In a Defence Select Committee meeting, Mark Francois MP brought to light his concerns over the lack of nuclear submarines at sea, saying, “It was all over the internet a couple of months ago that we did not have a single nuclear attack submarine at sea for the first time in living memory.”
Addressing the issue, Grant Shapps highlighted efforts to improve the manufacturing process, noting, “I have already visited part of the manufacturing process on the Rolls-Royce side of things to see how we can speed things up.”
Despite the challenges, Shapps assured, “we were able to meet all our NATO commitments throughout that period of time.”
However, Mr Francois raised concerns about the actual operational status of the submarines, stating, “Secretary of State, even the ones that are built are all tied up alongside, or they were… You can’t track Russian submarines with six SSNs tied up alongside.”
Lieutenant General Rob Magowan addressed the critical issues impacting submarine operations. He acknowledged, “The Clyde infrastructure programme… is a GNPP programme running at red.”
He emphasised the need for significant improvements, admitting, “the operational infrastructure to support the submarines you are talking about is not fit for purpose.”
Critical Areas for Improvement
The discussion highlighted three primary areas needing urgent attention:
- Infrastructure Overhaul: General Magowan indicated the urgency of the Clyde infrastructure program. He emphasised its importance, stating, “We are recalibrating that because the operational infrastructure to support the submarines you are talking about is not fit for purpose.”
- Supply Chain Management: Highlighting supply chain issues, General Magowan announced, “There are supply chain issues, which is why we are now launching our supply chain strategy, where we will identify as part of the increasing defence outputs programme where those supply chain pinch points are and ensure that we are being proactive around them.”
- Engineering Workforce Shortage: Addressing the shortage of engineers, Magowan noted, “The third area, which we have talked a lot about this afternoon, is people, and the shortage particularly of engineers at the back of the boat. We need to ensure that they have the package they need for us to sustain them in the Navy.”
Magowan also stated:
“If it were easy, then we would have all the submarines to sea, but they are not designed for all to be at sea anyway. But there is an overall programme, because you are absolutely right that it is an operational weakness.”
The operational readiness of the Royal Navy’s SSN fleet is a complex issue, involving manufacturing delays, infrastructure inadequacies, and workforce challenges. While NATO commitments have been maintained, the absence of operational SSNs is a strategic concern, especially given heightened global tensions.
Now the actual figures of armed forces ie the army is at its lowest of all time we now have ssn,s stationery what next no wings for our aircraft.not so much shambolic more diabolical
So if we can maintain our NATO commitments whilst not having a single SSN out at sea, suggests to me our commitments are a waste of time!
Unfortunately service chiefs either can’t or won’t call out the issues. The escort fleet has gone from 31 to 17 in less than 20 years and the RN is still claiming it can meet all of it’s commitments. The reality is they can only tick the box by ditching or scaling back certain duties and extending the amount of time crews spend deployed.
You wonder if the RN could somehow manage to have a small diesel sub fleet to do the more coastal to the greater regional patrols stuff and if this would free-up operations for the Astute’s? On a side note, Germany has just upped its order by 3 to 8 P-8s. We still have one more than… Lol 😁
We had the Upholder class built in the 90ts but someone thought Diesel electric boats old hat let’s go fully Nuclear, Dolphin closed, and the U’s got sold off now alot of countries are building or buying DE boats once again we dropped the baton
and to make matters worse Tommo, these mostly had about 4-6 years on the clock – barely used and then decommissioned. What a waste.
👍 all hidden from the taxpayer no VFM value for money us Brits are good at wasting our taxes Klonkie
too true Sir!
I’m sure they were claiming they could fulfil all commitments to the Entente Cordiale a few months before Dunkirk.
Its called forces at readiness.
How long does it take to go from readiness to “at sea”?
As long as it takes to get everyone on board, cast off and go out of port, I’d assume. That’s what readiness means, after all
It’s called ‘notice for sea’. The ‘readiness’ SSN (alongside the wall and in plant state A – reactor plant and systems warmed through with the reactor plant not self sustaining).
Twenty four hours notice for sea was the usual time frame, sometimes forty seven and a half hours notice for sea (once again the plant would be in plant state A). The boat would be fully stored with food for 90 days plus 14 days emergency rations, she’d have an ALPHA load of weapons aboard (war load).
No engineering work (hopefully) requiring altering the 24 or 47.5 day notice would be undertaken AND HOPEFULLY she’d not be carrying any ME or WE OPDEFS (Marine Engineering -Weapon Engineering Operational Defects).
The boat would be ready in all respects for sea. Whether it be an operational patrol OR exercise. IF it was for an exercise then she’d most likely be carrying a BRAVO load of weapons, not quite a war load but enough to make a dent in an aggressors ORBAT.
With the A boats now… they seem too spend wayyyyyyyy more time at sea than when I served on S&T class SSNs. AND when they are at sea, they are out of sight and out of mind. They are wherever the UK government considers them necessary. Whenever there’s a flashpoint on the planet, always have a look at where they doesn’t seem to be anything going on, THAT’S most likely where the boat will be. We operate in conjunction with the USN SSN fleet. It’s the Special Relationship that the pollies and civilians bang on about, 99.9% of them do not know just how special it really is! We are really hand in hand with the USN. Joint ops – UK/US Eyes Only!
If they want to retain people the navy needs to shed this moronic idea of basing everything in Faslane. There isn’t the facilities, civilian staff and accommodation. Removing the choice of having Devonport as a home port means the service will struggle to retain due to distance from home more than anything. No amount of extra money or stores will remedy that. Devonport needs submarines and submariners need the choice.
Yes, all the “sub eggs” in one basket and as several of us have mentioned many times here, no significant GBAD protection whatsoever along with the rest of the country. Might be the same here in Aus too but I believe they’re working on something with NASAM’s. 😏
Lateral thinking is clearly not their strong point esp when short term money saving is the overwhelming priority and longer term implications are others problems. Selling off our electricity generation has to be the epitome of such short term thinking with short term financial benefit equaling long term inflexible madness we all pay for.
Conservative government a joke we got wait until 2030s until the new Dreadnought class submarine entered service whilst out vanguard submarine are falling apart.
We have nuclear deterrence but, should we not have conventional deterrence?
The Russians may be all over our seabed slocs and we have six boats tied up because, they weren’t tasked; what a load of cobblers!
You’d have to hope the Moorhouse etc al get drummed out the Service and the CDS gets defenestrated for this dereliction of duty.
I’m not a fan of Labour at the moment but a reformed Lords that only has people who served the Country rather than the current wastrels and current crop of wannabees has to be voted for.
Hi mate, yes its a really frustrating position to be in, but, its not down to CDS, 1SL and RA Moorhouse, this is a situation that they have unfortunately inherited from previous stakeholders, as bad as it is.
LG Magowan has highlighted some of the issues surrounding SSN availability, but a larger issue is the current lack of docking infrastructure available down in Devonport. There are currently no docks available to put a SM in for any maintenance/refit work which is the real issue. Babcock which run the facility have started a recapitalisation of said facilities which will when complete turn the docks which surround 5 basin (9-15, no 13 dock) into the navys future refit complex for all its new major combatants (SSN/BN/T31/T26/T45/FSSS/MROSS etc). The project was started in2021 and will take some 5-6 years to complete with priority going to the SM docks including one for dismantling of older SM’s.
Under this project the RN is also looking at ordering 1-2 floating docks, much like the old AFD 60 we had back in the cold war days and basing them up in Faslane. This would give us far greater flexibility when dealing with SM dockings. The only facility currently available is the ‘shiplift’ in Faslane, which is only used for limited maintenance with our SSBN fleet taking priority, hence the build up of boats awaiting docking.
SSN tasking is not a straightforward issue, they are not randomly sent to sea ‘just in case’. If for example there is no Russian threat from the high North, then we dont need to send a SM into the GIUK gap on the off chance. We know when their SMs are deploying and act accordingly. Yes there were a few days the other month when all the SSN’s were alongside, but, within 2-3 days two SSNs went back to sea and have been bobbing around ever since. Thats not to say we dont have an issue with availability, because we do, it may well get worse before things improve as there is only so much maintenance work with regard to nuclear safety that you can delay before things grind to a complete halt due to lack of docking facilities.
We are not the only ones with this infrastructure issue, the US is experiencing similar problems but on a greater scale as they have far more SMs in need of docking with proportionally a smaller number of docks to utilise. There is no easy answer, but give the RN headsheds a bit of credit, they are most certainly making the most out of a really bad situation.
Hi SB thank god someone on here has a realistic understanding of reality and not just taking a knee junk reaction.
I don’t think that most folks understand that the not using an SSN when you don’t have a task for them is actually a really positive thing.
We presently have 5 Astutes in service each is fitted with a Full Life Core and 1 old T boat, and HMS Triumph is getting very close to her OOS so she has to be used sparingly.
If I were in charge of the RN SM’s I’d be looking at how the T23’s have been thrashed to death and doing what ever I can to husband the SSN’s whenever possible.
Full life is fine as long as you actually get the planned replacements on time (the alternative is just not a thought I want in my head).
Given the recent history of RN projects being delivered on time (not) and the complications that will inevitably happen due to AUKUS, I’d be very cautious when using the core life up.
Yes its certainly not a good look for the future is it!
We effectively loose 2 boats by 2027, Triumph will most likely have decommissioned and one Astute will forward deploy to SRF-West, which will leave us with 6 SSN’s. Not a good recipe for conserving ‘core life’!
I understand that we are now looking at getting SSN(R) into service by the late 2030’s instead of the early 2040’s as originally forecast, which is a must imo.
Both Astute – 2035 and Ambush – 2038 will have reached their OOS dates by then, so, as things currently stand, things look a tad tight on getting the planned replacements into service. Cant see it taking much to completely derail this process and leave us with an availability nightmare, but fingers crossed…..
I’ve said this elsewhere and I’ll repeat it, the sheer scale of investment on infrastructure and the pace at which it is being delivered here in Derby is simply Jaw dropping. It’s the same with the other facilities at Barrow, HMNB Clyde and Babcock’s Dock 10 project at Devonport. It’s more than slightly “surprising”, and in a very good way.
To me it looks like someone has actually decided to start to put a bigger new horse in place so the next cart can be bigger.
If I were a betting man (and I’m not) I’d not be too surprised if we see little or no increase in surface fleet but an expansion in SSN(R) numbers.
Simple fact is that the effort needed to deliver and then maintain 7 UK and 5 AUKUS boats affords an opportunity to upscale the fleet and ensure continuity of design and production.
And bringing forwards the SSN(R) in service date certainly helps to facilitate a larger production run.
Fingers crossed 🤞🏻
Hope you are right on SSNR numbers, mate. As I prioritize them over all RN assets save the Carriers, their Aviation, Amphibs, and the RFA.
Hi M8, The limiting factors are obviously money, crews and political will. But it may be HEU supplies that IMHO may be most problematic.
There is also the cost of the US supplied equipment (VLM etc), spreading the supply chain between 3 countries, integration of components and the predilection of our Australian colleagues to try and over-spec things.
The scheduling of refit and maintenance periods will be challenging to put it mildly.
Other than little lot it’s going keep lots of folks very busy for the next 30 years, but not me 😉
Done your bit mate. 👍
Agree with what you say here fella. Totally agree with possibilities of us increasing SSN numbers in the long term.
When Radakin was 1SL he did initially hint that we might well get 8. Things have changed since AUKUS was announced, and am cautiously optimistic that we might well see us ordering between 10-12 Astute replacements over the course of the project.
Would also give the MOD/RN time to sort out its recruitment/retention issues we are experiencing.
Wouldn’t like to see any potential increase in numbers at the expense of our surface flt, as we are also short of numbers here, although suspect that they might suffer to fund any increase in SSN numbers.
Every single EFPH will be scrutinised – ‘we’ used to operate in the half power state as often as possible, and we still had plenty of revs and knots to spare, should we need them.
The FPS will be just as jealously guarded in the A boats as in all the classes of SSNs before them. Thash not the boat, she will get you out of sticky situations faster than you got into them, Go easy on those engines Scotty!
It takes a Marine too call out the shortcomings of the SM branch Rosyth used to refit boats there prior too being closed whilst I was there the Trident Bason was being constructed as the Vs were larger than the Polaris boats that would refit there , Now the V boats go down too Devonport oh what a tangled Web Whitehall created
Yes havent they just! Options for change, closing dockyards, all coming back to bite us in the backside now….
Wow someone who has a good understanding how things work and the complex nature of operating SM’s. I dismal situation things are but at least some people can have a decent conversation without throwing their toys out of the pram without looking beyond the headlines. Great analysis mate 👍
Great post. Hopefully should deflect some of the dafter comments.
That was far more informative than the statements in the article, which is a real concern to me if there is indeed something there worthy of being explained.
Such a great answer that raises so many questions.
Unless we have shore side assets that monitor Russian deployment, how would we know.
Don’t answer that one, however, good to know.
😉
We do.
We have very accurate intelligence on all Russian naval activities. We have nuclear boats at readiness able to deploy at very short notice. Being alongside doesn’t mean we can’t put to sea. If a Russian boat is on its way to the UK, an Astute will be waiting for it.
Ask how many American families enjoyed the US responding to Pearl Harbour.
Heavens, go a step further and ask about 9/11.
Now, when almost every NATO AF personnel had read Tom Clancy ask how they feel about 9/11 when ‘Debt of Honor’ portrayed the same scenario.
Black Swans happen; ones that are foretold 10 years before, I’m not so sure.
You know you have the respect of us on this forum but, I really must disagree with your post – I want conventional deterrence, not tied up alongside awaiting a Black Swan.
But, in the real world of operational planning. It does work like a Tom Clancy novel. How the Armed Force’s work and how people think they should work are two very different ways of thinking. Astutes have been up and down the Clyde very recently. It was only a very short period of time none were at sea. It would be interesting to see our enemies boat availability. I think the figures would be an eye opener to those who think we don’t perform.
“’m not a fan of Labour at the moment but a reformed Lords that only has people who served the Country rather than the current wastrels and current crop of wannabees has to be voted for.”
Agree David, it needs reforming.
Hear hear but the Commons hate that idea seeing it as a big threat as it would appeal to the public rather than the contempt held for MPs.
Well. Our democracy needs change.
Defence must be taken out of politics and given a flexible budget that meets the needs of the Nation.
NHS. I’ve had several awful experiences that show that the NHS mismanaged and puts people in danger. True ditto.
And dentistry – a joke. What do we pay taxes for?
Hi David
I actually and very reluctantly have to say that we could learn a lesson from the other side of the channel. It doesn’t matter who is in power left or right they plough on with putting their National pride, Defence and protecting their strategic industries front and centre.
I really don’t like the flexible bit in your suggestion, it’s a red rag to a bull for Politicians to meddle with it in a downwards direction. If you let Politicians with any wiggle room then their own self interests take priority.
I always try to B+ and hope that the present lot will have some sense and increase the defence budget, but Tax cuts will probably take priority.
I always found it odd that the only part of U.K. government spending that I can remember that was pre defined in law pwas under Camerloon and Oddborne.
Yep 0.7% of GDP for overseas Aid, so “call me Dave” could feel good. That only got changed when the unlikely happened and a party got a big enough majority to put it to one side and we had Covid to pay for.
I’d like a Formal National Defence Act that set into Law Defence spending at 3% of GDP as a minimum and cannot be altered downwards without a 2/3 majority of the both houses as a start.
I’d right the great mistake and remove the cost of support infrastructure, development and production of nuclear weapons, delivery systems and Command and Control from MOD back to the treasury.
I’d leave the SSBN provision with the Navy and enshrine the % of budget for each service in law.
Wannabes in the Lords? An odd characterisation.
In many ways the House of Lords is more effective than the Commons. It’s better at scrutinising legislation, and it doesn’t have an inbuilt government majority so is better at holding government to account on legislation. The Lords has been reformed several times in the last 120 years, and the Commons barely at all; we would be better off reforming that, starting with more mandatory information about candidates to be made available online to the electorate and at Town Halls. (Would you recruit anyone else for a high paid job without seeing a CV?) Mandatory hustings and candidate debates, again available online. A full-sized Commons chamber that can actually seat all the MPs, equiped with electronic voting wouldn’t go amiss. If you don’t attend a debate, you don’t get to vote, etc, etc. A bunch of lawyers and Oxbridge PPE grads focused on power rather than the national good are worse than any wastrels you might find in the Lords.
What exercises Labour about the second chamber is the historical baggage that comes with the word “Lords”. Call it the Senate and rename all the life peers to Senator rather than Lord or Lady, and they might calm down a bit.
To people outside the UK, it would be easy to assume that the UK government policy makers, base their military spending figures on our commitment to NATO, and not much else.
Someone needs to get a grip on this . It’s not just procurement but maintenance seems to be an issue . Shambolic isn’t a strong enough word , some highly paid and supposedly highly intelligent people are failing badly leaving the nations defences exposed . It simply isn’t good enough .
Well what do we expect ? Unlike us poor mere mortals Politicians and Civil Servants don’t face any real financial sanctions or risks if they goof up.
Reduce the index linked Pensions and introduce a bonus / penalty system for senior officials that either tops the pension pot up or doesn’t. Or even demotion or the sack.
John SSSSH ! You’ll be lynched for saying things like this.😉
And rightly so. Just because boats are alongside doesn’t mean they aren’t available to put to sea at very short notice. It’s called forces at readiness. And we have intelligence on all Russian naval activity. Above and below the water.
Ah but we now have drones. That is not the naval hierarchy or MPs by the way. Those two flat tops will soon be the most expensive model aeroplane club ever. I gave to disagree with your description of shambolic. Frankly it’s not that good. Worthless maybe better.
Just imagine they are licking their lips at the thought every drone will require a bureaucratic support team headed by an Admiral or Air Marshal. For them problem solved cheaper the drone more room for financing their overlords.
I believe the RN have around 100 members holding the rank of Commodore or above. That’s one per vessel, plus about 20 to spare. So the have scope to increase by around 10 at least to cover the drones.
The Vanguard class have reworked at least once. I honestly don’t know how the flotilla will be able to provide the CASD until the Dreadnought flotilla is ready. It seems like a rather tall order. I shall have to place a few calls to find out exactly what is going on
Very fond of grandstanding is Mr Francois. Perhaps he should direct his queries and opinions to the new Foreign Secretary on whose premiership the vandalism of SDR 2010 was done.
Bravo.
This is only half the story and misleading. The RN has a fleet boat at readiness. This means it can deploy a nuclear boat at very short notice. 48hrs or less. Being alongside doesn’t mean boats aren’t available or tasks can’t be met. We know the movements of Russian boats very accurately. If one is on its way to the UK, an Astute will be waiting to intercept and shadow. We have escorts at readiness, a carrier at readiness, a 2087 sonar equipment T23 at readiness. So, having assets alongside doesn’t mean we aren’t ready and available to react.
Did we lose docks or capacity somewhere?
In 2005 the RN had about 11 SSN + 4 SSBN, today we’re at 6+4 yet apparently don’t have enough capacity, did we lose capacity or are our aging SSBN and complex SSN’s more difficult to maintain, or both?
Not enough people. Too many half hearted attempts to save money that results in tripping over dollars to pick up pennies. The delay in QE’s construction (entirely created by government arguing) cost over 1bn. That’s an entire SSN right there in wasted funds.
The UK MOD needs red circled funds to see defense projects through to their logical conclusion. Every government creates a new funding crisis in the MOD as priorities change.
The docks are still there, but they are in dire need of upgrading/refurbishment to comply with nuclear safety certification. Basically, no safety certificate equals no docking for SM’s which is the issue.
Some of the docks essentially require rebuilding( relining of the walls etc) whilst the decision to accommodate the new classes of SM has also been taken into account during this process.
The refurbishment of the docks for the new ships isnt an issue yet, as they arent yet in service, so will be modified after the work on the SM docks is completed.
Geez the level of blabberspeak even by their standards is depressing. I mean if they spent as much time on just sorting things out as anyone in industry would be expected to do to keep their Company’s solvent, that they do thinking up meaningless names and phrases for the unspecified processes clearly required, they would be gold medalists of efficiency. Just stinks of shuffling the leather chairs in overloaded committees to suggest that changes sneeringly passed on to the gullible are in hand but that realistically never really happen at the sharp end. Meanwhile the participants take a lovely State sponsored remuneration to keep them in the lifestyle to which they have become well accustomed over the years and keep them superficially employed between malt whiskeys and bourbons in their Private Members Clubs. Or am I being too cynical.
Cynical. People will call for you in the middle of the night… 😉
I can’t express it through words but this country is failing. Our values, our loyalty, our belief.
I’d look to old Conservative values to remedy it but there aren’t any; and New Labour are just too woke for their own good.
To Hell in a handcraft it is then.
HMS Audacious will be sat on the quay side for a year to allow some descaling. A national disgrace.