Britain's first three new Astute Class submarines will enter service over the course of the next few years. They will be called HMS Ambush, HMS Artful and HMS Astute. They'll be the most powerful submarines ever operated by the Royal Navy.
But the MoD is looking at having the futuristic Maritime Underwater Future Capability (MUFC) program to replace the Trafalgar Class submarines -
Britain's secret nuclear submarine plans
Reports say that Britain is secretly working on a replacement for its Trident nuclear missile submarines in a bid to maintain its status as one of the world's major nuclear powers.
By Michael Fishpool for ISN Security Watch
According to recent reports in The Scotsman and the US-based Defense News, Britain is secretly working on a replacement for its Royal Navy Trident ballistic missile submarines. The reports say that British Prime Minister Tony Blair is determined to have a replacement for the Trident-armed Vanguard class to maintain Britain as one of the world’s major nuclear powers. The Royal Navy currently operates four Vanguard-class Ship Submersible Ballistic Missile (SSBM) submarines – HMS Vanguard, Victorious, Vigilant, and Vengeance - from the Clyde naval base at Faslane in Scotland. Constructed by Vickers Shipbuilding & Engineering Limited (VSEL) at Barrow-in-Furness in Cumbria, the first Vanguard-class submarine (HMS Vanguard) entered service in 1994, with the last delivery in 2001 (HMS Vengeance). With each submarine capable of carrying up to 16 Trident D5 II submarine-launched nuclear ballistic missiles (SLBMs), each armed with up to 48 100-kiloton nuclear warheads, the Vanguard class is Britain’s sole nuclear deterrent and cost some £9 billion (over US$16.5 billion) to develop.
Meeting new international security requirements
While the Vanguard class is due to be decommissioned in about 2020, it was designed during the Cold War, and there is now a greater requirement for cost-effective, multi-role military equipment in the post-Cold War international security environment. As a result, it is believed that the British Ministry of Defence (MoD) is looking at enhancing the design for a new nuclear attack submarine, capable of firing both ballistic nuclear missiles and Tomahawk cruise missiles armed with conventional warheads, to fill the requirement for a successor to the Vanguard class. According to The Scotsman, the new submarine design could be based on the Maritime Underwater Future Capability (MUFC) program, which will involve major British defense companies like BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce. The MUFC, which was originally called the Future Attack Submarine (FASM) until 2001, is aimed at replacing the Royal Navy’s four Trafalgar-class Ship Submersible Nuclear (SSN) submarines by 2016. It would also initially augment the Royal Navy’s three Tomahawk-armed Astute-class SSN submarines - HMS Astute, Ambush, and Artful. These are currently being developed by BAE Systems at a cost of £2 billion to replace the Royal Navy’s seven Swiftsure SSN submarines between 2006–2009. Defense analysts believe that the MUFC could eventually replace the Astute class around 2030.
Shrouded in secrecy
There are presently few details available on the MUFC program, although it is believed that it has already entered the initial design stages. One of the main functions of the MUFC would be to undertake combat operations at long-range, using manned and remote-controlled undersea vehicles to attack the enemy. It is envisaged that the MUFC would fire vertical-launched missiles, rather than using the torpedo tubes as on the Astute, Swiftsure, and Trafalgar classes. The MUFC could also be equipped with mini-nuclear warheads to meet the requirements for a Vanguard-class successor. It has been widely speculated that Britain may already be involved in the research of mini-nuclear warheads with the US, which is looking to develop 1- to 5-kiloton mini-nuclear warheads capable of penetrating high-value underground military targets such as nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) weapons, as well as command and control facilities. Britain has a long history of close cooperation with the US on nuclear weapons development. Both countries signed the Agreement For Cooperation on the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defense Purposes (also known as the Mutual Defense Agreement, MDA) in 1958, which was amended in 1994 and is due for renewal before the end of this year. The agreement allows Britain and the US to exchange nuclear information and technology, and to collaborate on nuclear projects. The British-built warhead for the Trident D5 II SLBM is based on the US W76, while the missile itself was purchased from the US in the early 1980s to replace the US-designed Polaris SLBM on British submarines.
Money, the major stumbling block
In June 2002, The Observer newspaper claimed that the MoD was planning to expand and modernize the Atomic Weapons Establishment’s (AWE) 270-acre Aldermaston site in Berkshire to undertake research and development of the new mini-nuclear weapons. An article in The Guardian four months earlier alleged that the government had already given the AWE approval to undertake small nuclear explosions at the Aldermaston site. The allegations were, however, denied by the MoD and the government. Meanwhile, the New Scientist magazine reported in May 2003 that an AWE source had said that there were plans to increase staff at Aldermaston to cope with the new nuclear projects, while it was widely reported in December 2003 that the AWE had been given planning permission to construct a laser facility as part of the overall expansion of the Aldermaston site. The major stumbling block in the development of a new submarine to replace the Vanguard class is money. Many major defense projects for the British armed forces, such as the Astute-class SSN and the Eurofighter combat aircraft, have been criticized by the National Audit Office (NAO) for going over budget and taking too long to develop. The Royal Navy is particularly under scrutiny, with public money already being spent on the development of six Type 45 air defense destroyers and two 50’000-ton future aircraft carriers, being constructed by BAE Systems and due to enter service between 2007 and 2015. As a result, Tony Blair’s government could face a backlash from Labour party members if it approves another ambitious and expensive defense project.
Other, less expensive options
Defense analysts believe that a less expensive option would be to extend the service life of the Vanguard class as the US has done with its Trident-armed Ohio Class SSBM submarines. Indeed, the US Navy’s Ohio class, which has been in service since the 1980s, has had its service-life extended from 30 to 45 years as part of the 2002 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR). Such an option would not be difficult to pursue as the Vanguard class has many design similarities to the Ohio class, although the submarine’s core reactor would have to be replaced or modified. Significantly, the US is planning to order new and upgraded Trident D5A II SLBMs for some of its nuclear attack submarine fleet, replacing the D5 version, which is also used by the British. While Britain could purchase or lease the D5A missile from the US, it would have to either modify or replace the AWE-built warhead for the missile to continue in service. The US is also planning to upgrade its W76 warheads, and it has been reported that additional updated W88 warheads are on order for use on its Trident SLBMs. Another option would be to allow the Royal Air Force (RAF) to again become responsible for providing Britain’s nuclear deterrent. During the 1950s and the 1960s, the RAF’s ‘V-Force’ bombers and 60 US-loaned Thor Intermediate-Range Ballistic Missiles (IRBMs) were responsible for Britain’s nuclear deterrent until the Royal Navy was equipped with Polaris in 1966. The RAF continued to be equipped with the WE-177 free-fall nuclear bomb until they were withdrawn from service in 1998, leaving the Royal Navy’s 200-odd Trident SLBMs as Britain’s sole nuclear deterrent. Defense analysts suggest that the Future Offensive Air System (FOAS), which will meet the RAF’s requirement for a replacement for the Tornado GR4 fighter-bomber from 2017, would provide Britain with the ideal platform for an airborne nuclear capability. BAE Systems is currently considering a number of options for the aircraft’s design, including long-range bomber versions of the Eurofighter and the Lockheed F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). The principal armament of the FOAS is likely to include the next generation of air-launched cruise missiles, which could be equipped with nuclear warheads if the government decides to allow the RAF to go nuclear again. Such a decision would also suit the submarine’s future role in warfare, where it is expected to act more as a command and control centre to direct military operations rather than undertaking its traditional role of anti-submarine and anti-shipping warfare. This role would also suit the MoD by being cost-effective, allowing the MUFC to replace the Royal Navy’s entire submarine fleet by the time the Astute Class comes to the end of its service life.
MoD remains tight-lipped
Given the government’s secrecy over its nuclear program, it is unlikely that much information will emerge during 2004 on the proposals for a replacement. The government’s December 2003 defense white paper, Delivering Security in a Changing World, said that a decision on whether to replace Trident would not be made until after the next general election, due in 2006. In May 2004, the Royal Navy’s First Sea Lord Admiral Alan West added to the speculation when he told a conference held by the London-based Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) that a decision was expected within the next two to three years. The MoD, however, has said that no decision has yet been made.
Michael Fishpool is a London-based journalist and country analyst specializing in international security, defense, and EU affairs. He has written for a number of publications, including Jane's Security Sentinel and Nations of the World. He also runs the European Defence website (www.european-defence.co.uk).
A speculative graphic from the Sunday Telegraph illustrating several possible MUFC vehicles
Artist's impression of a Royal Navy "Future Underwater Vehicle (FUV)."
http://www.isn.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?ID=9062
But the MoD is looking at having the futuristic Maritime Underwater Future Capability (MUFC) program to replace the Trafalgar Class submarines -
Britain's secret nuclear submarine plans
Reports say that Britain is secretly working on a replacement for its Trident nuclear missile submarines in a bid to maintain its status as one of the world's major nuclear powers.
By Michael Fishpool for ISN Security Watch
According to recent reports in The Scotsman and the US-based Defense News, Britain is secretly working on a replacement for its Royal Navy Trident ballistic missile submarines. The reports say that British Prime Minister Tony Blair is determined to have a replacement for the Trident-armed Vanguard class to maintain Britain as one of the world’s major nuclear powers. The Royal Navy currently operates four Vanguard-class Ship Submersible Ballistic Missile (SSBM) submarines – HMS Vanguard, Victorious, Vigilant, and Vengeance - from the Clyde naval base at Faslane in Scotland. Constructed by Vickers Shipbuilding & Engineering Limited (VSEL) at Barrow-in-Furness in Cumbria, the first Vanguard-class submarine (HMS Vanguard) entered service in 1994, with the last delivery in 2001 (HMS Vengeance). With each submarine capable of carrying up to 16 Trident D5 II submarine-launched nuclear ballistic missiles (SLBMs), each armed with up to 48 100-kiloton nuclear warheads, the Vanguard class is Britain’s sole nuclear deterrent and cost some £9 billion (over US$16.5 billion) to develop.
Meeting new international security requirements
While the Vanguard class is due to be decommissioned in about 2020, it was designed during the Cold War, and there is now a greater requirement for cost-effective, multi-role military equipment in the post-Cold War international security environment. As a result, it is believed that the British Ministry of Defence (MoD) is looking at enhancing the design for a new nuclear attack submarine, capable of firing both ballistic nuclear missiles and Tomahawk cruise missiles armed with conventional warheads, to fill the requirement for a successor to the Vanguard class. According to The Scotsman, the new submarine design could be based on the Maritime Underwater Future Capability (MUFC) program, which will involve major British defense companies like BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce. The MUFC, which was originally called the Future Attack Submarine (FASM) until 2001, is aimed at replacing the Royal Navy’s four Trafalgar-class Ship Submersible Nuclear (SSN) submarines by 2016. It would also initially augment the Royal Navy’s three Tomahawk-armed Astute-class SSN submarines - HMS Astute, Ambush, and Artful. These are currently being developed by BAE Systems at a cost of £2 billion to replace the Royal Navy’s seven Swiftsure SSN submarines between 2006–2009. Defense analysts believe that the MUFC could eventually replace the Astute class around 2030.
Shrouded in secrecy
There are presently few details available on the MUFC program, although it is believed that it has already entered the initial design stages. One of the main functions of the MUFC would be to undertake combat operations at long-range, using manned and remote-controlled undersea vehicles to attack the enemy. It is envisaged that the MUFC would fire vertical-launched missiles, rather than using the torpedo tubes as on the Astute, Swiftsure, and Trafalgar classes. The MUFC could also be equipped with mini-nuclear warheads to meet the requirements for a Vanguard-class successor. It has been widely speculated that Britain may already be involved in the research of mini-nuclear warheads with the US, which is looking to develop 1- to 5-kiloton mini-nuclear warheads capable of penetrating high-value underground military targets such as nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) weapons, as well as command and control facilities. Britain has a long history of close cooperation with the US on nuclear weapons development. Both countries signed the Agreement For Cooperation on the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defense Purposes (also known as the Mutual Defense Agreement, MDA) in 1958, which was amended in 1994 and is due for renewal before the end of this year. The agreement allows Britain and the US to exchange nuclear information and technology, and to collaborate on nuclear projects. The British-built warhead for the Trident D5 II SLBM is based on the US W76, while the missile itself was purchased from the US in the early 1980s to replace the US-designed Polaris SLBM on British submarines.
Money, the major stumbling block
In June 2002, The Observer newspaper claimed that the MoD was planning to expand and modernize the Atomic Weapons Establishment’s (AWE) 270-acre Aldermaston site in Berkshire to undertake research and development of the new mini-nuclear weapons. An article in The Guardian four months earlier alleged that the government had already given the AWE approval to undertake small nuclear explosions at the Aldermaston site. The allegations were, however, denied by the MoD and the government. Meanwhile, the New Scientist magazine reported in May 2003 that an AWE source had said that there were plans to increase staff at Aldermaston to cope with the new nuclear projects, while it was widely reported in December 2003 that the AWE had been given planning permission to construct a laser facility as part of the overall expansion of the Aldermaston site. The major stumbling block in the development of a new submarine to replace the Vanguard class is money. Many major defense projects for the British armed forces, such as the Astute-class SSN and the Eurofighter combat aircraft, have been criticized by the National Audit Office (NAO) for going over budget and taking too long to develop. The Royal Navy is particularly under scrutiny, with public money already being spent on the development of six Type 45 air defense destroyers and two 50’000-ton future aircraft carriers, being constructed by BAE Systems and due to enter service between 2007 and 2015. As a result, Tony Blair’s government could face a backlash from Labour party members if it approves another ambitious and expensive defense project.
Other, less expensive options
Defense analysts believe that a less expensive option would be to extend the service life of the Vanguard class as the US has done with its Trident-armed Ohio Class SSBM submarines. Indeed, the US Navy’s Ohio class, which has been in service since the 1980s, has had its service-life extended from 30 to 45 years as part of the 2002 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR). Such an option would not be difficult to pursue as the Vanguard class has many design similarities to the Ohio class, although the submarine’s core reactor would have to be replaced or modified. Significantly, the US is planning to order new and upgraded Trident D5A II SLBMs for some of its nuclear attack submarine fleet, replacing the D5 version, which is also used by the British. While Britain could purchase or lease the D5A missile from the US, it would have to either modify or replace the AWE-built warhead for the missile to continue in service. The US is also planning to upgrade its W76 warheads, and it has been reported that additional updated W88 warheads are on order for use on its Trident SLBMs. Another option would be to allow the Royal Air Force (RAF) to again become responsible for providing Britain’s nuclear deterrent. During the 1950s and the 1960s, the RAF’s ‘V-Force’ bombers and 60 US-loaned Thor Intermediate-Range Ballistic Missiles (IRBMs) were responsible for Britain’s nuclear deterrent until the Royal Navy was equipped with Polaris in 1966. The RAF continued to be equipped with the WE-177 free-fall nuclear bomb until they were withdrawn from service in 1998, leaving the Royal Navy’s 200-odd Trident SLBMs as Britain’s sole nuclear deterrent. Defense analysts suggest that the Future Offensive Air System (FOAS), which will meet the RAF’s requirement for a replacement for the Tornado GR4 fighter-bomber from 2017, would provide Britain with the ideal platform for an airborne nuclear capability. BAE Systems is currently considering a number of options for the aircraft’s design, including long-range bomber versions of the Eurofighter and the Lockheed F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). The principal armament of the FOAS is likely to include the next generation of air-launched cruise missiles, which could be equipped with nuclear warheads if the government decides to allow the RAF to go nuclear again. Such a decision would also suit the submarine’s future role in warfare, where it is expected to act more as a command and control centre to direct military operations rather than undertaking its traditional role of anti-submarine and anti-shipping warfare. This role would also suit the MoD by being cost-effective, allowing the MUFC to replace the Royal Navy’s entire submarine fleet by the time the Astute Class comes to the end of its service life.
MoD remains tight-lipped
Given the government’s secrecy over its nuclear program, it is unlikely that much information will emerge during 2004 on the proposals for a replacement. The government’s December 2003 defense white paper, Delivering Security in a Changing World, said that a decision on whether to replace Trident would not be made until after the next general election, due in 2006. In May 2004, the Royal Navy’s First Sea Lord Admiral Alan West added to the speculation when he told a conference held by the London-based Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) that a decision was expected within the next two to three years. The MoD, however, has said that no decision has yet been made.
Michael Fishpool is a London-based journalist and country analyst specializing in international security, defense, and EU affairs. He has written for a number of publications, including Jane's Security Sentinel and Nations of the World. He also runs the European Defence website (www.european-defence.co.uk).
A speculative graphic from the Sunday Telegraph illustrating several possible MUFC vehicles
Artist's impression of a Royal Navy "Future Underwater Vehicle (FUV)."
http://www.isn.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?ID=9062
