New Royal Navy Nuclear Submarine Commissioned

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

[AriesDW]

IS there any truth to the story that a USS Navy ship was left powerless for a couple of hours after its computers crashed and wouldnt reboot?

I doubt the part of the story that they were based on MS windows is true anyway. Ive been on trains where the doors won't open because the computer thinks it isn't in a station, but a warship shutting down???

Stu

HA HA HA! I would not put it past that happening. Especially depending on the period of which this happened and what vessels this was and in what number of the series it was in it's class. Some of our ships are pretty shaky. We are luckily killing off the Oliver Hazard Perry class - WHAT A NIGHTMARE they were. I am a fan of the Arliegh Burke class . . .

[subroc]

HA HA HA! Whew to that! I am happy to see a new sub coming out of the UK. It certainly is a head turner and I am sure she will be a damn good ship.

What happened to the Narwhals  class vessels (I think that is the name of the Missile sub last built in the UK which had a similar design style.)?

your not talking about the Vanguard class are you?

[Captain Davies]

I think he is, I did some looking and it is the most recent British Missile sub and has a very similar shape to the Astute.  I think it may be smaller though, here is a link for more info:

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/uk/slbm/vanguard.htm (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/uk/slbm/vanguard.htm)

[AriesDW]

Yes, Vanguard. I apologize for the mix up. I think this design looks fantastic. How are they fairing now-a-days?

[Captain Davies]

They are still the mainstay of the British Nuclear Submarine fleet, it will be many years before the Astute fully takes over that role.  For now the Vanguard are still used to carry the Trident nuclear missiles, I imagine the Astute was developed to specialize in carrying the replacement to Trident. 

The worrying thing about this is; the government has announced that it will go ahead with replacing Trident, and they made it sound like the final desicion was recently made.  But if the Astute (which would have been approved years ago) was originally made for the purpose of carrying a Trident replacement, then that would mean the government always intended to go ahead with the plan for renewal.  It is worrying to think that this desicion may have been made before public opinion was even expressed.  It is one of the reasons why an 'elective dictatorship' is bad.

[Stuart2007]

Who was it that once said "If democracy ever changed anything, they would abolish it."

I THINK it was Napoleon...

People don't want Trident replaced, generally. But when some of the unstable despots finally get nuclear bombs and aim them at us, the cry will be 'why didn't we replaced Trident'.

Basically, you are damned if you do. Destroyed if you don't.

Stu

[Captain Davies]

This government is desperate for more money, I'm sure they would not spend £72 billion ($144 billion) on some new missiles unless there really was a threat.

By the way, I think it was Napoleon too.  Which is odd, seeing as he was supposed to have the interests of the common man at heart, or so they claimed.

[Stuart2007]

This government is desperate for more money, I'm sure they would not spend £72 billion ($144 billion) on some new missiles unless there really was a threat.

By the way, I think it was Napoleon too.  Which is odd, seeing as he was supposed to have the interests of the common man at heart, or so they claimed.

Capt D. I agree with you on that whole hearted. The way they are scrabbling for money would be like you or I searching under the sofa for the odd 5pence.

As for Napoleon, any 'government' will claim that they are looking out for the common man.

Having travelled in Soviet run countries before the end of communism, I always remember a line which translated into English as "Trust the Government. The Government knows what you SHOULD be thinking".

Stu

[muns]

Just wait until the effects of the Smoking Ban are felt - a loss of duty on all those fag sales from the people who have given up = less money at the treasury = higher taxes.

[Captain Davies]

Yeah, and one thing's for sure, one of Brown's favourite past times is tax hikes!

[Captain Davies]

The reasons the stabalizing fins are on the hull instead of the conning tower is for the sake of operations below the ice of the artic.  Most older submarines had the fins mounted on the tower itself.

[AriesDW]

The reasons the stabalizing fins are on the hull instead of the conning tower is for the sake of operations below the ice of the artic.  Most older submarines had the fins mounted on the tower itself.

Yes, a perfect example is the Russian Typhoon class submarine. I personally think it is better to have the fore stabilizers on the bow rather than the conning tower. I think it makes a lot of sense.

[NAVY_JR]

They are still the mainstay of the British Nuclear Submarine fleet, it will be many years before the Astute fully takes over that role.  For now the Vanguard are still used to carry the Trident nuclear missiles, I imagine the Astute was developed to specialize in carrying the replacement to Trident. 

The worrying thing about this is; the government has announced that it will go ahead with replacing Trident, and they made it sound like the final desicion was recently made.  But if the Astute (which would have been approved years ago) was originally made for the purpose of carrying a Trident replacement, then that would mean the government always intended to go ahead with the plan for renewal.  It is worrying to think that this desicion may have been made before public opinion was even expressed.  It is one of the reasons why an 'elective dictatorship' is bad.

Hi there! First time poster - Vanguard is a SSBN and carries the Trident Strategic Deterrent (Nuclear Missiles to you and me)  Astute will be a SSN - an attack submarine meaning that it's role is both counter surface vessels and counter submarine.  Astute is not capable of either carrying or launching Nuclear Ballistic Missiles of any type.  On the CVF (future carrier) it's still 'on track' and expected to weigh in at around 50k - 55k tonnes, just over half the size of the largest US carriers.  Names will be the Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales.

[Orinoco]

Hi there! First time poster - Vanguard is a SSBN and carries the Trident Strategic Deterrent (Nuclear Missiles to you and me)  Astute will be a SSN - an attack submarine meaning that it's role is both counter surface vessels and counter submarine.  Astute is not capable of either carrying or launching Nuclear Ballistic Missiles of any type.  On the CVF (future carrier) it's still 'on track' and expected to weigh in at around 50k - 55k tonnes, just over half the size of the largest US carriers.  Names will be the Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales.

Greetings Navy_JR, may I assume you're a serving member of the RN?

[NAVY_JR]

Certainly am!  Currently serving as a senior OOW in a T23 based in P'mouth - should be going on to the Fleet Navigating Officers' Course early next year.

[Captain Davies]

Hi there! First time poster - Vanguard is a SSBN and carries the Trident Strategic Deterrent (Nuclear Missiles to you and me)  Astute will be a SSN - an attack submarine meaning that it's role is both counter surface vessels and counter submarine.  Astute is not capable of either carrying or launching Nuclear Ballistic Missiles of any type.  On the CVF (future carrier) it's still 'on track' and expected to weigh in at around 50k - 55k tonnes, just over half the size of the largest US carriers.  Names will be the Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales.

Well you do surprise me!  I guess the presence of the nuclear reactor confuddled me a little.  So I suppose this means the Astute is going to be used for cruise missiles, special forces insertions and such, which would also mean the Vanguard will be around for much, much longer.

It's good to hear that the Aricraft Carrier is still on course, is it just the one or two like originally planned?  We need them, it's definetly time to retire the three we have now which, if I'm not much mistaken were not even supposed to be aircraft carriers in the first place.

Finally, not wanting to sound like I know nothing about the Navy, but what sort of vessel is the T23?

[Orinoco]

Certainly am!  Currently serving as a senior OOW in a T23 based in P'mouth - should be going on to the Fleet Navigating Officers' Course early next year.

Type 23? Which one? I was gutted to see HMS Grafton get sold to Chile, we need more ships, not less. If you're OOW, how often do you get the Bridge?

What position are you aiming for? I was aiming for Warfare Officer (and potentially Captain :p) before I developed Asthma. 

[Stuart2007]

A Duke class frigate if I remember correctly.

I don't know much about the inner workings of RN (there are a few, select things, that I know little about ) but I would imagine that the main decisions are being made by our dear, dear Government and not the RN?

Are they actually any nearer to laying a keel for any of them yet?

Stu

[NAVY_JR]

A Type 23 is a frigate and is therefore configured, primarily, for Anti Submarine Warfare (ASW) although it is also a capable ASuW (Anti Surface Warfare) and AAW (Anti Air Warfare) platform. 

We've four watchkeepers appointed to the ship but we typically sail with 3 of us.  I'd have the ship for around 8 hours a day.

I'm currently aspiring to Navigate for my next appointment then go on to command a small ship (a P2000 partrol craft hopefully) after that a 'broadening appointment' shore based then on to Principal Warfare Officers' Course. 

As far as I know the plan is still for 2 CVF - although there has been no real confirmation.  It's a brave PM who axes the HMS QUEEN ELIZABETH and the HMS PRINCE OF WALES. 

On submarines all 3 classes (Swiftsure, Trafalgar and Vanguard) are nuclear powered - the last diesel electric subs were the Upholder class (1980s) which were sold to Canada in the late 1990s.

[Captain Davies]

As far as I know the plan is still for 2 CVF - although there has been no real confirmation.  It's a brave PM who axes the HMS QUEEN ELIZABETH and the HMS PRINCE OF WALES. 

I would imagine that the old carriers would be decomishoned if these new ones came into being, if that is the case I wonder what will happen to the name HMS Ark Royal, that name has been reserved for the flagship a very long time.

[Orinoco]

I would imagine that the old carriers would be decomishoned if these new ones came into being, if that is the case I wonder what will happen to the name HMS Ark Royal, that name has been reserved for the flagship a very long time.

Er, the flagship is HMS Illustrious. Before Illustrious, HMS Invincible was the flagship of the RN until she was decommissioned in 2005.

[Captain Davies]

Er, the flagship is HMS Illustrious. Before Illustrious, HMS Invincible was the flagship of the RN until she was decommissioned in 2005.

You're kidding me!    All the same, the Ark Royal is still a famous ship and if the old carriers are to be replaced then it won't be around any more.

[Orinoco]

Your kidding me!    All the same, the Ark Royal is still a famous ship and if the old carriers are to be replaced then it won't be around any more.

LOL! Don't worry, it's a common mistake that's made.

I agree it will be a shame to lose the Ark Royal, but no doubt the name will be re-incarnated in the future! 

[Stuart2007]

Er, the flagship is HMS Illustrious. Before Illustrious, HMS Invincible was the flagship of the RN until she was decommissioned in 2005.

As far as RN is concerned it might be illustrious but to the rest of the population, we will ALWAYS call the Ark Royal the flagship (even if the name is used on a rowing boat) .

Invincible hasn't been decommissioned. Just put into 5 day readiness storage.

In any case, since HMS Victory is the only battleship in RN commission, shouldn't Victory really be the flag ship?

Stu

[Captain Davies]

Well here's the conformation on those carriers, looks like Gordon Brown has a spending spree in mind.

This is from Reuters:

MoD gives go-ahead for aircraft carriers
 

By Jason Neely

European Aerospace & Airlines Correspondent

LONDON (Reuters) - The government gave the go-ahead on Wednesday for plans to spend 3.9 billion pounds to build two aircraft carriers, triggering a deal that will merge operations at the country's two largest shipbuilders.

The Ministry of Defence's decision to proceed with a formal order for the carriers came as part of an increased defence budget set to expand spending by 7.7 billion pounds from 2008 to 2011.

The carriers are to be called Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales and are due to enter service in 2014 and 2016, the ministry announced. That is later than the 2012 and 2014 targets cited in original plans, which date back to 1998.

The two 65,000-tonne carriers, which will be the largest ships ever to sail with the Royal Navy, are expected to each carry 36 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter combat jets, being built by Lockheed Martin, as well as four early warning aircraft.

As part of its announcement, the ministry said it had decided to keep open naval bases at Portsmouth, Plymouth and the Clyde in Scotland, allaying fears of a closure of at least one of the sites.

So it is to be using F-35s?  Makes sense, after all they are VTOL.  But I wonder if they remember this small but rather expensive aircraft called the EUROFIGHTER which is supposed to be capable of landing on carriers, especially ones this big!

Oddly, it isn't angled deck, on a ship of this size surely it would be worth making an angled deck so as to accomodate older aircraft aswell?