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.
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
Yes, but just for context,in 1860 Earls Court was still a farm.
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 »