positioning the frigate(s) to ensure that subs stay clear of areas of interest (i.e. The route of a departing it returning SSBN)?

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 2164
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 3 times
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by Poiuytrewq »

shark bait wrote: The only way to counter subs in the North Atlantic is with MPA's, SSK's are no good in that role, at least not directly.
Absolutely, but I think the 'North Atlantic Problem' that is being grappled with by those working on the MDP isn't just in relatition to the GIUK gap. I think it also includes the wider issue of the UK's overall maritime security. As such I was addressing the wider approach of securing UK waters and the associated national infrastructure such as undersea cables which have been identified as a particular area of vulnerability.

By adding the SSK's to cover the approaches the Astute's can spend more time patrolling GIUK and together with increased P8 numbers and help from Allies this should be pretty effective.

The additional T26's are simply strength in depth. What is the best method to protect the aforementioned undersea cables? Is it simply a task for the P8's or should it be a combination of SSK's, P8's and ASW Frigates providing deterrence patrols to areas that have identified as vulnerable?

It is easy for the Sub to evade the Frigate in the wide open spaces of the North Atlantic but the tables are turned when the Frigate can identify the targets a Sub is likely to try and interfere with and the general area they may be operating in. In the case of the undersea cables possibly keeping hostile Subs away from them would be good enough.

Are all these hostile incursions coming through the GIUK gap and the North Sea or are they coming through the Mediterranean as well? Possible SSK's based in Gibraltar could have a role to play too in the overall defence of the UK's wider maritime security.

It all comes down to how severe HMG deems this threat to be and therefore how many resources it is prepared to deploy to combat it.

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 2164
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 3 times
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by Poiuytrewq »

As if by magic!

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-and- ... operation/

Increased cooperation with Allies is always welcome news but there seem to be a clear strategy emerging now to ignore obvious gaps in UK defence capabilities by claiming they will simply be filled by our Allies.

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1851
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 5 times
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by Jake1992 »

Poiuytrewq wrote:As if by magic!

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-and- ... operation/

Increased cooperation with Allies is always welcome news but there seem to be a clear strategy emerging now to ignore obvious gaps in UK defence capabilities by claiming they will simply be filled by our Allies.
It really makes me sick it's at times like this I wish trump would thumb our politians and give them what for like he did with some other NATO members.

HMG of all colours over the years have become to comfortable with this idea that they can just cut the forces cuz Uncle Sam will come to our aid while at the same time slagging off other NATO members for doing the same as if we're still pulling our weight like we did during the Cold War

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 578
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by Spinflight »

Given the rate that T26s will be built another three would see some change in the 2040s..

As to getting the rest of Nato to step up to the plate, it isn't working. Even if it did do you think they'd prioritise frigates?

Germany is arguing it's defence budget at the moment, though despite promising 2% by 2024 at the Newport summit it's set to decrease to 1.23% from 1.3% in 2022. And this despite giving Angela an ear bashing recently.

The mandarins have been arguing that the North Atlantic is a Nato problem for well over a decade now, with their only proposed solution being to get the rest of Nato to up their spend. This is a bloody serious diplomatic failure as our own 'strategy' was based around it.

It will be interesting to see what action Trump takes. He's made a big thing of the 2% target domestically and won't back down or forget.

It certainly leaves us in a pickle and SSKs would be one of the few options if they belatedly chose to take the North Atlantic seriously. The 2015 SDSR didn't even mention it. Barrow is pretty much chocked out with nukes though it isn't impossible to build them elsewhere. We bought all the widgery doodahs for making pressure hulls for the Astutes and all the other kit is either in production or we have recent designs. In fact I suspect we make the hull sections for European subs currently.

The biggest advantage of SSKs would them not needing nuke engineers who are both in short supply and tempted by civvy street. Also giving submariners something other than 9 month deployments to look forward to. Reduced tasking for perisher and training, freeing up the nukes from some of the sneakier beaky stuff etc. Sub launched Storm Shadow too, which was experimented with on Syria might tempt the mandarins... Apparently Cameron insisted on controlling where the TLAM firers patrolled. An SSK with precision strike might get the vanity nod.

Arguments that nukes are so superior as to make SSKs pointless are irrational, particularly when production space is maxed out for the near future for the former. When you hear about contested waters think Baltics, an area which doesn't lend itself to nukes, or indeed the eastern Med. SSKs are highly superior in many locations or missions.

It won't happen under current budgets, and if there were more money Andrew would historically lube up for the RAF to take advantage of them. We are finally seeing some political action though, it seems the only way to unite Tories, Labour, SNP and DUP politicians is to put them in a Defence Select Committee and threaten the Royal Navy with more cuts.


Oops, MoD got to it first... Lube applied. https://t.co/XN5Yk5NozL

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Spinflight wrote: Germany is arguing it's defence budget at the moment, though despite promising 2% by 2024 at the Newport summit it's set to decrease to 1.23% from 1.3% in 2022. And this despite giving Angela an ear bashing recently.
They went into their elections with a firm path to 2%
... and came out with this (still same people in the relevant key jobs) :(
In fact I suspect we make the hull sections for European subs currently
Front cones for Spanish subs; have not heard of anything else
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)

Meriv9
Member
Posts: 118
Joined: 05 Feb 2016, 00:19
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
Italy

Re: Royal Navy SSK?

Post by Meriv9 »

Just curious who are the mandarins?

Post Reply