BBC News looks at the newest nuclear-powered attack submarine in the Royal Navy, HMS Astute:
It is the stealthiest sub ever built in the UK, able to sit in waters off the coast undetected, listening to mobile phone conversations or delivering the UK’s special forces where needed.
The 39,000 or so acoustic panels which cover its surface mask its sonar signature, meaning it can sneak up on enemy warships and submarines alike, or simply lurk unseen and unheard at depth.
The submarine can carry a mix of up to 38 Spearfish heavyweight torpedoes and Tomahawk Land Attack Cruise missiles, able to target enemy submarines, surface ships and land targets, while its sonar system has a range of 3,000 nautical miles.
[. . .]
HMS Astute itself should never need refuelling over the next 25 years, thanks to the latest nuclear-powered technology which means it can circumnavigate the world submerged.
It even creates the crew’s oxygen from seawater as it sails, meaning that the air on board is no longer heavy with diesel fumes, as submariners used to complain of older vessels. The only limit to how long it can stay underwater is the amount of food on board, enough for 90 days at sea.
Rather a big step up from the diesel-electric clunkers we bought from them, wouldn’t you say? H/T to Adrian MacNair for the link.
Rather a big step up in capability, yes, but an enormous step up in price (at all stages of design and build) as well. I don’t hold with received wisdom in this country that the boats were a bad bargain. First, they were designed and built by the same mean as the Astute-class; second, they were an intermediary class between Vanguard and Astute, essentially nuclear attack submarines in profile but with a diesel-electric power train (much quicker and cheaper to build and maintain); third, the Upholder/Victoria class were outfitted by the British with equipment normally reserved for nuclear vessels, and; finally, while the Astute has the range of a nuclear powered vessel it only has the stealth of a diesel-electric thanks to new technologies including (but not limited to) the anechoic tiles cited by the article.
If Canadians are prepared to spend the money, we can have our own nuclear submarines in a generation or so. Of course, if Canadians were prepared to spend the money, we could have built our own diesel-electric boats and the British would not have had us bitching at them for doing us a favour instead of selling them to Brazil (which was the rumoured first choice at the time).
Comment by Flea — September 5, 2010 @ 19:13
The same “men”. PIMF. I am sure there are other typos as well. My apologies.
Comment by Flea — September 5, 2010 @ 19:14
I was certainly in favour of the deal initially, but as the extent of the problems became apparent, I started to think that our “bargain” would end up costing as much as or more than if we’d bought brand new boats. It’s pretty much a certainty that the government of the day would not have provided funds for a purchase of new subs — and the current government would not do so either.
As long as we claim sovereignty over the “Canadian” Arctic, we’ll need to have military equipment to allow us to enforce those claims. Submarines are a significant extension of our ability to do this. Nuclear-powered boats would be even better. But your point is valid that Canadian governments (reflecting the head-in-the-sand viewpoint of too many Canadians) will not take the necessary steps to equip the Canadian Forces with the tools they need to do the job.
Comment by Nicholas — September 6, 2010 @ 01:11