AUKUS, as a defence and security partnership, was launched in September 2021. This tri-nation agreement displays the collective aim of Australia, the UK, and the US to uphold peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region.
Beyond just a defence pact, AUKUS epitomises the three nations’ commitment to technology exchange, security collaborations, and a unified stance against emerging global threats.
The Origins of the SSN-AUKUS
The cornerstone of the AUKUS agreement is the provision for Australia to procure its first-ever conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarine fleet.
While Australia has operated submarines before, transitioning to a nuclear-powered fleet marks a significant advance, and this is where the SSN-AUKUS, also referred to as the SSN-A in the UK, comes into play.
This submarine design is set to be a next-generation wonder, drawing heavily from the UK’s forthcoming submarine designs and further bolstered by technology contributions from all three member nations. Notably, the integration of advanced US submarine technologies, which have long been leaders in undersea warfare, is a key feature.
Features and Capabilities
While specific details are classified, certain overarching capabilities of the SSN-AUKUS are evident:
- Design: It will be based on the UK’s next-generation submarine design, integrating cutting-edge technological contributions from the US and Australia.
- Weapons & Surveillance: The SSN-AUKUS will feature a standard vertical launch system, paired with advanced weapon systems. Its intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities will be unparalleled, integrating both human-operated and AI-enhanced systems.
- Interoperability: A chief objective of this initiative is flawless interoperability amongst the naval assets of the three nations. The design, enriched with elements from all three nations, will facilitate streamlined joint naval operations.
- Propulsion and Range: Utilising nuclear propulsion technologies, the submarine will possess extended operational ranges and lengthier durations submerged, outstripping conventional diesel-electric submarines.
Production Timeline and UK Industrial Implications
While construction on the SSN-AUKUS is earmarked to commence by 2030, the roadmap leading up to this point is progressively materialising.
The UK anticipates the first submarines of this class to be operational by the late 2030s, with Australia following suit in the early 2040s. However, in the meantime, Australia will not be left without advanced submarine capabilities. The US, subject to Congressional approval, has pledged to supply Australia with three Virginia-class SSNs, potentially followed by two more.
What does it mean for UK industry?
In line with the current Astute and Dreadnought programmes, the UK’s SSN-AUKUS submarines will be constructed by BAE Systems at Barrow-in-Furness, with the nuclear propulsion components fabricated at Rolls Royce in Derby. As highlighted above, Rolls Royce will also be responsible for producing all the nuclear reactors for Australia’s submarines.
The programme is forecasted to generate thousands of jobs in the UK. Given the anticipated logistical challenges arising from the concurrent construction of the Dreadnought and SSN-AUKUS, as well as the additional capacity necessitated by the US Virginia class SSN programme, specific opportunities will be earmarked for the Australian industry to engage in the SSN-AUKUS supply chain.
By doing this, it will “alleviate stress on the supply chains of the UK and the US, tap into the existing strengths of Australian suppliers, and bolster their capacity in the run-up to the onset of Australia’s build programme”.
These opportunities are likely to concentrate on essential components where Australia has showcased industrial proficiency, such as pressure hull steel, valves, pumps, batteries, switchboards, lighting, and additive manufacturing. Interestingly, no UK suppliers are currently equipped to provide the specialised steel necessary for the fabrication of submarine pressure hulls. The specialised steel required for the Dreadnought SSBN, for instance, is currently sourced from a French supplier.
Perhaps 9-10 RN, 6 RAN, 4 RCAN?
Reports in the UK press are for 12-15 for the UK, we are still waiting for Ben Wallace study on submarine numbers to come out but if we were not expanding SSN numbers there would be no point in the current massive expansion going on at Barrow. The US is only really interested in Britains ability to provide SSN’s and carriers in the Indo pacific theatre so I have no doubt that’s were the spending will continue to grow especially as the Russian threat to the Euro Atlantic continues to diminish. Those old Russian subs can’t go on for ever… Read more »
Canada is looking at the KS-III submarine from Korea. Lot of interest and discussions between the two parties on that. A lot of benefits behind this is the Koreans will build it and Canada will not have all the political internal drama of who would build this domestically.
The Northwest passage dispute is not a big issue. The softwood lumber dispute is the more straining dispute between Canada and the US. 🙂
Conservatives are way up in the polls currently in Canada.
Conservatives are riding high in the polls at the moment but the longer term trend is against them and Canada’s left is very anti US and anti military, the US blocked Canadian acquisition of SSN from the UK in the 80’s (over turned by Regan) but I can’t see Canada in AUKUS happening. Korea SSK move probably best option they can get but not massively useful for a nation with three ocean coast line much of which is under ice.
The ice is gone and receding in a lot of places in the Canadian Arctic so the Korean Subs will be useful. They also have VLS with less crew per ship. The Canadian Chief of Staff seems to be earning his paycheck in getting through to what Canada needs for future procurement with the gov. Not a liberal fan myself but this is all encouraging. The left you talk of that dislike US policies is the NDP party. The Canadian public is tired of Trudeau and the Liberals. It’s the typical ebb and flow of Canadian politics. The Cons and… Read more »
Hope your right, would be very useful to bring Canada back in to the fold properly.
The number of subs in scope is 12 from all accounts on the matter
Canada is still proper but it can be more proper. 🙂
Twelve KS-III SSKs? 🤞👍 Although it would not affect the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific, at least it could discourage Orc and ChiCom adventurism w/in Canadian territorial waterways. 🤔🤞
The Ice is receding ‘outside the arctic’. For unusual reasons the Artic ice *extent* also includes quite a bit in North Pacific outside Bering St and areas past Greenland down Labrador coast and some in Gulf of St Lawrence!
It sure is receding in those areas too.
Maybe not “Glacier Bay was first surveyed in detail in 1794 by a team from the H.M.S. Discovery, captained by George Vancouver. At the time the survey produced showed a mere indentation in the shoreline. That massive glacier was more than 4,000 feet thick in places, up to 20 miles wide, and extended more than 100 miles to the St. Elias mountain range. By 1879, however, naturalist John Muir discovered that the ice had retreated more than 30 miles forming an actual bay. By 1916, the Grand Pacific Glacier- the main glacier credited with carving the bay – had melted back 60 miles to… Read more »
The extremely long transit times to the Arctic are just as much a problem as the ice, perhaps more so, which is why SSNs would be preferable. Korean SSKs would be better than nothing but I doubt any future Canadian government here would order SSNs and if SSKs were ordered from Korea the number would be too small to be useful.
12 is the stead fast number of subs in scope for this potential deal with Korea. I agree that a mixed force would be preferable.
Vast distances indeed in the Arctic for SSK but there are a number of refueling and resupply ports of call like Iqaluit, Nanisivik, Resolute, Cambridge Bay and Inuvik. Churchill Manitoba on Hudson’s Bay is another port that could be utilized.
The Harry DeWolfe Arctic OPVs have a multi mission payload that can resupply these subs in remote areas as well.
I wonder about government commitment to keep stores in some of these Arctic ports. Any kind of crisis would make resupplying these ports difficult as land access is pretty much zero.
Two of those places mentioned are served by North American highway and rail links.
You are correct, resupply would be by air mostly up there.
Believe that Canada would join AUKUS Pillar 2 program, if invited, under a Conservative government. Very few believe that Pillar 2 programs are credible and/or important, but that tail will eventually wag the dog, especially when space R&D and ops are eventually incorporated. 🤔
Not certain how significant a lumber industry will remain in Canada longer term, if current trends in wildfires persist. 🤔😳☹️ At one point this summer, there were over 1K uncontained fires, generating some of the worst pollution readings in the world for downwind US metropolitan areas. 😱
It’s a goddamn mess and quite alarming. The part of Canada I live in was not affected by the wild fires directly but we had the smoke for over 20 days in my area. Could not see more than half mile in either direction
I understand the wildfire extent hasnt increased and was worse in 1950s and 1920s. Just didnt get the attention it does now.
Just as the 2023 North Atlantic hurricane season so far has been exceptionally quiet with no hurricanes making landfall at all.
Much hyped storm for Southern California instead but their worst year was 4 similar or worse in 1 month alone in 1939
Hmmm…according to Canadian officials, 2023 is indeed the worst year for total acreage destroyed by wildfires (25M acres and counting), eclipsing the previous total of 18M acres in 1989. Did note that some of the largest individual wildfires occurred during the 1920s and 1950s. 🤔
Plant trees in smaller plantations with wide firebreaks!
And choose drought and disease resistant species(a)?
…species…🙄 (Couldn’t access edit function for some reason.)
Presumably, if the Labour Party, either alone or in coalition w/ similar parties, control a Parliamentary majority after the next general election, a defence review w/out preconditions will be mandated. All facets of MoD plans, structure, funding, etc. could be subject to radical revision. Is there any effective method of ensuring continuity in acquisition programs, short of binding contracts w/ penalty clauses for termination? 🤔
The Labour Party would not cancel anything related to shipbuilding…..it’s a workers Party that has some socialists in it…not a socialist party…..which is why the whole Corbin thing was an issue..every few decades the socialists try to take over…it means that the Labour Party tends not to cancel things with industrial jobs attached and is essentially pragmatic about the armed forces and view it as nessary ( they are all workers as well) the socialist elements on the other hand don’t like..now Corbin has gone the armed forces are as safe as they can be ( most of the time… Read more »
Thanks for the nuanced explanation, thought Corbin wing of Labour Party was both its past legacy and future destiny. 🤔
To be honest the British press (right and left) and party faithful go on about how awful the other side is and build the other side up as either communist insurgents or wannabe facists but in reality they are both centrist parties that are essentially identical in their beliefs on what the nation should look like and just disagree a bit on the exact method of getting to it..( pretty much the entire British political establishment is based around western liberal centrist views)…every so often you will get a party lurching away from the centre ground to appeal to their… Read more »
Very interesting, believe there are only three people left in the US who self-identify as centrists–and I haven’t had the pleasure yet of meeting the other two.
And you are not it…
Our Mexican Trolls back 😀
Not for long.
Hooray!
You can not tell people that Suella Braverman, Rees Mogg et al are centrists, that is a gross distortion, and one that should be called out. The tilt to the rich over the last 13 years has seen the NHS divided up into parcels that can be sold – my own GP Surgery has just been bought out. The railways are a waste of money but a money pit for investors. Raw sewage pumped out but dividends paid out and the taxpayer called upon to fix the infrastructure. Refugees weaponised by this appalling government and used as a voter recruitment… Read more »
David..I did say that the Conservative Party will loss the next election because the right have taken over the party…as I described every so often a party will shift to the wings and ends up being punished…I tried not to get into the micro politics in the explanation but for confirmation I agree that a number of Tory politicians are not centrists…but sunak and hunt are….until the conservatives put the right wing back in its box they are going to have a string of lost elections moving forward ( the British electorate will act as a balance). As I said… Read more »
👍 Spot on.
That was a good read. And others posts too.
The way I see it, these days both parties swing to the center to beat off the incumbent, then once they have been in power for a while their respective left or right factions eventually push them in that direction until they become unelectable, and then the cycle repeats. I’d suggest it was Blair that started this strategy. Before then it was the other way around, so we ended up with polarized reactionaries like Thatcher who pushed things a bit too far, who then got toppled and replaced by the more moderate like Major. So BoJo was actually a bit… Read more »
Good post, you have to remember that someone on the left or right will consider themselves a centralist and therefore normal centralist policies are extreme right or left to them.
That’s a good point we always see our own point of view as normal…even if everyone else thinks it’s way out there…after all flat earth types don’t think they are fringe tin hat types they thing everyone else are the idiots.
Good to see critical thinking but some misunderstanding here “Private sector landlords buying up more and more property and charging unaffordable rents”. The Rental Reform Bill is abolishing half of the means to recover a property (Section 21) so that many landlords are selling out to avoid the incoming crisis that will cause. Also inflation and 15 consecutive Bank of England MPC base rate hikes have removed any profit. The result is a worse imbalance of supply and demand so that rental costs increase as per traditional economics. Government is responsible for RRB and MPC so a problem of their… Read more »
You’re quite right in your thinking but, I’d draw your attention to one item. For multiple years, Councils had to bank the proceeds of right to buy without being able to spend it. I noticed Reading now has a project building flats near the beginning of the Oxford Road – they are sorely needed. However, in Cumbria with the demise of the District Councils, I do wonder if Town Councils can exercise any options to build social housing – that provided by some ‘Social Housing’ agencies can be pants. Instead, County is pressing ahead with spending £20m on a glorification… Read more »
The problem isn’t just housing, every new family needs a % of infrastructure. The whole direction of the country had been wrong for more than 2 decades ie add people to increase GDP, more people means more of everything else is needed. Yes you get tax revenue from them but you need to invest upfront to provide the schools, hospitals, roads etc you can’t wait for that revenue to accumulate from the increased population so you have to borrow and then you pay interest. Not only that there’s limits, you simply can’t add wider roads for instance to take the… Read more »
The railways are a waste of money but a money pit for investors
Worth a read to understand the topic beyond the headlines.
Rail Industry Finance (UK) – 2020-21 (orr.gov.uk)
If you want a good railway then forget nationalised rail and follow the best on the planet, the Japanese railways system, (private). Provide the best service and receives pretty much the lowest state aid on the planet.
Excellent summary folks tend to forget that some of the Biggest Defence cuts were made under Conservative Governments and some of the biggest positive Decisions have been made by Labour. The floating voters tend to be right of centre on some issues and left of centre on others. Essentially for the last 25 years we have had a succession of Centrist Governments. Blair got us into wars, but went ahead with the Carriers and Trident Replacements. Cameloon was a disaster and Bo Jo well he seems to have Nationalised half the Railways and the MOD now owns an industrial company.… Read more »
The real battle in British politics isn’t left or right, red or blue both sides are anti freedom. We’re seeing more an more erosion of our freedoms and choice no matter who’s in power. Its being presented as the only option we have to restrict where people go, what they say and think. We going to end up similar to China where we have a unofficial social credit system, adhere to it or pay a price financially or through revoking of service.
Cannot disagree we have seen a general reduction in freedom..education is a good example…the control of what children do and the expectations on parents to comply with what schools what is significantly more than it was before.
Last time labour came in they stuck with Tory spending plans and continued the projects the Tory’s signed like Astute and MRA4, looking very much like next labour government will do the same. The Tory’s tried to cancel everything when they came to power MRA4 scrapped, tried to kill the carriers and T26 delayed.
Excellent, the defence of the West’s ‘truly unsinkable aircraft carrier’ appears to be a little more assured. 🤔😊
Yes, just need you to send us the planes 😀
It’s not so much the UK is an unsinkable aircraft carrier…after all its was doing its thing….keep Europe balanced….well before the invention of the aircraft….simply put its the UKs ability to interdict shipping and hold at risk the key shipping lanes around Europe and into the Atlantic that make it so important….in the end it’s one of the doorways to the world from for northern and Central Europe….being able to close the door has been a major part of European security for a long time…..its lucky for Europe that Britains inhabitants are as a famous dictator put it a bunch… Read more »
For the same price, 2 carriers + combat group and planes and 12 submarines « classic ».
Well, at least, when we played Australia yesterday and won, we made it for one game, defeat is a bruthing that will last 2 weeks at most.
When UK and USA gang Australia’s bank, they do it for 400 Bn$ over 80 years and don’t deliver a sub before 2040, just to make them useless for upcoming tensions.
Good job, we would never dare to do the same to a country. Let’s call it a lack of ambition 😄
Traditionally the Conservatives used to be Army people if they were talking defence. Now they seem to be more rounded, giving the go ahead on Tempest and the National Ship Building Plan. I dont think it serves any purpose blaming any one party for any of the mess we may be in on defence. The Army seems to not know what it wants and they may be honestly forgiven in part, having fought desert wars for over 20 years. Unsurprisingly there has been little attention paid to a central European war apart from Brexit (Joke). The one thing that looms… Read more »
Those pesky Austrians spending $300b on 8 subs. It’s a bit over kill for the lakes and rivers but hey who am I to criticise 😂😂😂😂😂
Yes, the Hapsburg empire is back 😀
They did have Slovenia once over… maybe it’s a land grab?
– All right, everybody be cool, this is a robbery!
– Any of you fuckin pricks move, and I’ll execute every motherfuckers one of you.
love you honey bunny!
I wasn’t going to bring it up… but… 🇦🇺 is down here…and we’re sure as hell not 🇦🇹! Lol 😁
12-15 for the RN? I would love to see it but where is the money coming from? I suppose there would be benefit from economy of scale but would that really be enough to offset the cost of 12-15 – essentially doubling the size of our current attack boat fleet?
Much of Austrailia’s security lies in the vast Oceans surrounding it. The point of this whole AUkUS stratagy is to get as bigger bang for your buck as you can. Part of the benefit to the UK & the US is that if things start going pear shaped the Austrialians have got a big enough force to keep any adversary busy until the cavalry arrive. A dozen boats per country (as a minimum) suggests everyone is serious.Entering the agreement you would expect the various parties to be insisting on commitment (for a change).
Er, there is little to no security in the oceans surrounding Australia – I think Darwin got the good news in WW2…
Australia has to become the Pacific unsinkable aircraft carrier for the US and that needs and effective Navy able to project force and interdict enemy SLOCs. Only way they stay safe – oh, and a shit load of Patriots and Thaads.
Distance is always security. Ask Portugal and Ireland during cold war compared to say Norway or Denmark.
Mexico and Canada do very nicely close to US but a long way from elsewhere that could be hostile.
And those vast oceans are also open Highway to an ever increasing Chinese sub and naval fleet especially if they start increasing their relations with friendly countries nearby and start having naval access granted and bases popping up. Foreign ministers will need to work harder at their relationships with countries which may have been neglected and left more open to Chinese influences.
I think the RAN is looking at 8. And before that 3-5 second hand Virginia’s.
Morning Q
Sad news re the Osprey accident. Been watching the coverage on SKY news.
Afternoon Klonkie, Yes, and a bit soon after the Taipan incident claiming four lives too. And the Osprey looks bloody useful. A few of us here probably wanted a few for the carriers. What with Aus buying lots of new defence stuff here’s hoping that NZ can treat herself a bit too.
As a kiwi, I am ever hopeful, but the plain truth is that whatever amount we set aside for the NZDF, it will always be a pittance in comparison to most of our allies, least of all our dear friends next door.
Not helped by a likely need to replaceme our NH-90s!
Every little helps. Look at some of the small nations in nato, have a good stuff and help make nato stronger together.
Probably best not to buy ex-Army Taipans or Tigers. Your NZ NH90s seem to be going along okay. I think they came “ready to go” direct from France, not sure about the Taipans here. Hope NZ gets some decent helos to replace the Seasprites too. Some Wildcats anyone? Like to see a couple sets of NSMs for the two NZ Anzac’s. I’m sure Aussie bros will look after our NZ cuzzies if push comes to shove. Except in 🏉! World Cup soon.
Australia is saying 8. To build onshore, anything else will not add up. Getting a decision out of Canada is nearly as bad as India. I honestly can’t understand why Canada is so blind to the problems their procurement setup creates. I don’t think they want to know. Canada won’t be getting SSN’s until they recognise that being slightly ahead of India is not something to be proud of.
Quick thought: As SSAN-Aukus uses’standard vertical launch system,’ and as technology improves, how practical would it be for a Astute and Dreadnought replacement to use a standard hull, with a switchable nuclear ‘module’ able to replace the conventional munitions in the verical launch system? I can see advantages in having a fleet of subs whose function is not known to potential enemies, or whose can be changed to match changing circumstances.
Not possible as the Virgina Payload Module which the VLS will likely be or be based off is a series of single centreline tubes whereas the trident missile tubes are two wide and much smaller diameter.
“Virgina” 😱
No chance without major redesign
AUKUS as the replacement could be used, I would have thought, but not for existing ICBM’s. Improved range cruise and maybe a smaller ballistic missile. They are coming.
Ambiguity in nuclear vs conventional weapons is a Very Bad Thing, as the opposition have to plan for the worst case scenario and so will tend to overreact/get their nuclear retaliation in first, which is not what you want. That why things like nuclear Tomahawk were among the first to go after the Cold War, it’s not good for confidence for the red team to be preparing WWIII every time the US wants to fire a conventional Tomahawk at a terrorist camp or something. Because accidents will happen when people are nervous. There was actually quite a bit of controversy… Read more »
Agree, Submarine conventional armed ballistic missiles are a terrible idea. Massive issue is that with countries like South Korea considering them it is impossible for any adversary to know who is launching them. If you see multiple launched missiles coming from the sea any countries first thought is a nuclear strike. Cruise missiles were no so bad because they don’t show up on early warning Radar or infrared tracking satellites however by removing nuclear cruise missiles it gives NATO forces a conventional strike deterrent option against countries like Russia that can be used instead of a nuclear for a measured… Read more »
It’s basically why the UK and French nuclear deterrent is a bit more powerful than most people think…as one nuclear ballistic missile submarine launching its payload would essentially kick off global thermonuclear war world, as the target nation would never know who it was that was attacking it with a nuclear strike and likely launch its own deterrent at all perceived enemies…everyone would know this and essentially get their own launch’s in even if not the target of the first attack. That’s why ballistic missile nuclear subs are the ultimate deterrent…they really are an everyone dies button.
Ha, the Australian colony will pay, since they made good money with China 😉
You don’t ever want ambiguity in regards to what is and what is not a Nuclear deterrent..as most nations ( including the UK) consider an attack on its nuclear deterrent as a first strike scenario answerable by a nuclear retaliation. A nation mistakenly attacking a nuclear missile boat could trigger a nuclear exchange.
Are these boats going to resemble the US Virginia’ class in overall design/appearance?
Dreadnought derivative with one or two Virginia Payload Tubes similar to Virginia Block 3 but not as many as the Virginia Block 4/5 with the added Virginia Payload Module which are more Ohio SSGN replacements than pure breed hunter-killers.
No the boats will resemble the Dreadnaught class, Virginia hull is quite old school and does not incorporate an angled exterior hull to deflect active sonar like Astute. The US will also likely move to the angled hull form for its Virginia replacement.
“The US will also likely move to the angled hull form for its Virginia replacement.”
I think this is unlikely as there is a greater need for stealth on ballistic missile subs and the upcoming Colombia class subs at this point still looks like they will have a similar hull form to current US subs.
Ballistic submarines spend almost no time near the surface unlike SSN’s rarely if ever surfacing on a detterence patrol and mostly staying below the thermocline which would already hide them from ship sonar, SSN’s on the other hand need to observe shipping and act in littoral waters and spend a lot more time at the surface so the ability to deflect ship sonar is much more important.
Mostly agree with you but none of that changes the fact that the only way a ballistic sub stays viable, and in turn the security of a nation operating it, is in it’s ability to stay undetected. There is no assured retaliation without it. Stealth is the absolute cornerstone of it’s design and operating tactics.
i think we need the labour shipbuilding stratagy as the conservatives are unlikly to win an election. order 13 SSN before the election, for say 25billion ish, cancelation fee per sub is 10 billion. Bonus of 5 billion if first sub is built by 2030, this would ensure another build hall was built. Also barrow gets a motorway link to the M6. for “regeneration” Similar stratagy for T26,T31 another carrier to really push it 🙂 another 24 typhoon, another 4 wedgtails, another 7 P8 if the army have any sense then get orders in as well, all with extortionate cancellation… Read more »
You think Rishi sunak and Jeremy *unt actually care enough about defence to order anything like that, no chance they will be too busy lying about scrapping inheritance tax and knocking a penny of income tax to promise any spending. If memory serves the only government that pre ordered ship before an election with massive penalties for cancelation was Labour under Gordon Brown. The Torys tried to cancel the aircraft carriers but couldn’t because it’s was cheaper to build them. The biggest issue is T32 build because the current government has not funded it and labour will be following Tory… Read more »
Agreed 👍
I was asked to complete a Labour survey – I was truly despondent that Defence was not mentioned at all – it underscores the very low interest that Labour show – and I’m a Labour town councillor. Defence is being spoken about locally, investment in defence does bring jobs and security, however, talking about the burgeoning NHS bill to fight obesity etc caused by lifestyle choices is not. How about, you munch on fast food, smoke, drink alcohol, and do feck all but watch TV, you die. No NHS can cure you, so don’t bother asking. Vote for us! Vote… Read more »
👍
You lost me at motorway link to Barrow.
And pink pigs will fly.
Flowery language, but essentially nothing new or any insights into possibilities and options. Could have explored UUVs and AI options together with increased automation and quantum navigation to name a few. Very shallow article.
“A brief guide” to the programme, what were you expecting?
I agree. New commenter here, but I thought blah, blah, blah.
Why don’t you submit an article?
Why don’t you write something? It’s quite strange to demand more of folk doing this in their free time, for free.
Why so rude?
Quantum communication will at some point also be a big change, likely within the life of these subs..especially for UUVs as it would create an undetectable way for the Sub and UUV to communicate.
interesting pun OR-“very shallow article” about submarines😃
Well it is far better to discuss such matters in individual articles where one can base it on known developments and speculate how they might be exploited rather than speculate on them being used on a very specific platform when there is little to absolutely no direct information is known so would be especially lightweight in nature and indeed pretty pointless. Far better to have specific articles on those subjects as I say when something of note is know about such developments as for example happened with quantum navigation when the Patrick Blackett was sent on its first mission to… Read more »
I’ll believe it when I see it. This programme is in my opinion, simply too ambitious. Too many things need to come together and I still don’t trust US intentions viz the UK. I sincerely hope that I’m proven wrong
SSN-AUKUS is mixed blessing. Use of PWR-3 and fitting of the Virginia Payload Module means that SSN-AUKUS is going to be a large and very expensive beast. Perfect for the Pacific, but no so good for UK waters, the Med or the Arabian Gulf. Also the agreement to fit American command and weapon systems in order to give the RAN compatibility with its leased Virginia SSN’s means the end of the road for the BAE Systems and Thales UK developed Common Combat System. That is a big industrial blow, and the loss of an important sovereign capability. CCS is a result of 50 years of… Read more »
I agree. I would like to see a list of who is putting in what. Seeing as the USA is having its own design why is the U.K./Oz boat going use so much more USA tech? How much U.K./oz tech is going in the next usa ssn design?
I’m still not completely sure Australia won’t turn round and say it’s ok U.K. we will use virginias and build USA next gen subs later. Hopefully I’m wrong.
If you try to look at it objectively, the SSN-AUKUS project is rather puzzling. Given that Australia has also committed to buying three ex-USN Virginia’s in the 2030’s, with an option to also order two new builds – why aren’t they just sticking with US made subs? The additional cost and effort required to locally assemble 5 SSN-AUKUS’s in a brand new shipyard is mind-boggling. It does indeed seem to be an easily cancellable project unless the UK quickly locks Oz in to some cast-iron contracts with huge penalty clauses.
Australia had a terrible experience with the Oberon class, operating a foreign designed and built sub with no access to the IP and with no industrial base can be a real nightmare especially when you are so far away. US submarines are too big and too manpower intensive for Australia. No US defence contractor has set up a yard or has virtually any experience of building vessels in foreign yards. BAE has a great deal of experience and is already established in Australia. The USN and congress don’t even want to sell 3 subs to Australia much less 8, they… Read more »
That doesnt add up about RAN Oberons. They were able to be upgraded in Australia. HMAS Onslow became the first conventional sub equipped to fire sub launched Harpoons It was also adapted the torpedoes from UK Mk8 to Mk23 wire guided and then the US Mk48 The Collins were designed for and by Australia and built there but were a shambles in that respect . too many issues which took a lot of time and money to resolve including throwing away the local IP and designed combat system and buying off the shelf American, which they have no control over… Read more »
And UK shipbuilding 40% more expensive than Fr in terms of price per ton.
I am surprised the Oberons were a disaster. They were excellent in UK service.
The Australian Coontz DDGs were a disaster according to an engineer flatmate of mine in Sydney in the 60’s! They ran on very high temp steam and were a nightmare. Better than anything we had in other regards.
Best solution would be to speed up sub construction if possible. Get SSNR production up and running ASAP. Then there could be a chance of giving Australia a couple of astutes with SSNR replacing them. Australia then will be building a sub that’s already in the water and had kinks worked out.
I doubt it’s possible with SSBNs still building and getting the reactors built in time.
Australia should look at getting its first boat in the water before 2040s.
If the U.K. could get the 1st Boat in 2032, 2-3 years trials Australia could get one in 2035
At present the work to enable the expanded infrastructure to build the number of PWR3 and expand the workforce here in Derby is going “at pace”. Same goes for BAe at Barrow you are looking at 4/5 years before we can start to ramp up the production rate. As for 2032 for an inservice date of first SSN(R) is completely impossible. And it isn’t down to a lack of cash, resources, planning or motivation. In all my years I have never seen Raynesway working at the present level of expansion, it breathtaking and damned impressive. If you want to see… Read more »
Thanks for the info. I really don’t know much about the timescales, more wishful thinking
If they slightly speed up the dial on Dreadnought class, finalise the design in the next 3/4 years and order the long lead items, then maybe, just maybe you may see the 1st of class doing her trials in 2037/8. And then the fun begins because the U.K/US/Australian supply chains and treasury instalments have to sync in to deliver a 15/18 month drumbeat. That will deliver 16 boats in 24 years, which is a reasonable assumption for the class. The reason for that is we then get into the replacement of Dreadnought SSBN. Oh how time flys 😉
The suppliers will have to build ahead and parts kept in warehouses, and if that means we pay earlier, then we do. An overall supplier drumbeat for just in time is too much to ask for.
It actually works precisely like that and given the timescales involved it can’t be done any differently, and I’ll try and explain why. It isn’t like building a car where it may take 2/3 years to design and then be in continuous production for maybe 6/8 years, JIT works fine for that as the parts are mass produced. And unlike a car we are slightly fussy about where we source the parts from. The Drumbeat is based on the intended in service date and the concept, design, build time and the entire supply chain feeds into that pre determined schedule… Read more »
I think it actually makes some sense when you take into account the hidden factors. Firstly the timescales involved don’t sit well with the OOS date for the Collins class. RAN is at risk of having a submarine gap precisely when it needs to be increasing its crew numbers. Secondly 3 older Virginias allows training and experience of operating Nuclear Boats with US systems and maintains / increases crew numbers. If they use move to a 2 crew per boat rotation system it really is a enabler for a larger Submarine force. Thirdly it allows the US to effectively increase… Read more »
Think Jim says rather more than I can other than this is a big win to Aus to get US tech into its AUKUS subs, virtually zero chance the US would sanction licence build of its boats, they are so damn protective and probably understandably so too. To be honest I suspect even this amount of cooperation and release is only down to the fact the US is so deeply concerned about China and it’s own short to medium term problems with producing its own subs in sufficient numbers, they will reduce in number before rising again which is why… Read more »
Is it a given that the RN boats will use the same CMS as the RAN boats? That question could be expanded in scope, e.g. to torpedoes. On the size issue that occurred to me too. (I’m definitely no expert, just a civilian with an interest in the military.) Could any of the big-boat limitations be mitigated by the use of offboard systems that could carry weapons/sensors/people/etc into shallower waters? With VPM I assume some tubes could house drones rather than missiles. The big issue I see there, assuming my thinking isn’t ludicrous from the outset, is sub-surface communication with… Read more »
Seems like it’s a goer! For me though it’s a subject I know very little about and do learn much from the SMEs on here!
If the UK is looking at 9-12-15 in 10-15 years time, what about what’s ideally needed right now? Even keeping a few of the later T-boats in service to boost numbers? And to have a small diesel sub fleet for regional, deep sea, coastal patrols?
Morning @Q63, I believe that those higher numbers are not realistic, we will be getting 8 new SSN(R)s, at a push possibly 10, even though we really need a minimum of 12. Getting 15 is at this moment extremely unlikely, as it would involve almost doubling the current number of submariners we have, a significant manpower increase, not probably achievable for certain branches even int his timescale I’m afraid. Forget anything about T boats, they are just plain worn out, far too expensive to attempt to re-activate, just look at how little time we got out of both Talent/Trenchant after… Read more »
Thanks Deep, I’m happy forget about the T-boats and to be corrected by some good realism. Just 7 Astutes seems a bit light though and seemingly taking ages to get there. Hopefully some good numbers on the SSNRs and other ASW drones and and technologies all in good time.
Well, currently 8 is the magic number wrt SSN(R) for the UK, of course, over the next decade or so that number might well increase, we shall have to wait and see.
Yes drones are likely to play a big part in future ASW ops, but, that is realistically decades away despite what many think. It’s why both Dreadnought and SSN(R) are still manned, so nobody is thinking that unmanned is currently the way ahead, certainly not for the next 4 decades anyway.
Smaller drones to operate with both WS and SM certainly, just not yet.
I know it’s a dream but was hoping as the new SSK being proposed by SAAB for the Netherlands that uses British sonar could see us join the program with a build in the UK as well at Camel Laird for a small UK fleet.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/07/saab-offers-four-expeditionary-submarines-to-the-netherlands/
4 SSK would really free up the SSN fleet in the Mediterranean and Atlantic and let us forward deploy two Astute to Australia.
Jin, I’m totally with you on the need for a small fleet of SSKs, 4-6 would certainly be the sweet spot in my opinion. As a preference my choice would be either the Swedish A26 spilt 3×oceanic-er with VPM fitted and 3x pelagic for inshore work, or 6× Japanese Taigei class.
Unfortunately I don’t believe we will ever go back to operating SSKs, never mind the funding/crewing issues.
Agree, however with crewing level 3 times less than an Astute having a small fleet as an interim capability until SSN numbers increase is very doable and 4* A26 would only cost around £2 billion with a crewing level less than the River Batch 2 fleet. A little ambition is all it takes and we would have a force of 11 Hunter Killers and be able to forward deploy 2 Astute to Perth. That would give the UK a power permanent force in the Indo Pacific of two deployed frigates, 2 SSN’s and a Littoral Strike Group, easily sufficient to… Read more »
Keeping a T boat in service ? Sorry to be blunt but that is quite frankly impossible, they are out of life, it isn’t just the hulls it’s what’s in them. Old equipment that hasn’t been built in decades, so there is no supply chain. More importantly there are no PWR1 Z cores left and there is no way to build any more, it’s impossible. Which is the same reason we can’t build anymore Astutes, we build a certain number of cores, that is based on the number required to refuel over the life of the boat and a coupe… Read more »
Hope USN maximizes design contributions to SSN (AUKUS), then, in turn, utilizes that design as a logical baseline starting point for SSN(X). Would appear to be a rational plan to a non-participant. 🤔
Despite press reports I’d say we’ll be lucky to see 8 or 9 boats in RN service. Money and manpower will dictate that. I’d take 9 now.
The 12 to 15 numbers being banded around are most likely just aspirational and designed to help with work share.
I am thinking out loud here so stay with me on this. Will the new SSN-A get the Virginia Payload Module, not sure as it looks like the Virginia block V will get three or four new modules 83 inch in diameter based on the VPM to take three hypersonic glide missiles. This is the same module that is being fitted to the Zumwalt for the Long Range Hypersonic Weapons. In the US Army which currently deploys such a weapon with a range of about 3,000 miles it is called Dark Eagle. So if the US is going to install… Read more »
Where has it been stated the UK is hoping to increase SSN numbers to 15? I presumed that figure was brought up when the AUKUS collaboration was announced because the Aussies want 8 and we our benchmark would be 7 to replace the Astute’s.
Think it was from someone at Barrow announcing “the first of a new class of 15 submarines will be built here for the Royal
Navy”
Breaking it down – there will be a new class of 15 submarines , the first of which will be built at Barrow for the RN – the second and indeed all the other 14 could be built in Australia for the RAN – that was never mentioned – just that the first of the 15 will be built in Barrow for the RN.
And if u add 7+8 = 15. 7 for RN, 8 for OZ. As I’ve said before I really hope I’m wrong.
There was a lot of confusion and misunderstanding in source docs as to whether Australia will build 5 or 8 SSN-AUKUS. Both are potentially wrong. Vice-Admiral Jonathan Mead, the RAN’s navy’s nuclear-powered submarine taskforce chief, clarified that in June 2023 by explaining to a government Estimates Committee that the “indicated eight nuclear powered submarines for Australia … includes three of the [American] Virginias”, which may increase to five. Senator David Shoebridge was not corrected by the Admiral when he concluded that the “only actual promise” to the UK is for Australia to build three SSN-AUKUS submarines.
No initial announcement was for 15 for the UK alone not including Aussie boats.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/13/britain-to-build-nuclear-powered-submarines-for-historic-aukus-pact
Again no point in increasing size of Barrow if not to increase UK SSN numbers.
All very vague isn’t it. All we know for sure is that the expansion at Barrow will help the Aussies with their initial AUKUS boat.
Beyond that it seems to be a very fuzzy aspiration for a larger SSN fleet that the media has jumped on as some sort of actual plan!
I mean a lot can happen in the 30+ years it would take to build anything approaching 15 boats.
Yes and potentially intentionally so, AUKUS and any UK increase in SSN numbers is a counter to Chinese expansion. At current capabilities China lacks the technology or industrial base to challenge US and UK under sea naval capability however that may soon change and by the 2040’s China could be significantly out producing the USA as part of its 2050 plan. At that point having UK production facilities knocking out significant numbers of SSN’s will be vital for western defence posture much the same as the 80’s when the soviets were knocking out massive fleets of submarines. Our naval build… Read more »
Well I have just realised that building U.K Nuclear Submarines is a complete waste of time, education, training and money.
As it seems not one single one of them is at Sea. I feel safer already ☹️
https://www.navylookout.com/
The latest article on Navy Lookout, you linked to, is a rather depressing read.
It’s coming off a high typo rate last year with new boats working up and I’m sure a strong desire on the part of HMG and NATO ago have an SSN reserve in the North Atlantic should mad Vlad decide to try his luck.
If the boats were knackered or short of crew it would be leaked in the daily mail in 2 mins.
Hopefully you are right about having a SSN reserve. Both the USN and RN seem to be having long wait times for SSN maintenance.
Yes, just read it mate.
Is 500 days sitting along side normal for a sub? Articles says astute spent 500 days alongside before going out briefly in july.
I don’t know enough about subs to comment. Is it lack of crews, maintenance needs, no money or need to put to sea? Not ideal I would think but don’t know enough about subs
The root problem seems to a lack of docks and shore side maintenance facilitates suitable for the Astute’s – which is crazy given the decades long lead time the MOD had get those organised. Even worse, there is no quick fix. It’s ironic, but RN Astute’s seem set from 2027 to rely heavily upon the nuclear submarine support and maintenance facilities that Australia has started to build at HMAS Stirling. Speculating wildly – maybe RN-AUKUS boats will one day end up even being refitted in Oz!
So we are reliant on the French for the steel for these next gen subs ? What could possibly go wrong ? I’m sure the French have no axe to grind.
Hi folks hope all is well.
On a similar theme, I read with interest in Navy Lookout that all of our attack subs are in dock. This I find quite alarming considering the current activity in east Europe. I would imagine if there to be an emergency, some of the subs could be sent to sea in fast turnaround?
Any advice if this normal, or just part of normal maintenance?
Cheers,
George