HII has confirmed the successful completion of initial sea trials for the US Navy’s Virginia-class attack submarine USS Massachusetts (SSN 798), the company stated.
The submarine spent several days at sea as part of testing led by HII’s Newport News Shipbuilding division and the Navy, which included submerging for the first time and conducting high-speed manoeuvres both on the surface and underwater.
Further testing will continue before the vessel’s formal delivery to the fleet.
“Our entire team at Newport News Shipbuilding understands the importance of delivering capability to our fleet,” said Kari Wilkinson, president of Newport News Shipbuilding. “Proving capabilities through this first sea trial for Massachusetts is an important step in demonstrating this and we are honored to support the mission.”
USS Massachusetts is the 25th Virginia-class submarine and the 12th built by Newport News Shipbuilding. The vessel was christened in May 2023 by sponsor Sheryl Sandberg and launched in February 2024. It will be commissioned in Boston in late 2025, according to the Navy.
Ordered in 2014 under a $17.6 billion contract awarded to General Dynamics Electric Boat, Massachusetts is the first Navy vessel to bear the state’s name since the battleship USS Massachusetts was decommissioned in 1947.
The submarine displaces 7,800 tons, measures 377 feet in length, and is powered by an S9G nuclear reactor. It carries Tomahawk cruise missiles and Mk-48 torpedoes and can remain submerged for up to three months.
Powerful boat.
Safe sailing USS Massachusetts
Not one of the block V with the VPM then?
No, Block IV …..
Number 25 not commission until 2026.. that is about 3 years latter that it was scheduled. The thing is by the end 2026 I believe the USN will only have 20 LA class and 3 seawolf that’s a long way from the 66 in total.
Eleven plus years have elapsed from the ordering to the commissioning of a known quantity, serial production, boat. Does not augur particularly well for AUKUS, either the delivery of three to five Virginia class in the 2030s and beyond, nor the planned delivery of SSN-A, an entirely new class by the early 2040s. Dunno, perhaps the RAN should indulge in some contingency planning w/ interim purchase/lease of some SSKs? The Japanese, heavily invested in GCAP/Tempest, may be willing to deal at mate’s rates. 🤔
Agreed, time for some contingency planning by the RAN. Although both government and defence decision makers will be very reluctant and wary of changing course, given the debacle of the French SSKs and subsequent delays caused to the Collins replacement and an ever widening capability gap. Nevertheless the realities of production scheduling constraints may force a re-think by Australia and for once it would be good to be ahead of the curve.
While Trump has made positive comments about commitment to AUKUS at a meeting with the Australian PM (for what they are worth) the formal outcome of the review of AUKUS underway by the Pentagon still hasn’t released its findings and could easily conclude that the USN cannot spare any Virginia boats for the RAN in the near future.
In practice the AUKUS Pillar 1 (the SSNs for Australia) has always comprised two phases. Phase 1 the early acquisition of Virginia’s to allow some of the Collins to retire and; Phase 2 the development of a common AUKUS design produced simultaneously in the US, UK and Australian shipyards.
IMHO the notion of Australia acquiring Virginias for Phase 1 should be scrapped and the RANs requirement redefined in terms of a conventional SSK. Given the production bottlenecks in the US and the strategic demands on the USN this may become reality, but it can be done without sacrificing the AUKUS deal.
Australia could adopt a two tiered approach to its submarine fleet. In the same way as its new pragmatic two tiered approach to its surface fleet through the purchase of Japanese Mogami frigates is utilising some overseas production capability (rather than relying totally on a slower, less efficient sovereign shipbuilding pipeline) to quickly and cost effectively acquire new capabilities. Following the Mogami deal, the Japanese are once again the most likely supplier with their new advanced lithium battery powered powered Tagei class SSKs offering similar size and range to Collins and already in production. A buy of say four SSKs would help close the capability gap until the arrival of 4 to 6 AUKUS SSNs.
There would be a number of advantages. It helps the USN build its own boat numbers and the US is spared the ’embarrasment’ of being unable to supply the agreed SSNs and renegging on the deal. It’s a political, pragmatic and strategic win for the US.
Australia meanwhile would have longer to build the industrial capacity and train the workforce in its shipyards for the skills needed for SSN production not to mention a considerable saving in tax payer dollars that could be redirected to other defence projects. It would close the capability gap more quickly with conventional boats the RAN is already skilled at operating. Meanwhile Australian crews could continue to train and cross deck on US and UK SSNs and the regulatory frameworks and technical expertise could be developed at a more realistic pace.
Ultimately with the recently announced introduction into service of the Ghost Shark XLAUVs in significant numbers (fleet size of around 30), the RAN could field a versatile and cutting edge submersible fleet of SSNs, SSKs and autonomous XLAUVs.
How many UK ssns are at Sea right now?
How does that matter really to this article about US boats ? But the number is not published.. probably 1, the real question is how many are operational and is the adequate to do the work supporting the deterrent and but some pressure on Russia.. then if it kicks off can the RN get adequate boats to do its bit against the Russian northern fleets boats.. so let’s consider the RN at maximum surge could “probably “ but 3 boats out into the artic ocean area Russia can probably manage 1-2 modern SSGNs and 1-2 older inferior SSNs.. so the RN could probably edge it against the Northern fleet.. yes having 10-12 boats to allow a surge of 4-5 would be more comfortable.
But the UK is not facing off China in the pacific, the US is and US build rate and future fleet numbers need to overmatch China.. and China is now has a greater capacity to produce SSNs than the US and that’s a strategy probably for the US moving into the post 2035s because at that point all it will have is the Virginias it’s built and on present build and order rates that’s going to be 35-40 boats.. China the crazy centrally controlled communists that they are have built a nuclear boat mega factory with up to 36 bays to lay down 36 nuclear boats at the same time backed up with 16-10 component fabrication areas and entire bay just for tilling and painting as well as a two chambered fuelling facility all in the same area of a mega yard and connected by purpose but roads and a rail system that can carry an SSBN.. essentially experts estimate that China will be able to crack out up to 8 boats a year ( 6 SSN and 2 SSBN) if it wants to.. and it has actually started serial production of SSNs which it’s never done before ( because they were all not great learning boats) it’s now mostly through the seriel production of 12 type 93b ( estimated 8 launches since early late 22 early 23).. which is considered an adequate SSN that is likely a peer with a flight 2 LA ( vertical launch tubes for 1500km range cruise missiles, pump jet propulsion and peer level rafting and tiles.. its flaw is a duel reaction set up ). They will all be launched probably in 27-28 it’s also building the type 95 this very likely a peer or close peer SSN to Astute and Virginia ( as it’s a single reactor boat because the Russians flogged them a 150mw marine nuclear reactor a decade ago)… it’s estimated they will have two commissioned for the late 2020s and will be kicking in serial production.. if they are at capacity running out 6 a year by 3035 worst case is 6 not so great type 93 and 93A, 12 adequate 93B and 30 peers type 95s as well as 40-50 solid peer level AIP and possibly nuclear auxiliary powered boats.. that would be a handful for 35-40 Virginia class boats.. and that is 2035 unless the US kicked in a massive recapitalisation of its nuclear sub built in the late 2020s China will be out building by 4.5-5 boats a year.. the US needs to be putting 4 boats into the sea a year for the start of 2030 if it wants to maintain a good edge over China.