Astute class nuclear submarine HMS Audacious will be commisioned into the Royal Navy fleet later today at HMNB Clyde in Scotland.

HMS Audacious, is the fourth of seven Astute-class attack submarines being built by BAE Systems for the Royal Navy.

During trials earlier this year, Audacious fired an upgraded Spearfish torpedo off the Bahamas.

The Royal Navy say that five of the heavy torpedoes were fired by Audacious during three days of trials on a special range.

“The firings at AUTEC, the Atlantic Undersea Test and Evaluation Centre on Andros Island, studied the performance of the weapon at its maximum operating depth and challenged the torpedo’s homing abilities through the introduction of countermeasures.

The trials in the Bahamas were the latest in a string of crucial tests on the upgraded heavyweight torpedo since the decision was taken to enhance it in 2010. The souped-up Spearfish – known as the Mod-1 – features a new warhead, new, safer fuel system, a smarter electronic ‘brain’ and a fibre-optic guidance link with its parent submarine to improve its accuracy and lethality.

These trials took place after Initial Operating Capability was achieved, meaning work can now begin turning existing Spearfish into the improved Mod-1 version for entry into operational service with all Royal Navy submarines by 2025.”

Upgraded torpedo fired by nuclear submarine in Bahamas

You can read more about those trials by clicking the link above.

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

194 COMMENTS

    • What I can’t find anywhere is are crew quarters now better than what you see on prior class eg v’s HMS Trenchant, which looked very cramped in that C5 documentary (and very rusted too i guess for a decades old boat not a surprise). I see one article that said actually worse than before but does not seem trustworthy, and remember seeing something about having an innovative lighting system (I guess RGB LED:)) that mimics day and night and outside conditions. The other things was maintenance with Trenchant something seems to go wrong every day 🙂

        • They all start off having enough bunks for everyone but the crew starts creeping up so some hot bunk, then more crew or riders etc are on so more hot bunk. You can also put beds on the weapons racks in the ‘bomb shop’ but that obviously takes up space and its a working compartment so not the best for sleeping.

          • For the majority yes, its a straight 6 on/6 off, the ‘steam pigs/bin bag/back afties’ (stokery types) are usually 4 on/8 off because of the working conditions. Bombers because of their larger crew numbers can be a bit more flexible once they’re on patrol.

            You do settle into it.

          • Its not just when doing sneakies, there can be people from other boats that need to keep in date or there to be trained on different gear or just guys who need to do their ‘Dolphins’ to become fully qualified submariners.

            I’ve no idea how bad it is now but when you’ve only got limited platforms there’s a high demand for training billets and that’s before you toss in different riders (FOST staff etc).

        • On my equality and diversity instructors course at Shrivenham , we had a few PO from the Subs . Over coffee it was revealed that they had to set aside a room for praying followed by , our only Muslim has no problem eating bacon sarnies.

          • I’m my very limited experience, there is no better inclusivity training than combat. Mates helping mates, life long friendships formed. Bullets are colour blind. Yikes. I’m getting all philosophical!

          • Farouk sorry to seem a bit silly but if submerged how does one face to Mecca when at Pray please forgive my ignorance

        • Most crews will find somewhere ‘comfy’ in pipe spaces, torpedo loading bay I have hears a few times, even from American subs. I’ve been lucky enough to have a tour on several US / Uk subs, even the biggest suffer from lack of crew sleeping areas. Also the dreaded ‘ coffin dreams’ where they’d wake up and feel like they are buried in their own coffin *shudders*

      • Hi DRS, the bunks space is pretty much the same as on the T boats, slightly different layout but the same idea, 3 high and not much space between them. The ‘mess’ on the A boats is pretty small, certainly smaller than the S boats but the T boat ones were smaller too.

      • Hehe, submarines are cramped full stop – three to five decks crammed into a metal tube. All ships get rust streaks as they spend their lives in saltwater – they get a bit of chipping and painting or even a new coat when in port. Subs are covered with rubber tiles – so paint not an option and they streak a little when exposed to fresh air during a maintainance period (not their natural environment). A-boats are larger but with a smaller crew, so should be a little less claustophbic – but most space is taken up by machinery, weapons and electronics. Its the nature of the beast. That excellent TV show was filmed over 3 months, so obviously they focussed on the dramas – including stuff packing up. Most sub life is quiet and boring.

  5. Good News. Leaving aside all the personalities, governments and Admirals, it would make absolute perfect sense to just keep the assembly line going and build some for the RAN plus just one more for the RN. In terms of delivery,cost and capability could anything make more sense??

    • Hi geoff,

      Simple answer is yes.

      The more realistic answer is more complicated. Firstly, the production line at Barrow is filling up with the new Dreadnaught class SSBN’s. Two are already being worked on, at least one of which, I believe, is taking shape at Barrow (the second may still be at the ‘long lead items’ stage). Given the priority of the CASD and the rapdily ageing Vanguard class I do not see the UK government allowing any further delays in the Dreadnaught class that would result from handing production slots to the RAN.

      Secondly, the Aussies are determined to develop their own national programme. It is high risk and there is a lot of infrastructure that will need to be put in place, but if they are determined to go down that route so be it. If that does happen then which ever solution is selected it will be a services provided type export model with lots and lots of technology transfer included not just on the boats but on the infrastructure as well. Training alone would be a big money spinner! Big and risky business for Australia to take on.

      Cheers CR

      • I take it some submarine sections can’t be made off sight at another yard. Lots of our other yards did build submarines at one point, ok not this complex but still.

        • Good thinking Reaper Qecs were thrown together all round d the UK before being assembled in Rosyth Dreadnoughts are smaller in tonnage evidently but twin hulled outer ,pressure is their other yards like Pompey’s who specialise in that kind of welding xraying, Stress testing ?

          • No, not good thinking.

            While extremely high quality, the issue with the carriers was quantity of work. Quite a few shipyards had the technical skills and equipment.

            Submarines are a different beast. Quality of work has to be much better; there’s really not much room for error. Especially nuclear powered ones.

          • That’s the whole point ,specialist welders Xraying of welds stress testing of materials apart from Barrow ,Bae Pompey ,Devonport would be about the only dockyards that could. Devonport has worked on nukes for years, Pompey did diesels but the expertise is there.

          • I didn’t expect either would be competent enough to do tasks involving the reactors housing ,etc but Hull construction akin too such as was used for the Qec’s buikd

          • Morning fella, it doesn’t quite work like that. Barrow is a building yard. Devonport is a refit yard, whilst the two require lots of workers with the same skill set the two are completely different activities. They are the only two yards that have a license to deal with Nuclear SM work (not sure about Rosyth).
            Unfortunately Pompey haven’t touched SSKs for over 20 years (sold the Upholders in 90s), so it is highly unlikely that they will have any SM expertise left after such a long period out of that SM game.

          • I know that Rosyth used to do refits, but they don’t do any now, that’s all done down in Guzz.
            Rosyth store decommissioned nuclear SMs just like Guzz. That’s as far as it goes I believe.
            If push came to shove, in a emergency, then I could see Rosyth getting back into the refit business.

          • Thanks Deeps when Based up there, there was P boat in refit , all aft under cover rad tallies on all dockyard personnel use too joke about “Redie Brek” giving them an all round Glow

          • Exactly deeps if She Ms Sturgeon wants a Scottish defence force ,France has dome diesel electric SSKs must have some going cheap now especially as she wants to rejoin the EU

          • Rosyth isn’t nuclear build licensed anymore.

            It’s current license is for storage only.

            Restarting three would be complicated by SNP’s UND posture. Anyway I do t think anyone would shut the sole UK nuclear shipyard and dream that all the workforce would amble up to sunny Rosyth!!

          • It’s not just sunny as you put it SP but boy was there a sectarian divide in the shed Orange and Left footers they didn’t get along , had to visit one of the workshops too get some weapon gauges checked over not being rude by I should have had an interpreter Kidding Hsf a lovely Rust tan when I left

      • The problem is that there is no such thing as a line.

        N-a-B went into that in some detail.

        What Barrow does have is a fabrication team that is now well versed in making Astute pressure hulls. It might be possible to increase the depth of the workforce so that Astute could continue in production as well as Dreadnought.

        It just depends on the rate at which the workforce can be augmented whilst keeping QA at the essential levels.

        That said things could be speeded up at Barrow as it is a local joke that the time to inspect the car park tarmac is Friday afternoon…..when all the expensive SUV’s have left the car park……

        There is however a risk to the Dreadnought delivery program of trying to do both at once.

        There is also a risk to not having enough SSN to deal with Russia and China.

        Welcome to risk management and trade offs….

        Various bits of Astute have been made in other places for a while already. But I doubt anyone else is making pressure hull. Probably just the outer casings – don’t know this just speculating – but it seems likely for QA reasons.

          • Which is why I said

            “Various bits of Astute have been made in other places for a while already.”

        • Hi SB,

          OK line is probably the wrong word, but there is limited space at the yard which is what I was alluding to. The link below shows what I had in mind when I wrote my post.

          https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/down-periscope-britains-new-nuclear-subs-set-for-choppy-waters-9b93zzs32

          There has been an expansion at Barrow I believe but there are now three Astutes and two Dreadnaught class subs underway at Barrow. That’s a lot of work and the SSNR programme is starting to gear up as well!

          Bottom line I still think there is a capacity issue at Barrow which I accept is probably also linked to the size of the work force. Comes down to too much X Factor and too few wanting to get stuck in and actual build something!

          Cheers CR

          • Well that means there are 5 spaces in which things can be built.

            Building more shed is the cheap easier bit.

            More the issue than X factor is the lack of focus on trades and technical training – if you don’t have the training slots you won’t have the workers trained to learn how to do the job properly. Welcome to why demolishing the CFE & Polytechnic system was not clever…

            But then it was fashionable to demolish factories then and do ‘services’…..

          • Hi mate, (5 spaces) no that’s not what it means at all. DDH has had an extension, but, that doesn’t mean we suddenly have space for 5 boats, it means they have a bit more room to operate and get things prep’d for build. The remaining 3 A boats are all but built – externally, they are now completing all the internal work that is required for completion. They will complete one, then progress down the line until all 3 are complete and launched – 2026 for the last, so still lots of work.
            Construction on D hull 1 will have commenced, D hull 2 is all about long lead items with very little actual construction work at Barrow going ahead. The build time for these boats is 10-12 years, twice as long as the V boats – not sure why its this long, expect HMG have slowed things down/perhaps not enough technical qualified workers etc. Production should speed up as the Astutes are launched with the workers now able to work on the D class.
            The BAE facility in Barrow is as large as it can be, there is no space to build anymore infrastructure unless they build elsewhere in Barrow – not realistically going to happen, so Barrow is at capacity in terms of space and SM build. Yes we can probably increase the build time of the D class, but, everything that feeds into the project will also have to increase – not an easy ask.

          • I defer to your superior knowledge.

            I’ve only been there once 20+ years ago.

            You do have to curse the various yo-yos who decided to break the drumbeat of production in the name of “peace dividend”, “Sandy wars”, “schools-n-hospital”, “balancing the books”……….

          • Im sure that I can talk Bo**ocks with the rest sometimes, so no worries mate.😂😂
            I think that one reason for the slow build rate is that we don’t actually need a A boat replacement until late 2030, as Astute is scheduled to last some 30 years without refit!
            I suspect that had we not need Dreadnought build to start so soon, and money were available, then we might have had an extra Astute?
            Who knows. HMG are a law unto themselves, so this is just a wild guess really!!

          • I think it has been digested hence the T31 project.

            T31 is a trial, if you like, of ‘The Parker Principles’

            Submarines are also delivered separately via the Submarine Delivery Authority: for historical reasons some of which are not valid anymore. SDA is a good example of slowing down a project so it can be delivered ‘On Tine & On Budget’ – that phrase makes me mad every time I see it as it translated to ‘Ridiculous Budgets & Crazy Timescales’….

          • Amazing the vanguards were laid down and built in @ 5 Years each and commissioned the following year. Astutes are running at +/- 12 years from being laid down to commissioning. Almost a quarter of a century since Astute orders were placed.

          • That, I would hope, would be the start of rebuilding capacity.

            Also slowly inching up the drumbeat to allow for a larger fleet.

    • The plan is to build the fleet of SSNs here in Oz.

      What we won’t definitely be building here in Oz is the reactor.

      We won’t know for another 18mths which design will be chosen (UK or US), but that particular hull section won’t be part of the local build program.

      Cheers,

        • Mate, there is no guarantee at this stage which design or which nation will supply the design to the RAN.

          Both the UK and US have plans in the works for a follow on design to replace their respective Astute and Virginia classes.

          Crewing is going to be a very important factor, the current Collins class has a crew of 58, Attack was to have 60, Astute is 98 and Virginia is 135.

          As to cost per hull, Virginia is considerably more expensive than Astute.

          If I was to have a wild arse stab in the dark now, I’d say a UK design (evolved Astute or SSNR), US combat and US weapons systems, which are currently in use on Collins and were planned for Attack.

          Decision is still very much 18mths away.

          Cheers,

          • Virginia is not that much more expensive than the Astute. It’s difficult to get an exact reading but basically an Astute costs $2 billion. The US Navy just signed an amended contract with GD to build 10 block V Virginias at a cost of $2.4 billion each. Interestingly, that tenth Virginia is only going to cost $1.89 billion. Economy of scale. Something the UK can’t offer.
            There is not much to choose between the Astute and Block V Virginia when it comes to reactors or sensors but where Block 5 Virginia has the edge is in the number of weapons it can carry – 65 as opposed to Astute’s 38. Someone in Oz is going to have to do an analysis as to whether that increased firepower and time on station is worth the extra expense.
            Not to be overlooked is that Australia has a much closer defense relationship with the US than it does the UK.

          • If crewing is the main driver, then, the French Barracuda would have been favourite (crew 60), but, there are other considerations that probably ruled that choice out!!!
            There are only 2 choices per se, either an Astute, or a Virginia class. SSN(R) isn’t even a set of drawings yet, neither is the US SSN-X, both are at least some 15 years from build. A modified Astute is probably unlikely, we are busy with Dreadnought and starting design work for SSN(R), which will be our priority for the foreseeable future. Not sure about the US though!
            So, if Aus are going into the SSN business, unless you lease some from the US, it is highly likely your choice will be Astute or Virginia class.

          • My understanding is that the two US yards which build SSN’s are also at capacity building boats for the USN, but I think you are missing the point. It is the Aussie’s intention to purchase the design of a submarine from either the US or the UK, and then to carry out as much of the construction as possible (read: hulls) in Australia using Australian workers, with certain things which cannot be constructed there (ie reactor compartments) being constructed either in the US or UK and shipped to Australia for assembly.

            In my opinion, Astute or a derivative thereof with a US combat system is the logical choice given Aussie manpower constraints similar to those faced by the RN.

          • Evening Daniel, I also believe that both sides of the pond are at capacity for building SSNs.
            The issue of building said class was always going to revolve around where the RC was coming from, the rest of the issues eg combat systems and weapon fit is easy by comparison. It will be a considerable time before Aus has all the technical expertise in place to commence building SSNs even with assistance from both countries.
            I don’t think that a derivative Astute is likely, we are just about to start designing SSN(R), the US will be busy with SSN-X, so I think it’s one or the other with the RC coming from the country that supplies the boat design, anything else gets v complicated imo, adding yet more time to the project.
            I was speculating with the lease option, it would be the quickest way of getting something in the water should hulls be available – unlikely I know.
            None of this will be as quick or easy as some seem to think, the Aus gov have lots to debate before anything can start happening, I wish them luck, as this capability is needed.

          • Hi Reaper,

            I read an article not so long ago (on Defence Technology I think) and much of the equipment on the Astutes is newly developed, often from systems that were on the T-class, but they were upgraded.

            The big ticket item, the reactor, was new to the V-class and basically drove the size of the Astutes which are much bigger than the T-boats as a result. The sonar suite fitted to the Astute Class was retro-fitted on to some of the T-boats to keep them current. So yes you right up to a point…

            It is never a clear cut picture though, and if the Aussies do buy an updated Astute Class there will be lots of development work to do because the build won’t start for at least another 5 to 10 years, by which time the kit on the UK boats will need updating let alone fitting it to new boats.

            Having said that, evolving an existing design is going to be the lower risk option than trying to design and build an entirely new class. If the evolution of an existing design drifts into the realms of being a new class then cost and time over runs are more than likely. Control on this project is going to be key…

            Cheers CR

          • Hi mate, ref the sonar suite, nothing was retro-fitted, the T boats had S2076, which was then fitted on the A boats. The basic hardware remains the same, with some improvements to the processing side (better computing etc). The major improvements/changes have been in software for the system, that, you basically download, so SM’s may well be at different software mods, but eventually they all receive the same mod.

          • Hi Deep32,

            This is the quote from Naval Technology (it is not well written, to be fair);

            “Sonar 2076 has so far been fitted to Trafalgar Class submarines Torbay, Trenchant and Talent, which entered service in February 2003. Astute is fitted with the latest version of the Thales S2076 integrated sonar suite.”

            The article can be found here.

            I have also found this Thales infromation sheet on the yumpa website. The Sonar 2076 was developed for the final upgrade of the Swiftsure / Trafalgar Class boats, so was apparently a retrofit system. It was further updated for the Astute Class.

            Finally, wikipedia indicate that it was only fitted to the last 4 T-boats.

            Given HMS Astute was only commissioned in 2010 and the T-boats apparently got the S2076 in 2003 then the sonar was at sea long before the Astute. I’m pretty sure that the S2076 is way younger than the T-boats.

            Cheers CR

          • Hi CR, S2076 went to see on Torbay then Trenchant early 2003. The hardware, ie sonar arrays Weo flank are all just improvements on older generation hardware eg ST 2020. Where they were all pretty much stand alone bits of kit.
            S2076 brought them all together, gave it a posh title ‘federated system with multi function displays) and allowed operators to control/view any sensor input on any screen that was the new software bit, including a few tweaks to hardware.
            So, the hardware is older, but the software and computing technology is the new bit.
            We were the first boat to take S2076 to sea for trials and acceptance.

          • I’d have thought it would be a tweaked Virginia or a squashed Dreadnought design. Astute would be a bad choice because of the outdated reactor.

      • Does Building all the specialist equipment getting the right men and yard make sense to just build a few Submarines? What after all that investment, no exports!.
        Fair enough maybe assembled in Oz, with sections coming from uk, usa and OZ surely that’s more cost effective?

        • It’s not about being cost effective, it’s about building a sovereign defence capability and being able to maintain, upgrade and manage that capability.

          We were planning to build 12 Attack class conventional subs, the project budget allocation was going to equal an expenditure of A$90b (2050s dollars).

          That expenditure wasn’t just the cost of 12 X SSG, it included everything necessary to build and maintain that fleet and future replacements too.

          The new SSN fleet will have all of that funding and probably more too.

          The Government here has said ‘at least eight SSN’, it could be more, and of course setting all of this up also allows for the ability to replace this fleet in the future too.

          This capability will be a jewel in the crown for national security.

          Cheers,

          • And quite a jewel John,

            If it comes off and the RAN gets 8 SSN then it will put the RAN into the top 6 of global navies – if you accept that SSN’s are the ‘battleships’ of modern navies…

            Cheers CR

          • A huge project and big step forward for Aus and natural progression in a nation that is growing in population and prominence not to mention being the 6th biggest country in the world! Now if you can do Nuke subs how about restarting an indigenous car industry. Holden 2025?

    • The RAN want to build their own so want technical help. I very much doubt they will buy one off UK. niether UK or USA are going to give them our cutting edge secret sauce

      • The whole point of AUKUS is to give RAN ‘our secret sauce’. There are quite a few permutations – joint design and build of one of the next classes of boats (both USN and RN are in the design phase), an improved version of either Virginia or Astute, or a wholly new boat designed with UK/US input (or even a joint AUKUS design for all three navies). Short term lease/basing or joint crewing of boats is likely too.

        • No we may help them with nuclear power and helping them build a nuclear industry but if you think we will share the cutting edge sonar and sensors on astute your wrong, we don’t share that with usa

          • The various subsidiaries of Thales are not required and/or not permitted, under any circumstances to to share amongst themselves classified designs. Subsidiaries in the defence industry are effectively independent in that regard.

      • Secret sauce? What do you think the new AUKUS alliance is there for?

        The US gave the special sauce to the UK in 1958 to start their Nuclear submarine program.

        The UK and US will be doing it for Australia on the back of the new alliance.

        • Yes. But the hurdles Aus has to overcome are huge. When the UK (thro the 1958 Agreement) built HMS Dreadnought it was if I recall a UK front end mated to a US (Skipjack) rear end (including US reactor). But the UK had a decent submarine building industry in those days – something like 24 subs(?) from 1945-1960. Australia hasn’t built a sub for quite a while – so nothing like the relative expertise compared to the UK experience. It will be interesting if Aus wants its own design whether it will go down a similar front+back route.

          • Mate, yes the hurdles will be huge, no doubt about that at all.

            But it does appear the UK and US have committed to ensuring the Australian project succeeds,

            The PM here has said the Government will commit the appropriate level of funding, he said ‘whatever it takes’.

            Expertise and involvement from General Dynamics Electric Boat (GDEB) and BAE will be critical.

            I heard the other day the Def Min announced that GDEB will be heavily involved in the Collins class LOTE.

            Again, huge hurdles, but as long as all three AUKUS parties commit to the project it does have a good chance of success.

          • I understand the Aus Govt’s position and wish them all success. The two main dangers to the project are I think how bespoke a design they want and political ( the ALP in other words!). You can also bet China will try to influence political outcomes by their usual shady methods.
            On the bright side at least the French are gone.One of my prayers answered at least👏.

      • The current UKUSA ( before that BRUSA ) agreement involves many secret sauces that have been shared between UK / USA / Can / Aus / NZ for decades. No harm in adding SSN tech to the mix.

      • The US could lease LA Class subs to the RAN, or help to design a updated mod
        of the LA Class.
        Yes, the US won’t give away the latest tech.

        • Exactly people on here are under the illusion U.K. and USA are gunna share cutting edge secrets with Australia, what we are doing is helping them build nuclear subs and industry, if they asked for an LA class or a trafalgar then yes but no way would give them a current boat. Us and U.K. wouldn’t

          • In a post I placed when France had a non nuclear meltdown I did suggest T boats as a stop-gap for Aus too counter Chinese presence in their neck of the woods, Hasn’t Biden or Boris said anything on a Lend lease programme for the Aussies , ?

      • Hi Peregrine,

        I don’t think so, unless they are still building the last reactor for the Astute Class.

        The Dreadnaught class SSBN is using the PWR3. This new reactor will also go into the SSNR replacement for Astute as well I believe.

        The Dreadnaught Class are bigger than the Vanguard Class that they are replacing. If this is reflected in the reactor physical size then the SSNR will likely be even bigger than the Astute’s…

        Cheers CR

  6. Where are all the moaners that the RN is a “third world navy” that I have opposed over the years here.

    They must have taken a day off, with assets such as this on the prowl and the complexities Australia is facing introducing these.

    The UK has had them for decades.

    • Yeh, I agree. The RN still sits in third place behind the US and Russia for numbers of SSN. The French have 6, but they also have 6 SSBN’s according to the recent graphic that went up all over the place when the AUKUS alliance was announced.

      So if the SSN is still the modern day equivalent to the battleship the RN is still pretty much in the top 5 of global navies.

      Of course, if you use surface fleet as your primary measure that doesn’t quite stack up. 🙂

      Cheers CR

    • people say the RN is weak, but if it’s based of firepower ect the our Nukes trump having more ships, one warhead from one missile thst has multiple British built warheads could destroy a naval task force or naval base from continents away… So Nuclear navys should all be the top Navys, anyone disagree?

      • I’d say if we are firing tridents off the strength of the fleet is pretty much irrelevant, everyone has already lost.

        The strength of the non nuclear fleet is still relevant as its hoped if the brown stuff his the fan that’s the fleet we will be relying on. We still need conventional muscle.

      • Me to an extent.

        As the top navies should be judged on-

        Assets ( capability and numbers )
        People ( training, experience, professionalism )
        Operations. ( the doing, and having done, not sitting in port looking shiny )

        The RN tick most of those boxes. How many can send a CSG around the world and maintain it, whether it has 4 escorts or 40?

        We have gaps, and lack of numbers, like most others who are not the USN.

        There is a reason FOST is so valued and navies around the world send their assets and people for Thursday war with the RN.

        Nukes are a political weapon and we should not be feeling great if we have destroyed a naval task group continents away, as something of the same ilk will be coming back at us.

      • “So Nuclear navys should all be the top Navys, anyone disagree?”

        Its not top trumps mate. If all you can do is nuke the crap out of places then you’re not exactly ticking all the boxes. “Damn, there’s been an earthquake in Haiti…. should we send some humanitarian aid ???? Nah mate, we got rid of all that stuff to get another SSBN so we could nuke the crap out of everyone. Should we just nuke them ????”……

        Pirates operating off the coast of Somalia/Indonesia ??? “Goddamn it, nuke the bastards”

        You get the picture.

      • Apart from the deterrent(not to be underestimated!), once we’re using nukes everybody on the planet has lost big time from the ensuing MAD.

  7. Much needed, as anyone who watched the Tv program on channel 5 where HMS trenchant was shown knows…

    That submarine was falling apart…Failure after failure, granted the Crew fixed the problems and continued on mission but god it was embarrassing I’m surprised they wanted it shown in national TV…

    And now I know how to take down a submarine, put the toilets out of action lol.

    • cant get away from plumbing, i assume the shit has to be forced at high pressure out in the murky depths. the crew were talking about using bin bags as the remedial work was being undertaken.

      • No, it isn’t normally forced out at high pressure. Although you can ‘blow’ both the slop and sewage tanks. Sewage is flushed into a tank, when full it contents go through a macerator and is pumped overboard, it’s much quieter then putting a HP blow on the tank?

      • Been on a couple of old S boats that had to come back in because of ‘poo issues’. If you excuse the expression…. shit happens. 😂

    • Why are you surprised, Trenchant was 30 yo, things break, try keeping your car for 30 years and covering in excess of 30 thousand miles a year!!!!

    • I think Trenchant is due for decommissioning this year, isn’t it? Don’t think the Navy is going to let a film crew aboard a modern SSN.

      • Hi fella, Trenchant has already been decommissioned, the filming was conducted just prior to that happening. We only have 2 T boats left, Talent and Triumph, both now over 30 yo.

        • It’s a good try by the BBC/RN to show life on a sub – but not the best advert for the RN when a lot of the sub looks cramped and clapped out. Would a potential recruit look at that and be impressed? I reckon the documentaries on HMS Duncan and the (forthcoming) one on HMS QE would make a better impression.

          • Unfortunately SSNs are cramped no matter what class you are on. Have to admit that is showing things at its worst, and serving on SMs isn’t for everyone. Yes agree, those two programmes show the Navy in a better light.

    • I’ve never been on sub, but it was how I’d imagined they all would be like after a while. It would be interesting if a submariner from another nation could realistically claim they were doing better with their older subs.

      Would you rather a blocked toilet or one of the Russian or Argentian subs we might bring to mind with a tinge of sadness?

  8. Sadly , and this goes for a lot of Australians not just me ; we wont be making these or any other Steam Subs . Rickover is the last Block 4 Virginia for the US Navy. No prizes as to who is getting the rest of class . Our sailors are already drawing a certain port in Washington State and as I write this a follow on T-26 specializing as air warfare is being discussed with intention of not being an follow on but simultaneous build . What would be cool if we were to open an wager where that incredibly flatuous statement of mine could be bet against and I recoup at least something from the Attack debacle .

  9. The issue with Numbers is the disposing of them when retired, costs as much to scrap as to build.
    USN saying that scrapping the USS ENTERPRISE will take 15 years at a cost of $1b per year. Ouch.
    need to recycle REACTORS

    • No mate not then. Between 1980 – 1990 we had 15 SSN’s in our nuclear SM fleet. As the older classes (V, C and S boats) were retired, we were left with the 7 Trafalgar class SSN’s. These are being replaced on a 1 for 1 basis by the Astutes.
      During that period we also had 10-12 O-boats (SSK’s)(replaced by 4 Upholders), 4 SSBN’s, so, our SM fleet has shrunk considerably since the mid 90’s, as we now only have 4 SSBN’s, and currently 6 SSN’s which will rise to 7!!

      • I remember in about 2005 (roughly) at one of the defence cuts (sorry, I mean reviews) when somebody in power said we were going down to 10 SSN’s and we were all pretty shocked. Admittedly half the boats were shagged which meant the running one were run even more ragged but it was an ever decreasing circle. As I understand it, not much has changed.

          • no to mention the rest he chopped in the 2003 “defence review”
            Some toplines
            Type 45 programme – halved to 6
            3 type 23s chopped
            Jaguar RAF sqns cut, plus some Tornado, Harrier and Nimrod

            The list goes on and on

          • I know mate. 2004 “New Chapter ” in effect reduced surface fleet to 25 from 31. The T45 requirement was reduced to 8, the 2 extra cuts came later.

            RAF was massacred. There were 23 Fast Jet squadrons including FAA when Labour came in and 12 when they left. I always mention this review when posters moan about Tory cuts and Labour wouldn’t do this or that. Cobblers. They’re all as bad and people forget, or choose to ignore, what happened to the military numbers wise from 97 to 2010.

  12. Astute is great but only 7 boats (actually we have 5 at the mo the rest being T Class boats. Anyone watching the C5 series Submarine based on HMS Trenchant? It’s falling apart, the pipes are leaking and the heads blocked). Remember that at any one time only 2 or 3 boats are actually doing their stuff, maybe another 1 is involved in training and the rest in refit. I reckon we need at least another couple of SSNs but how do we do that? If we built just 1 more Astute Class sub and bought, yes from the Germans, a couple of SSKs that would mean that their would be 2 extra deployable SSNs because we could use the SSKs for perishers and the like. A fleet of 4 SSBNs, 8 SSNs & 2 SSKs could really work and make the Russians really think about it.

    • I would love to see some small German ‘steaming bat’ SSK’s or something similar. Great for being places that they shouldn’t and a shallow draft would help with places like The Gulf. AIP would be handy, maybe base a couple somewhere like Singers too…. assuming the locals were amenable.

    • Whilst a few SSK’s for use in home waters does seem to be a good solution to the general lack of hulls and lack of extra production capacity, I don’t think they could be used for perisher. Commanding an SSN is substantially different to commanding an SSK, that’s why the RN only runs perisher courses for foreign personnel who want to be SSN captains, with the Dutch taking over the running of SSK perisher courses since the Upholders were retired.

    • We could maybe squeeze in one more Astute, but to fund it the RN would have to cancel all 5 of the T31 frigates.

      I expect the RN is looking at UUVs for doing the kind of work SSKs might do in coastal waters and the North Sea.

      • The RN has already committed to the Manta project, which seeks to deliver three relatively large UUVs. I suspect they’re a small but necessary step towards larger, more potent UUVs in the future, which could well serve as SSK replacements.

        Small steps of course. But Manta will definitely augment existing capabilities and act as a valuable ASW asset, particularly for training.

      • I hate to spoil the party fella, but no, they won’t be doing SSK work or indeed replacing a manned SSK any time soon.
        Can a XUUV/UUV land SF troops – no. Can it conduct ISTAR ops in/around territorial waters – no. Can it track and trail a OPFOR SSN – no, can it conduct area denial/ gatekeeper ops, again no. Not really too sure of what people hope these asset can/will be able to do!!!!
        At best they will be and extension of a SMs sensors, if they can solve the C&C Comms conundrum. Otherwise they will be running basic racetracks collect environmental data and the such.
        Just to put that into perspective, in 69 we put a man on the moon and were able to talk to him. Today we can communicate and control ROVs on Mars – 400m km away ish. Whilst in the underwater environment we can’t currently get two SMs to talk to each other reliably at 10 miles or so distance. That’s the scale of the problem.

        • I didn’t realise we were planning on going to war against France, Eire or any of the other North Sea coastal states… Where did you get that information from?

          As for landing SFs etc our SSNs can do that, that’s why the Astutes can accommodate a dry shelter. They can deploy our SFs worldwide.

          Our Astute’s are also the RNs primary weapon against SSNs, not sure why you’d want to endanger our sailors by putting them in SSKs to take on SSNs…!

          As for the UUVs you obviously haven’t been keeping up with AI developments if you think you have to limit them to dumb racetracks. But assuming we bought cheap and got ones only capable of racetracks. You could set up a series of overlapping racetracks to have the UUVs acting as sentry’s to prevent area access; eg the North Sea.

          • Don’t think I mentioned any particular countries coastline! You mentioned taking over SSK tasks, what do you think that might be given your experiences? SSKs are perfect capable of engaging a SSN, they are by far the quieter of the two, thus arguably have a first shot advantage!
            I’m very aware of the capability of our Astutes, and what they do, are you!
            I’m also aware of what a UUV can and can’t do, how exactly do you think a UUV is going to stop a SM entering an area!! By asking it nicely!!! Sensors? Detection ranges? Endurance? Tracking ability? Got that sorted then, only I think that places like DSTL would bite your hand of for that information!
            You need to broaden your horizons a tad, try doing some balanced research into the subject before engaging your typing skills.

          • SSKs only have any real advantage in coastal waters. I’m all other occasions my money would be on the SSN in a SSN v SSK fight. Pretty sure RN, USN, would place their money there too – actually they have already 🤷‍♂️

            Oh I’d say a torpedo or two from a UUV is going to spoil the day of any enemy submarine. UUVs can be just as deadly as UAVs have proven to be.
            But I guess you think they’ll never be armed, just like they’ll only be capable of doing racetracks. I think you need to stop living in the 1950’s.

            (As for knowledge, well I work for a company that among others things is working at the leading edge of AI technology. Incidentally amongst those other things was contribution to the development of Spearfish.)

          • Your response ref SSK capabilities is total drivel fella! Ask any SM capt what vessel he fears most, he would say another SM, ask him what type he fears most, he would say SSK – why, because they are quieter/stealthier then a SSN. In our world he who shoots first, generally gets to go home. Advantage SSK.

            You conveniently omitted the bit where/how a UUV is going to;
            Detect
            Track
            Classify
            Produce a Fire Control Solution (Tgt Course,Speed, Range)
            Position itself to fire a torpedo at its target.

            The above is all done by a crewed SM using its extensive sensor suite, command team of 15 odd people using its command system to get a torpedo out then guide it to a position where it can detect and home onto its target. Its the reason heavyweight SM launched torpedoes are wire guided – clue: they have a v short detection range due to the relatively small surface area they can mount hydrophones/transducers! Thus need help to get to a position to locate the target, before they home in on it.

            Current MOD policy has stated that any UUV type craft that we eventually deploy will NOT be armed. Why do you think that might be fella!!! I will let you work that one out.

            Glad you work in an area that deals with fantasy and illusions that may or may not eventually bear fruit, leading tech or not. Meanwhile, the rest of us work in the real world, and can speak from experience, and you……

          • Continue to live in the 50’s, because clearly your knowledge hasn’t advanced since those days. I’ll leave you to your obsolete knowledge, thinking, and sheer nativity.

          • Oh deary me, did the big boy ask to many difficult questions that you clearly have no knowledge of and therefore can’t even begin to answer!!! Did it cause you to have a hissy fit in the playground and spit your dummy out. Best go home and tell mummy then, perhaps she will let you play with your toys….

          • I’m with deep on this one, he’s got the dolphin, operating both legacy and modern SSNs. Experience matters, as future developments depend on previous knowledge and operational experience.

  15. As an ex-army man, I am very envious of the Navy for rolling out modern, (virtually) trouble-free ships and boats in the last 20 years and particularly since the year of the Navy in 201, are doing timely upgrades on mature vessels, and are planning the future frigates (T32) before the next generation of frigates has even been built yet.

    The army cannot upgrade or replace its battle-winning equipment, without high drama and failure. Is ther any good and serious planning happening for future, future army equipment?

    • “the Navy for rolling out modern, (virtually) trouble-free ships and boats in the last 20 years “

      While I think the navy are doing a LOT better than the army, don’t believe everything you read. The navy haven’t ticked all the boxes they say they have. Obviously not going to be too specific. Having said that, I’m kinda shocked by how badly the army seem to be consistently making an arse of it.

  16. Good news. Urgently needed, as I have been watching the Sub programme on Ch5, on Mondays and im quite shocked to see how old and worn out Trenchart seems to be. I know its over 30 years old but still quite shocking to see the relaity of keeping older boats in service for longer and longer. Makes me realise that being in a Sub isnt normal, and those submariners while much smarter than me are obviously totaly mad!!! (and have nads of steel). Not normal at all….lol. Anyway, good news and keep it up.

      • Thanks for that mate? but I’ve a surprise for you, clocked him, did a quick recce on his older posts, one still remains as Harold with a moan about the carriers! He has a few other avatars remaining included PierrLM saying he is French, and “map” from Falmouth. Bloody sad isn’t it mate, he needs a life! Cheers.

    • Mate, I had that very thought yesterday reading one posters description of the coffin like existence of submariners and that they are totally mad. I thought, which is worse, that or that nutter Airborne throwing himself out of a serviceable aircraft! I’m not sure to be honest!!

      • Subs mate, I get two parachutists and lots of fresh air….lol. Respect those submariners so much more. But I do remember watching perisher in the 80s? Not sure when it was first shown but no matter the tech, or the times, the crews are still 100% operational and facing danger even in peacetime, nads of steel (But don’t tell deep32 don’t want him getting a big head lol)

        • Mate, you couldn’t get me to jump out of a perfectly good plane if you gave me 17 parachutes never mind 2. It’s not safe!!!! 😂😂

          • Deep you dolphin boys are a bit crazy, at least I can breath when jumping lol makes things soooooo much safer 😝

        • Parachuting is a lot of fun. I remember the first time I used a square rig as opposed to the semi-steerable round canopy, what a difference!

          For those not in the know, jumping from 2500ft with a round canopy isn’t that bad, you have about a minute or so of bliss, absolute quiet except for a bit of wind noise through the strings and canopy, you can hear ambient sounds and the view is fantastic. Then there’s 20 seconds of sheer panic as you get “ground rush”. This is where the ground seems to accelerate towards you. If you haven’t got your shit sorted, you will have an injury.

          Compare this with using a square rig (ram air canopy). This uses air pressure to form the canopy into an aerofoil. Much like a glider (depending on the canopy’s square area) you can actually use thermals to gain altitude. However, that is for the extremely wide canopies, the majority of the smaller rigs just arrest your descent rate, to something a lot more pedestrian. Then when you get close to the ground, you can flare the rig, so you have a soft walking landing. You can even use ground effect to a certain degree, to put you back on target, if you fluffed it.

          The difference between the two rigs are chalk and cheese. I was never a Para, but have jumped with them and others. Doing both traditional jumps, but also high altitude high opening (HAHO) and high altitude low opening (HALO). My lowest was 750ft, I know they did it from lower heights but that wasn’t for me – base jumpers are just a different breed. The highest, where you needed a heated suite and oxygen at just shy of 35,000ft out of a Herc (not in the UK). That was just over 2 minutes freefall.

          The scariest jump was the second at Weston on the Green. The first you didn’t know what to expect, the second you did. Sitting on the ledge in the centre of the basket was far harder to shuffle through, than jumping from the side door of the Cessna or the ramp of a Skyvan!

          • Spot on mate different methods for different reasons types of entry. Most common and hardest IMHO is an LLP (or before a PX4) static line, with 80 other lads crammed in the back, all with heavy kit, up to 100kg and must go loads to include mortar base plates etc, wedges, door bundles and sick bags, 3 hour flight to include some serious low level, lads not strapped in but sat on the floor, crammed in sweaty as lobbing out at night at 600 feet. Then on the DZ the work starts lol…….aaah those were the days……NOT! Give me a free fall anytime even with kit, or even a simple a tactic line square and a tailgate lol. First jump always the scariest I think but mine was a balloon. Gutted when the balloon got binned as it ended up as a very expensive RAF doss, but then again the sky van jumps were easy and fun. Did some great trips to the states for extended periods and got plenty of C17 lobs in. Was even at Pope AFB when the rodeo was on and got a jump out of shed loads of NATO platforms. Great times Davey eh mate, great times. In Bloemfontein with the the SADF and 44, got some random airframe jumps in to include one of their still going strong turbo Daks…shit you’ve got me started now could waffle on for ages, but I will save young all the pain and shut up 😝 cheers.

  17. Wow tough first assignment during her first week in commission sent out to try and find HMS Vigil. Nice timing by someone in the production team.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here