The number of sightings of American nuclear submarines visiting Scotland this year has doubled over the same period last year.

We reported previously that while visits themselves are common, the frequency of visits is not common. Neither is it common for visits to be publicised by the U.S. Navy or Royal Navy unlike the visit of the USS Rhode Island, a Trident-armed nuclear submarine, that arrived (and departed) earlier this year.

In figures reported here, it is claimed that double the usual number of NATO submarines have been spotted heading to and from the key Faslane naval base.

“Sightings so far this year stand at 85 compared with 43 for the whole of 2021, and include a string of Americaā€™s most advanced Virginia-class fast-attack submarines.”

The U.S. Navy said previously that port visits to Faslane reflect the United Statesā€™ “commitment to our allies and partners in the region and complements the many exercises, training, operations, and other military cooperation activities conducted by Strategic Forces to ensure they are available and ready to safely and effectively operate around the globe at any time”.

Third American sub visits Faslane in space of two weeks

The last time a U.S. Navy SSBN like the USS Rhode Island conducted a port visit to Faslane was when USS Alaska (SSBN 732) visited in July 2019.

In a visit to BAE in Glasgow, where the Royal Navy’s new anti-submarine frigates are being constructed, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said:

“The one thing Putin is going to have left after his illegal invasion is a navy and an air force. He uses his submarines, and they are good submarines, very well to intimidate. Weā€™ve seen worries about critical national infrastructure, gas pipelines, internet cables. We need ships that are going to hunt those submarines or deter them, and thatā€™s the role the ships are going to take.”

Frigate moved onto barge in Glasgow ahead of ‘launch’

Russian submarines will “stay away” if they know a type 26 frigate is in the water, he added.

 

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

88 COMMENTS

    • May the Russian forces be pushed back into the Asov Sea and sunk! Strength to Ukraine šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡¦, its people, its armed forces and their President in pursuit of their victory! āœŒļø šŸ‡¬šŸ‡§ šŸ‡¦šŸ‡ŗ šŸ‡³šŸ‡æ šŸ’Ŗ šŸ’Ŗ

    • With an added Christmas present from the UK!

      “British forces reveal missiles being sent to Ukraine Ministry of Defence has posted a video showcasing Brimstone 2 missiles being sent to arm Ukrainian forces.

      Brimstone 2s are precision-guided missiles originally designed for air-to-ground attacks.

      According to the MoD, the Ukrainian armed forces are using them to target armoured vehicles and tanks.

      They were flown from RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire.”

    • Unlike building more Astutes this is something that could actually be done IRL.

      However, it might interfere with T32 – the slip-of-the-tongue class.

      Remember 2 x T26BII is similar money to the T31 program.

      Whilst I donā€™t think the absolute budgets are being increased ATM Hunt is allowing BW more flexibility to spend agreed funds in ways that reduces overall costs

      • Increasing the defence budget whilst reducing lots of other budgets might have looked awkward for the government, any chance that some ‘extra funds’ are being slipped to defence under the table?

        • Given the UK is sending equipment to Ukraine, there is ample justification to either increase overall defence spending or to reimburse the armed forces from the strategic fund.

      • HI SB,

        I would suggest that building a batch 3 of 2x T26 would be a cost effective way to increase the fleet size. I would like to them equipped with a version of the SAMPSON radar and associated C2 systems as a lead into the T83 Destroyers. I would keep pretty much everything else as is i.e. the MK41 VLS and a focus on ASW.

        The reason I suggest this approach is that BAES in Cowes need an on-going development stream for their radar technology. Some improvements are to be made to SAMPSON as part of the upgrades for T45, but I would like to see some derisking of next gen technology that will support whatever goes onto the T83 and that needs to happen from now on. I would see this as a SAMPSON 2 rather than as an entirely new system, but the technology could then form the basis of the systems fitted to T83.

        SAMPSON after all is the product of an R&D process that can be traced back at least into the 1980’s and wasn’t cheap either! As I am sure you are aware it is all very evolutionary in nature and that requires continuous effort and innovation, it is not something that can be turned on and off like a tap, but try telling the bean counters that. Hence the idea of an enhanced B3 T26. They could be sold to the bean counters as an enhancement or back up to the T45’s as well as a system derisking exercise for the T83.

        Obviously, these additions / changes would increase the costs of a B3, but the overhead costs of the rest of the ship’s build and systems will already have largely been paid for by the B1 & B2 production runs and the knowledge feed into the T83 programme should help to control some of the key systems costs there too.

        Cheers CR

        • If you are putting Sampson on a T26 you a building a totally different ship.

          The only way you get economy of scale is to make more identical units.

          T26 is totally ASW optimised

          T45 is totally AAW optimised.

          Both have the ability to take VLS.

          Good radar is not something a CSG is short of. Adding more Sampson would be a waste of money. The only exception to that would be to put it in the carriers where it was supposed to be. That would be higher up than even a T45 radar mast.

          Nope spend the money on two more of the same. Buy some AAW missiles to put in the VLS of T31 (a must in my view as it turns a good platform into something with big teeth) and T26 and focus on networking the ships.

          Then of course there is the little issue of AEW over watch not using a Merlinā€¦.

          • Iā€™ll let you figure out the metacentric moment that Sampson creates on its high mast as well as the forces that are generated by its rotation.

            Then you can check them for a T26 hull.

            When youā€™ve done that Iā€™ll take the comment a bit more seriously.

            In things military you canā€™t just glue one thing onto another platform. Well you can: then you end up with AJAX.

          • He is correct. It’s like trying to adapt a VW Golf into a Ferrari. T26 is designed to be a dedicated ASW platform, with a very strong AAW capability to defend its self. Trying to bolt on T45 capability would be a mistake. We have know idea what the requirement of T83 actually is, and will probably be a clean sheet design to take advantage of new and emerging technologies.

          • But that is a whole other class of ship that is being builtā€¦ā€¦?

            Not as was being suggested by OP here some unholy amalgam of T26/T45/T83ā€¦.

            In any case the CEFAR isnā€™t that high up compared to Artisan never mind SAMPSON.

        • Now CR, you know that outside the box thinking so annoys the Ye Olde Bean Counters Guild, that it might rouse their competitive spirit! šŸ¤”šŸ˜‰

      • Hi SB, just thought while the T26 program is starting to roll a bit and it was originally to be 9. Even increase the T31/T32s by 1 each too, for a wee bit more of more useful ships. I think a few of us here have asked for some extra Astutes already too with no luckā€¦lolā€¦weā€™ll have to wait for the SSN(R). Anyway, it always good seeing a new šŸ‡¬šŸ‡§ ship take shape and more to come.

      • I suppose, It would depend how quickly they need to move onto the Type 83, if they keep starting the T26 hulls on a two year cycle the last hull Of batch 2 will be started in 2031. If it takes five years to get it off the slips then thatā€™s 2036 ish. Daring and dauntless will be getting very long in the tooth by then so they may have needed to have moved onto the T83 if they are getting one commissioned before the the first few T45s hit 30 years old.

        I am assuming that BAE get the T83 contract and they are built at Govan.

  3. Wow 85! If someone had asked how many I thought I would of guessed 25. Exciting times coming in December. Hopefully we find out the next submarine steps for Australia, Ajax decision is due, itā€™s Christmas and thereā€™s some other things Iā€™m sure Iā€™ve forgotten about.

  4. I get the very distinct impression that Russian Navy ships and submarines are having a very interesting time operating in NATO waters at the moment. Although I doubt very much that many of the surface units will even know if there is a NATO sub trailing them. I bet they are on their very best behaviour even when they are poking their noses into areas where they are not welcome…

    Cheers CR

    • No these orcs dont know how to behave. Their behaviour is characterized by thinking they can do whatever they like without consequence. Then when their lack of training, lack of modern equipment, lack of success becomes obvious they revert to type. Attack infrastructure, civillians and flee a trained military response.
      Bunch of cowards.
      I grnuinely hope NATO does find a Russian naval unit conducting sabotage operations. That way we can engage and sink it. Or better still board it. Arrest its crew and put them on trial.

  5. It would make a lot of sense to have a NATO-USA-AUS-UK class SSN wouldn’t it? Maybe a choice of propulsion and weapons fit but the same basic hull. The economies of scale would be tremendous. The challenges at sea are likely to be huge in the next 30 years.

    • The US will only build nuclear subs. It’s capacity to do so is totally maxed out as is that of the UK. France’s nuclear sub capability is also maxed out. The US is considering expanding its nuclear sub capability to reduce the timeline to build nuclear subs for Australia, but that is a multi-billion dollar commitment. And the US is not about to spend billions designing a new class of nuclear sub. It’s just not practical.

      • The US already are spending billions to design a new class of nuclear subs, as are we. Theirs is called SSN(X), ours is called SSN(R), and Wallace’s suggestion is that they use common technology and modules, along with Australia’s offering. So not quite as advanced as Jonno’s suggestion of us all building the same design, but certainly along those lines.

        Given that the mid-2030s is also a common timeline, the biggest issues on having a common design will be, do we have the same requirements (I think we broadly do), and who builds what, where? The US won’t want to source anything outside of the US for fear that their industrial complex will go screaming to Congress. The idea that we might source stuff with them and them with us, isn’t something they are as chill about as most countries.

          • That was mainly because we contributed a significant wedge of the F-35’s development costs, something like 10% at the time. It’s relativlely fair to say that, at the time, our financial contribution and committed orders helped get the F-35 built. That’s why we get 15%, if it was just that our manufacturers can build something better than US ones, it would still be all built in America!

      • UK capacity isn’t maxed out. UK submarine production has been deliberately slowed so that they never get to a point where they run out of work.

    • That’s not possible as countries consider trade secrets like submarine acoustic tiles and aerogels for ICBM nose cones as top secret. While the US has been willing to share as we sent Electric Boat company to save your SSBN program that went off the rails, there’s no way we would do that for France.

      France jealously guards their strategic deterrent even more so than other countries. While the general public doesn’t really understand just how close the relationship between the US and French navies is. As the CDG sails with several USN sailors onboard to maintain the catapult as per the contract signed between US and France. But that doesn’t mean the French and USN is remotely as close as the RN and USN to the degree that our sub-builder helped overhaul and save your SSBN program and share ICBMs.

        • Daniele,

          He should be awarded partial credit for getting the concept correct, if losing points for convoluting separate programs. The interesting reveal will be in four months w/ AUKUS roadmap…šŸ¤”šŸ¤ž

  6. Could the T32 have Sampson fitted? Seems its better suited than T26 as it hasn’t been designed yet! Maybe as a 2nd tier AAW frigate.

    • Youā€™d be much better if investing in the six T45 hills that we have that are in excellent condition. They have loads of life left in them as they havenā€™t been to sea as much as they were planned to.

      Then put VLS into T31 with some mixed missiles including AAW.

      T31 hill canā€™t have something g as heavy as Sampson as high as T45.

      The only other sensible place to put Samson is on the two QEC where it could go higher than in T45. However, you would need a hydraulically retractable mast to get it onto the Rosyth dry dock.

    • On the A140 website you can see the AAW variant and others. It’s a pretty versatile design. We could possibly even convert 2 of the 5 T31 to AAW or just make 2 more. Could complement the T45 PIP Aster/CAMM upgrades and be useful in the LRGs.

      • The AAW variant is a CGI or model – it isnā€™t a real design never mind a fully debugged entity.

        It is really just a concept.

  7. I noticed the U.K. media (B.B.C., Mail, …) have got this story but no acknowledgement to UKDJ that I can see! Cheek!

    • Ive mentioned this before and provided the direct line and qoutes. The Australian government is very mindful of the fact that France’s latest nuclear submarine the Barracuda class had its designs stolen. By the Chinese using industrial espionage.
      Therefore they cancelled the order for French subs and wanted to go nuclear. The Australians dont want a sub that the Chinese know everythjng about and are likely to utilise the designs stolen to leapfrog 1 possibly 2 generations of nuclear attack submarine technology to close the gap with Western submarines.
      Bravo France and goodbye Monsieur Macron. I think Australia will likely go for an Aussie Astute or Australianised SSN R.
      The RN in late 2030s could donate a couple of Astutes once SSNr is coking into service. Or the UK will need to expand submarine construction to 2 yards. Ā£Ā£Ā£Ā£Ā£Ā£

      • The UK defence budget is not going up for the foreseeable future. The fact that money was found for the Naval Strike Missile purchase (with numbers higher than anticipated) suggests a shift within existing funding to the RN. This makes strategic sense, but it remains to be determined whether and how the Army and RAF will pay the price.

        • Agree sounds very much like contingency funding or under spends. Even in the worst days under Cameron we were still able to scrounge up some funds for C17 purchase in this way. Itā€™s one of the benefits of fitted for but not with I suppose. Takes decades and billions to build a class of warships but just a few years and few hundred million to put a new missile on it.

        • The money can be moved around in a number of ways, if anything the way the armed forces overall spend on projects and procurements allows for alot of creative accounting to say the least.

          BW may well have sorted out some of the existing ongoing projects and made savings, heck he may have even got a small rebate/refund from the farce that is Ajax! Who knows but if he keeps doing as he is then they can be as creative as they want.

      • Fortunately the Barracuda isnā€™t at an even vaguely similar level to Astute.

        Then there is the whole issue of Chinese copying which isnā€™t working well for jet enginesā€¦.so Iā€™d hazard a guess they will struggle even more with a nuclear submarineā€¦.

  10. Stated it before, bears repeating, if RN doesn’t exercise control, USN will be setting up shop at HMNB Clyde, a little annex at first, perhaps, but eventually…šŸ˜³ Old saying, at least in US, “once the nose of the camel is inside the tent”… Recommend healthy harbor slip fees (RN could find a use for some extra coin). šŸ¤”šŸ˜

    • It’s a and always has been a joint effort/operation SSN wise.
      Yes we are a tad short on numbers at the moment, 4 x Astutes in service, Anson starting her trials/work up, Triumph due out of refit soon (not soon enough), then the last 2 at various stages of fitting out.
      We would t e at full strength until 2026 when all 7 Astutes will be in service and Triumph will be retired.
      At best we have 2 boats we can sortie, so yes need the help, although not unexpected by across the pond I imagine.

      • OT but relevant, finally able to report some USAF progress in strategic realm. Most extensive ‘Elephant Walk’ of B-2 to date occurred @ Whiteman AFB, MO on 07 Nov 22. Eight a/c; hey, it”s a start. Will be more impressive, once a few hundred B-21s are on the tarmac. First rollout scheduled for Friday.

        • Yes, read an article in ‘The Drive’s ref B-21 rollout this Friday. A most impressive bomber, should serve USBC well. Sadly it’s arrival will no doubt see the demise of the B-1 Lancer among others – one of the nicest looking bombers ever and v impressive for it’s time.
          Despite the financial implications, believe that the B-21 would also be a good fit for both Aus and Can. Excellent reach and payload equates to impressive capability.

      • BTW, US StratCom press release stated that USS West Virginia visited Diego Garcia from 25 Oct thru 31 Oct. Don’t remember as much public info re SSBN port calls–ever. Someone is very interested in informing the world that the Boomers are out and about. Mad Vlad? ChiComs? Kim Jong Nutbag? Dunno–very interesting…,šŸ¤”

          • Hope it makes suitable impression; evidently a recently released Pentagon report assessed slimeball ChiCom nuke warhead current inventory @ ~ 400 warheads, w/ projected quadrupling by 2035. Just about the time everyone projects a showdown at the OK Corral aka SCS. šŸ¤”šŸ˜³

    • The US has been exercising control with SSN action around the UK for about 60 years. The only reason they show up now is to prop up be half-assed allies that we have defended for years. And to send a message to Mr Putin. The submarines have always been there and the SSBNs. And the British prime minister bloviating about the type 26 that will not be operational for another three or so years is laughable. Not a proud moment for the Royal Navy

        • Bloviating. US Slang, to talk at length, especially in an inflated or empty way.
          US President Warren Harding once described it as ā€œ The art of speaking for as long as the occasion warrants, and saying nothingā€. Which rather sums up most politicians today, especially when they are talking about defence. They all seem to have been taking lessons from one Johnson B.

      • You are totally clueless, not exactly sure what you have between your ears – probably an empty space, but take your chip somewhere else, I don’t think you will find many on hear interested in what you have to say.

      • For a person supposedly from Portugal you seem to have downer on any thing British! Now this the UK defence journal so bugger off to your own countries site and take your tripe with you.

      • Oh dear, more British Army socks found in your laundry I take it? And Mrs Esteban walking about smiling more than usual? Itā€™s easy to see your bitterness! Donā€™t worry youā€™ll be ok!

  11. slightly OT but there is a Navy Merlin currently flying interesting patterns in the middle of the Firth of Clyde between Brodick & Saltcoats .
    I wonder if a NATO sub or Ivan is around… ?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here