UK Submarine Design

For all the Submarine fans out there.

There is a conference coming up if anyone wants to know the latest in Submarine Design. It is being held in London on the 22-23rd June in London.

The 8th in the series on Naval Submarines, this conference features presentations on a variety of topics, including:

HMCS Chicoutimi - Fire at Sea
Risks and Hazards in Recovering the Nuclear Submarine Kursk
Astute Class Submarine Movement Control - An Integrated Approach
Astute Propulsor Technical Innovation Summary

www.rina.org.uk...

Note to mods: This is not a commercial ad, i have no affiliation to RINA

Cool, my favourite sub is the American USS Seawolf... Do you ahve any favourites among our underwater friends...?



[edit on 16-6-2005 by Figher Master FIN]

i always liked shots of the Vangard class (UK SSBN) from front on. It looks mean with big shoulders!!!


[edit on 16-6-2005 by paperplane_uk]

here is my favorite design of a submarine. freaky looking but cool. im curious to new designs and methods.













navy-matters.beedall.com...

Evolution of the FASM Project

The demise of FASM 2001 placed the Astute Class as effectively the replacement for both the Swiftsure and Trafalgar Class hunter-killer SSN's, rather than just the further. MUFC was seen as a leading to a revolutionary new capabilities that would only reach full fruition (e.g. a new class of manned "mother subs") in about 2030, when the first Astute would require replacement at the end of its 25 year service life.

However although MUFC was originally orientated as an eventual replacement to Astute, it has recently becoming multi-role in nature. In June 2004 the United States-based publication Defense News revealed that the latest MUFC design studies were examining replacing both the Vanguard Class Trident missile-firing submarines and eventually the Astute hunter-killer submarines with a single class of multi-role, nuclear-powered submarine.

The first Vanguard Class SSBN entered service in 1995 and will require replacement in 2020 (apparently now adjusted to 2024/5). The costs of designing a new submarine are described as "astronomical" by Royal Navy officers, and keeping in service two different types of submarine (SSN and SSBN) with differing roles may simply no longer be affordable.

The new multi-role MUFC concept includes vertical-launch missile tubes to allow the submarines to fire both nuclear-tipped long-range missiles (possibly including Trident D5, or a lower cost but less capable ballistic missile) and conventionally-armed Tomahawk cruise missiles. An MoD source said. "By making the submarine more versatile, we get more value for our money and don’t have billions of pounds of capital investment tied up in a submarines that can never be used for anything except blowing up the world. ... It cost more than £9 billion to buy Trident [and the Vanguard SSBN's], and there is just no way we can justify that kind of money any more."

imagine a design that combines boomer with attack sub and put all kinds of capabilites in one sub.


[edit on 16-6-2005 by deltaboy]

how many Subs do we have by the way?

Here is my latest design for a mini-sub.

Thanks again for another intresting post on the Astute class SSNs. This caused me to look up some general available info on this class of boats.
I see that they are planning to launch tomahawks from the torpedo tubes.
The US Navy used this approach many years back but it tended to limit their available torpedo load outs so they opted for the vertical launch system in use today in their SSN. This system is however very expensive to build and maintain. I am hoping that the British will overcome this limitation with a larger torpedo room or eventually going to the VLS system.
Also the pump jet propulsor seems to be catching on. The first one I recall reading about was on a French boat. For now it seems to be the wave of the future.
They seem to be using a reactor proven out on a Trident class SSBN..this means very quiet systems..just what the doctor ordered. Bravo.
As to the picture posted by someone of the Seawolf boats. In the trades they are known as PierWolfs...as they are tied up to the piers most of the time broken. Very complex systems on them. This is not to say that they are not wonderful machings when they get them working..but the problems with complex or new systems is keeping them working. There is some merit to the philosophy...KISS...keep it simple stupid. Makes me wonder about the new F22s that are begining to show up just down the road from me. Time will tell.

Thanks again Paperplane.
Orangetom

Originally posted by orangetom1999
Thanks again for another intresting post on the Astute class SSNs. This caused me to look up some general available info on this class of boats.
I see that they are planning to launch tomahawks from the torpedo tubes.
The US Navy used this approach many years back but it tended to limit their available torpedo load outs so they opted for the vertical launch system in use today in their SSN. This system is however very expensive to build and maintain. I am hoping that the British will overcome this limitation with a larger torpedo room or eventually going to the VLS system.
Also the pump jet propulsor seems to be catching on. The first one I recall reading about was on a French boat. For now it seems to be the wave of the future.
They seem to be using a reactor proven out on a Trident class SSBN..this means very quiet systems..just what the doctor ordered. Bravo.
As to the picture posted by someone of the Seawolf boats. In the trades they are known as PierWolfs...as they are tied up to the piers most of the time broken. Very complex systems on them. This is not to say that they are not wonderful machings when they get them working..but the problems with complex or new systems is keeping them working. There is some merit to the philosophy...KISS...keep it simple stupid. Makes me wonder about the new F22s that are begining to show up just down the road from me. Time will tell.

Thanks again Paperplane.
Orangetom

thus the move to switching to the Virginia Class?

how many Subs do we have by the way?

Who are you talking about if its the U.S. then we have 56 attack subs and 16 bomber subs, but the pentagon seems to want in the next 10-15 years to raise the number of attack subs up to near 70.

Interesting... But from were do they get allt he money...?

Where the always get it from the tax payers and an insane defense budget that's going up every ear.

Originally posted by WestPoint23

how many Subs do we have by the way?

Who are you talking about if its the U.S. then we have 56 attack subs and 16 bomber subs, but the pentagon seems to want in the next 10-15 years to raise the number of attack subs up to near 70.

look at my location

Originally posted by orangetom1999
Thanks again for another intresting post on the Astute class SSNs. This caused me to look up some general available info on this class of boats.

When did i mention astute???????

I see that they are planning to launch tomahawks from the torpedo tubes.
The US Navy used this approach many years back but it tended to limit their available torpedo load outs so they opted for the vertical launch system in use today in their SSN. This system is however very expensive to build and maintain. I am hoping that the British will overcome this limitation with a larger torpedo room or eventually going to the VLS system.

We are already using the system in the S and T class boats and have done for 5 years now, including using them in anger at Afganistan and Iraq. This would suggest that the system works well enough. Your right that it reduces torpedo load, but the Astutes have a 50% increase in capacity over the T's.

Also the pump jet propulsor seems to be catching on. The first one I recall reading about was on a French boat. For now it seems to be the wave of the future.

Wave of the future????? We have been using them for over 20 years!!!
Pump jets are proven technology that are in use with most modern navies
UK, USA, France, Aus, Canada may have (cant remember what the upholders had), Russia and china both have designs but am not sure if any are in service. The first vessel with a pump jet was the second T boat, HMS Turbulent launched in dec 1982 and commisioned in 1984. (note: she fired 30 tomahawks during the iraq war, as i mentioned earlier)

They seem to be using a reactor proven out on a Trident class SSBN..this means very quiet systems..just what the doctor ordered. Bravo.

They are using the PRW2 reactor.

"The latest design of the PWR2 is the "Core H", which removes the need for refuelling, allowing a submarine to avoid two reactor refits in its service life. HMS Vanguard will be fitted with the new core during its refit, followed by its three sister ships. The Astute class submarines will have this full-life core installed. As they were developed for SSBNs, the reactors are considerably larger than those of current British SSNs. The diameter of Astute class hulls have therefore been increased to accommodate the PWR2.

Rolls-Royce claim that the Core H PWR2 can deliver six times the power of the original PWR1 and last four times as long."

As for the seawolf's you would know more than me.

[edit on 17-6-2005 by paperplane_uk]

the UK currently has 15 sub's in service.

4 Vangard class SSBN's
4 Swiftsure SSN's
7 Trafalgar class SSN's

It also has the first 3 Astute class SSN's being built by BAE sytems in Barrow (formerly VSEL [Vickers])

for full current royal navy listing see website below.
www.royalnavy.mod.uk...

Cool site... How many carriers does the British army have...? I found 3...

Considering that water is around a thousand times as dense as air and the size and shape of that thing, I think the drag penalties of such a sonar bulge would be enormous.

3 Invincible class STOVL carriers
1 Ocean Class Helicopter/assault Carrier

Thanks for your post.

I stand corrected. The propulsors are new in this neighborhood. I am sure they have undergone significant changes over the years but still propulsors. Makes me wonder what took us so long.

As to the reactors. yes I see the larger reactor increases hull size and hence accomodating the 50 percent increase in load out capacity in the torpedo rooms.
Also happening here ..the Reactors are designed for long lives before refuelings ...a very costly enterprise. Natural that they would take advantage of improved operating techniques and designs to prevent expensive refuelings. Its about time. Nuclear work is very costly.

Thanks again,
Orangetom

Any submarine named called the USS Jimmy Carter is doomed to be a failure (Sea Wolf #3).

Best sub for its day - German Type XXI

Sub that took the greatest technological leap (and my personal all time favorite) the Russian Alpha class - but noisy as hell.

Anyone who thinks that the Sea Wolf is a radical design will be amazed when they see me using my new fangled cell phone.

The Alpha was radical, Sea Wolf is just, well, evolutionary, the Virginia class even less so

Originally posted by Winchester Ranger T
Any submarine named called the USS Jimmy Carter is doomed to be a failure (Sea Wolf #3).

wat do u mean doom to failure? its just a name, people shouldnt be too superstitcious that they dink they gonna sink because of a name.