After months of maintenance and readiness challenges, the Royal Navy’s attack submarine fleet is back on course with a notable increase in activity, reflecting hard work behind the scenes to get boats to sea.
Currently, the Astute-class HMS Anson and the Trafalgar-class HMS Triumph are both at sea, following HMS Astute’s recent return to Faslane after completing Exercise Strike Warrior.
This renewed presence is a promising sign of the Royal Navy’s commitment to improving submarine availability and addressing prior maintenance backlogs.
Earlier this year, the Royal Navy faced prolonged periods without any of its nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs) at sea, underscoring the impact of maintenance delays and a stretched fleet. HMS Astute’s recent deployment and HMS Triumph’s return to sea reflect a marked improvement, demonstrating progress in fleet readiness.
With HMS Anson now at sea, the Royal Navy is fielding one of its most advanced submarines in the world. Meanwhile, HMS Triumph, the last active Trafalgar-class submarine, complements the numbers showing the fleet’s ability to sustain a balanced operational presence even as older vessels near the end of their service.
In recent years, the Royal Navy has started to prioritise significant upgrades to its submarine maintenance infrastructure, undertaking projects aimed at enhancing the operational availability of both the Vanguard and Astute-class submarines. Improvements such as the £200 million refurbishment of Number 9 dry dock at Devonport highlight the Royal Navy’s response to infrastructure bottlenecks that have previously hit fleet readiness. This upgraded facility now allows for more efficient deep maintenance on nuclear-powered submarines, helping reduce downtime and meet pressing operational demands.
We haven’t even mentioned Project Euston.
The Ministry of Defence previously initiated Programme EUSTON, a project designed to strengthen submarine maintenance capabilities at His Majesty’s Naval Base (HMNB) Clyde. This programme aims to establish two new floating dry docks along with supporting infrastructure to meet the demands of the Royal Navy’s submarine fleet.
Launched as part of a broader strategy to enhance operational readiness, Programme EUSTON is currently in the early concept phase, with market engagement underway to shape the project’s procurement approach.
Nevertheless, challenges persist, particularly with the ageing facilities and the limited number of dry docks available to support such complex vessels. Recent maintenance periods, including the extensive work on HMS Victorious, illustrate the scale and intricacy of sustaining the Vanguard-class submarines.
This resurgence in SSN activity highlights the Royal Navy’s efforts to overcome previous maintenance backlogs, ensuring that the UK’s undersea defence capabilities remain robust, responsive, and strategically ready.
Project Euston is an interesting name.
The 1840’s extension of the London Birmingham railway from Camden to Euston cost £74k. The origional contract survives in The National Archives.
HS2 could cost £74Bn….
I never understood the reason behind HS2. Those mega projects always seem to double in size of the original costings. So is that 74Bn for just the London- Birmingham section? And for what 25 minutes of time saved. That money would have been better spent upgrading our existing rail services and fixing our roads.
It was a Boris sop to Tory backers. And he loved big projects to feed his ego.
Nothing stopping Labour from cancelling it then is there?…
They’ve already spent so much buying land and agreeing contracts that if they cancelled it now they’d still be down £30bn – and £74bn for not that much is better than 30bn for nothing at all.
Land goes up in value and can easily be sold or repurposed. Contracts are another thing depending on the terms.
It was purely to increase capacity as the lines are pretty much at or over capacity.
It was very little to do with 25 mins saved, but the promotors made the mistake of majoring on that trivial advantage, thinking that the public would be impressed. Actually it is all about capacity on the existing west coast mainline, which is becoming critical and results in severely restricted access for freight trains, and long distance expresses being held back by various stopping trains. HS2 HAS to be built, but it would have been much better at a lower specification that did not need a continuous reinforced concrete base, rather than conventional granite ballast. Furthermore it is not logical… Read more »
We needed a Jumbo not a Concord.
Sadly MPs are rarely on the button and no major £billon +project has ever come in under budget
Much of the reason is that the cost at the start of the project are based on current costs while much of the final spending will have up to 30 years inflation. If projects run over budget which is normal the only way to fund them is to slow them down and use future years funding which inflates the nominal cost. Cross rail for instance started at £7 billion and ended up at £20 billion but it wasn’t three times over budget.
HS2 was never about saving time, it was always about capacity. By making HS2 high speed it is able to relive three main lines at the same time. A lower speed rail line couldn’t do this so you would have to either upgrade or build three new mainlines. As an example the sections of the East Coast mainline between Leeds and London are at capacity. The West Coast mainline is not near Leeds. By making a high speed line down the West Coast with a branch to Leeds you take traffic off the East Coast mainline as even though it’s… Read more »
Yes, but just for context,in 1860 Earls Court was still a farm.
HS2 may as well go on to st pancreas and northern trains able to continue straight into Europe.
It can’t be done there is no space for it at kingscross st pancreas
HS2 was based on increasing capacity on the “full West Coast Main Line.
Yes, increasing capacity was a key reason for the work and absent a complete shift to home working would be needed in future decades regardless. Any decrease in journey times was and is a complete red herring. The escalating costs of the programme are a different matter though – this could have been done for so much cheaper. There are lots of lessons to be learnt there. Why were the Victorians able and willing to build things that would last for generations and we, the inheritors of their work, so reluctant? Probably lots of reasons for that but we don’t… Read more »
The Victorian’s were building in empty fields. Today is a very different story.
There projects also ran late and went over budget just like ours.
Not quite correct -the main reason for HS2 was for relieving pressure on the West Coast Mainline, you can’t increase capacity on it.
Wow…an SSN article has become a Rail Forum!
As a railwayman myself, I agree on the capacity issues around WCML and HS2.
Pity about the route.
On money, does building a gigantic concrete dry dock really cost 200 million?
How is that possible please? Is MoD being fleeced again?
It’s actually modifying an existing drydock. But the nuclear nature of the subs makes for very strict requirements and in turn cost.
We have to rate our dry docks for strong earthquakes now in the UK if they have nuclear boats. Didn’t have to do that back in the day.
Yep, was aware it was already there, which to me makes it worse. Ok, the nuke side point taken. How does that run Into that amount? Cables? Power? What does an SSN have when it sits alongside that an escort does not? High security, and?
The US and Australia are paying billions for dry docks. Everything cost a fortune now a days. Probably even more reason to keep facilities like H&W.
Anyone know if it’s possible to extend the service life of the last Trafalgar class SSN? I’m hoping we get knees soon of either more Astute class bring ordered as an interim stop gap measure to return critical mass to the RN attack sub fleet before Aukus comes into service or that Aukus programme has moved to the left and is coming 5 years sooner. It might be useful to retain the last 2 Trafalgar class as a reserve force for special forces deployment, reconnaissance and as a reserve in case of a war with a peer enemy like Russia… Read more »
Only 1 trafalgar left and it’s got no refit facility to go to so it will be retired soon. No more astutes as their reactors are out of production.
Unless facilities are expanded any new Aukus subs will be post 2030, probably at least mid 2030s once dreadnoughts are finished.
Hi folks hope all is well.
Well that’s good news despite their initial low numbers we have to deploy at any given time.
Whilst here, I appear to have trouble been able to be on this site. It takes ages to load and despite all other sites opening as normal, this one is slow. Anybody else noticed this recent
issue?
Cheers
George
Evening, George, good to hear from you. DM and I, and others, have also commented on the same problem, in the past.
Now, I’ve used Firefox as my web browser for years. This evening, after getting the same problem with UKDJ access, I switched to Microsoft Edge, to see what happens and – bingo, no problems at all.
Are you using Firefox? Try Edge (or another browser) and let me know how you get on.
Cheers to yourself!
Crab
Stone me, they’ve managed to prise two of them away from the wall. An absolute miracle.
So two are at sea then? Why not say two then?