inside look at royal navys new sub (video and pics)

damn sub looks fudging impresive with a price tags of 3billion
can stay under water for 3 month (only because they can hold enough food for 3 months ) by generating its own air using filters,
no periscope just digital cameras located in key locations

video

That would be the new Astute class, correct?

Rather funky machines them..makes we want to join the Navy!

Originally posted by stumason
That would be the new Astute class, correct?

Originally posted by stumason

Rather funky machines them..makes we want to join the Navy!

thats what i was thinking
would love to go in one

To be honest, i wasn't aware the Astutes where already under construction.

Goes to show that, despite reports to the contrary, the Royal Navy is not being "scaled back" or cut down, but rather being modernised.

There will of course be a changeover period from the old ASW Royal Navy of the Cold War to the new Expeditionary-style Royal Navy of the 21st Century. We just have to be patient. By 2015, the Royal Navy will be the best Navy in the world, after the USN of course, who just have an obscene amount of ships!

bbc

"It's a mean looking beast. I think it looks like the alien," remarks Chris Nelson of BAE Systems, as we walk round the front of the Royal Navy's new Astute submarine in Barrow.

Looming above us is a construction shed 12 storeys high. Within it are three nuclear-powered submarines at different stages of construction.

And as a huge, red neon sign reminds the workforce, the first one is now just 32 days away from launch.

But to judge by the scaffolding surrounding it, it's hard to believe it's going to be ready on time.

"I'm determined it will be," says operations director Nigel Ward. "However it's a nuclear submarine, and lots of things can go wrong."

info on the build from the bbc
they are expecting 2-3 more subs to built (if they get the order)

I think the first sub of the class, HMS Astute, is due for launching very soon (a month or so, all being well).

These seem like excellent subs, though - are we only replacing the Swiftsures with these, or will we be replacing the Trafalgar-class subs too?

I imagine the Trafalgars will be replaced with something else since the last of their class is due to be phased out by the 2020s... though I believe HMS Trafalgar itself will be out of service within the next year or two.

I think current plans are initially to have the Astutes replace the Swiftsure Class, but depending on future order's, they may well also replace the Trafalgars as well.


EDIT: We only have 2 Swiftsure's in service now anyway and the Trafalgar is essentially an upgraded design of a Swiftsure, so it seems likely they will go as well.

[edit on 8/5/07 by stumason]

That is a very cool submersible.

I'm not very educated in hydrodynamics or submarine design, so I'm wondering what
the fins in the front section are used for.


Like I said, a great sub for a historically great navy.

I would'nt expect less from the navy of the country that the phrase "The Sun never sets on
the British Empire" originates from.

I've always been a fan of the Royal Navy, such a great history. I think they were only scaling back their surface fleet though? The new sub looks awesome, cant wait to see footage of her leaving port!!!

[edit on 5/9/2007 by ludaChris]

THe fins in the front of the submarine is a set of what are called bow planes used for diving and surfacing. They offer a certain amount of stability when placed that far foreward.

Many navys use these planes mounted on the side of the sail structure...where the men often ride on top of the submarine. Some navys use this configuration of bow planes in a retractable configuration where they will retract flush with the hull.

This appears to be a fast attack configuration...not a boomer.

The building where they are built seems to do both the ring sections, mounted vertical on blocks, and then by cranes turned horizontal to mount equipment in them before joining the sections together to form the complete hull. Quite an operation to see it done from begining to end.
The buildings in which they are built offer protection from the enviornment meaning the welding processes can be more carefully and finely controlled from outside enviornmental factors. It also means more controlability from outside cleanliness factors. These too can be controlled. Very necessary ..especially in nuclear reactor work.

The completed boats are slowly moved by crawler units working together ...outside of these builidings to a platten and then finally when ready lowered intot the water by a floating drydock type arrangement. This too is quite a operation to witness. Very complex to coordinate all the trades necessary to accomplish each of these steps. Everyone must be on the same page when you do this and it takes most of a day to accomplish.

Nice looking boat here.

Thanks,
Orangetom

Great post bodrul.

It was very astute of the BAe Rep to mention the renegotiation of the original contract as it most certainly is £900M over budget and let's face it, almost every project BAe is involved in, never comes in on time and almost always costs we poor taxpayers, more money.

Having said that, sub in question look really good and I for one, remembers hot bunking at RAF Scampton during Exercise 'Mad Mick' and know that it is really bad. I am so pleased that the crew have their own bunks, finally!

Armed with the advanced BAe Naval Staff Target 7525 that has a range of 30 miles (low) or 12 1/2 miles (fast) speed, the Astute class of subs will be a fearsome opponent for any navy, anywhere in the world.

What makes the Astute even more deadly, is the Spearfish's ability to think for itself and the propulsion unit (Sundstrand turbine/pump-jet) makes it one of the fastest and quietest anti-sub torpedo in the world.

The Astute will be armed for 'hard' targets with the Raytheon (BAe)built Tomahawk Block IV cruise missile which, unsurprisingly, will be launched via the torpedo tubes, instead of verticle tubes.

(The latter measure I believe, was part of the cost cutting and part of the renegotiations of the new contract)

By having no verticle launch tubes, does this preclude the use of nuclear weapons? Would it not be better for the boat to be dual role, thus saving the taxpayer billions of £s?

Fritz,

Hot bunking... the bane of the LA Class boats which never endeared the crew to this class of submarine.

The Virginia class is way over budget too. Common Knowlege.
The USS North Carolina went into the water recently. Still undergoing outfitting but just waterborne now. I got to see her in the floating drydock recently before they let her down and afloat. Always good to see a boat go into the water where she was designed to go.

As to launching Tomahawks from a torpedo tube..no that should not prevent their usage with "special warheads." THe original set up here stateside was with torpedo tubes ..not vertical launch systems.

And yes...the vertical launch system is a very costly add on to a boat.

My impression of thes Astute class boats is that they have a larger torpedo room to accomodate a larger weapons load out than do our boats. Mix of both torpedos and tomahawk.

Thanks,
Orangetom

Originally posted by ludaChris
I think they were only scaling back their surface fleet though?

The Royal Navy is basically undergoing a major modernisation programme - moving away from Cold War configuration (especially the anti-submarine role... the current aircraft carriers are designed primarily for ASW aircraft, for instance) to a new, expeditionary role which is especially important post-9/11.

There's plenty going on - the Astutes, the new carriers (and the replacement of the Harriers with F-35s), the Type 45 Destroyers, the Albion landing platforms, the planning for the successors to the Vanguard-class subs (which carry Britain's Trident missiles) that I can think of off the cuff.

It's true the numbers have been cut, and I'm very disappointed with that, but I hope that once these ships prove capable (which they appear to be) then the government will invest in more of them.

orangetom1999, that was my 'take' on this issue, but was not too sure.

I am not a deep water expert unlike those found within these pages, as I have no experience of such matters.

I have however, always advocated a British Nuclear Deterrent, but one that is totally Independent and free of any and all controls by the US.

Submarine based, certainly. Trident? Certainly not! An absolute waste of Taxpayer's money @ £25-30B.

With the 3 Astute submarines being built with, if I read bodrul correctly, another 3 to be ordered, then the UK has the chance to upgrade it's deterrent.

Bin Trident and build the other 3 Astute class subs and arm them solely with Tomahawk SLBMs with nuclear warheads.

Spot on Fritz. I also think Trident is a waste of resources. In this day an age it represents (forgive me) complete overkill. A fleet of (nuclear) cruise armed Astutes would provide an effective and flexible deterrent. I'd be interested to hear from anyone who could do a cost comparison between the proposed Trident replacement and a feet of say 9 (multi-role) Astutes. My only concern is whether the current generation of Tomahawks are up to the task.

Fritz,

I like what they have done to four of our Trident class boomers.

Due to some kind of treaty arrangements they have re outfitted these four Trident class boomers to be a type of arsenal ship. They are modified to carry about 7 tomahawk missles per tube. 24 tubes...that alot of tomahawk. The key factor in this turn around was that these boats still had alot of reactor core left in them. It also represents a wise investment of the taxpayers moneys as these boats were very expensive to build.

Also there is talk of modifying at least two of the missle tubes for the SEAL type teams and thier equipment load outs. This would be ideal for SAS and special boat squadrons. THese boats are most certainly capable of the special team loadouts in equipment.

Also there is talk of fitting out some of the tubes to handle Remotely operated Vehicles. ROVs. This seems to be a field which is taking off. Somewhat hush hush in the underwater world but I am sure progress is being made outside of the public spotlight.

Thanks for your post,
Orangetom

Orangetom, that was a really interesting post. I had no idea - and why should I, about the keeny-meeny stuff re SAS/SBS or even RPV/ROVs.

Surfice to say my friend, that we have enough subs out there for SF use as it is. They are not too old, their reactors are sound.

I do take issue about Trident. I have said time and time again, that Trident DIII/DIV or whatever configuration they came up with, it still represents an obscene waste of money.

I view issues like this with a black and white methodology and I recon the questions that should be asked are these:

Do we need a truely independent (of America) nuclear deterrent? Yes we do.

Are we ever likely to use nuclear weapons, even in the heat of the moment or, more likely, in retaliation? Perhaps in the heat of the moment, if a foreign power launched a nuclear attack on the UK. In retaliation to a radiological attack by a terrorist organisation - I very much doubt it!

Who are the supposed/proposed enemies who we envisage we need to defend against? Russia? I seriously doubt it. China? Why should China become our enemy? India or Pakistan? Again, I seriously doubt it.

Those damned French? Of course!

In light of the advanced weapons platform that is Astute, do we really need another submarine weapons platform? No!

Would Tomahawk Block IV do the same job as a Trident? Yes. But on a much smaller scale and at a range of 648 miles. (Later updates will obviously have greater ranges)

Do we need Trident? No! No, and again No!

Originally posted by fritz
Bin Trident and build the other 3 Astute class subs and arm them solely with Tomahawk SLBMs with nuclear warheads.

It depends on what you want. Tomahawk is a cruise missile. Trident is a ballistic missiles. Trident has a longer range and will not get shot down by AAA.

Regards

Originally posted by stumason
I think current plans are initially to have the Astutes replace the Swiftsure Class, but depending on future order's, they may well also replace the Trafalgars as well.

Currently, three Astute class (SSN's) are to replace nine attack submarines in service. At best (if another four are ordered) there will only be seven boats built...

fritz and others,

NO problem on the other boats being more than able to handle the SAS/SBS equipment load outs.

I believe that though our various teams train together, they often have different loadouts in equipment, depending of course on mission requirements.

As I recall the original intent was to scrap these four boomers under treaty arrangements so that they would not be used as ICBM platforms. It was realized that with plenty of core life remaining that they could be modified to the role of Arsenal Ships and still comply with treaty requirements.

I was also quite surprised recently to view on Google Earth the navy base at Pearl Harbor, Oahu, Hawaii. I counted 11 submarines between the dry docks and the piers. Thats alot of boats in one harbor. This does not include those out on patrols. Compared to the 5 boats just south of me in Norfolk, Virginia this means that whatever they are doing in the Pacific they are very very busy. These fast attacks do certain work with the various Teams ...depending of course on the equipment loadouts.

These Trident class modified boats will help alot with the mission requirements as far as equipment availability. I do know that as of recently there was an older class boomer ..the USS Kamehameha already configured for special team missions including dry deck shelters mounted onto two of the old missle tubes.
These drydeck shelters contain a garage for the mini submarines and also a decompression chamber. High pressure air for operating the chambers and also electricity would be routed to these chambers through umbilical lines running up the missle tubes.
This is just another configuration for getting more from the already expended taxpayer dollar.

I saw some of these drydeck shelters being built here at this shipyard some years back. It was obvious what they were when I realized it was a parking garage complete with bumper guards and a decompression chamber. THe very high pressure valves were the give away.

Paraphi has a point about the range of these missles verses the ICBMs of the boomers. Much longer range. There are to my knowlege different variants of the Tomahawk with longer range but I am not sure if these are air launched versions or the sea launched. Seems to me that there are some versions with range over a thousand miles.

The Virginia class boats here are begining to come on line. It has been a long learning curve for all involved. At the same time the quest for financing is becoming a problem as it is in the UK.
I get the impression that it is the same with this Astute class of boats...the learning curve I mean. Moneys have always been a problem and growing worse. I believe however it has been some time since the industrys in the UK have actually built a boat from the bottom up. It takes time to redevelope the skills and know how..and then you have to keep and maintain them or lose the whole system again..only to start from scratch. It has happened here.

The thing which browns my backside...is that many of these politicians and armchair experts want our people to do the job with olde outdated equipment while they make statements from their offices of new furniture and/or the country club. This always struck me as a very cheap shot on our people in uniform of whom they require to take risks for the State.


Thanks for your posts,
Orangetom