SSBN(X): Follow on Ohio replacement; News and info

[F-15 Eagle]

http://armedservices.house.gov/pdfs/SEF012010/Labs_Testimony012010.pdf

Here is just a little bit of info that I found so far:

* The Navy plans on buy 12 new SSBN(X) subs to replace 14 Oho class SSBNs

* The new ships will displace 15,000 tons making them twice as big as a Virginia class submarine....which is no surprise.

* They will be armed with 16 strategic ballistic missiles.

 

[MrQuintus]

http://armedservices.house.gov/pdfs/SEF012010/Labs_Testimony012010.pdf

Here is just a little bit of info that I found so far:

* The Navy plans on buy 12 new SSBN(X) subs to replace 14 Oho class SSBNs

* The new ships will displace 15,000 tons making them twice as big as a Virginia class submarine....which is no surprise.

* They will be armed with 16 strategic ballistic missiles.

sounds like the vanguard class to me, the chances of a joint US/UK design just went through the roof

 

[Ananda]

http://armedservices.house.gov/pdfs/SEF012010/Labs_Testimony012010.pdf

Here is just a little bit of info that I found so far:

* The Navy plans on buy 12 new SSBN(X) subs to replace 14 Oho class SSBNs

* The new ships will displace 15,000 tons making them twice as big as a Virginia class submarine....which is no surprise.

* They will be armed with 16 strategic ballistic missiles.

15,000 tons and 16 missiles...that's in same legue with Borei's..
Just wandering if there's already some unwritten agrrement between Russia and US on the size and capacity for the next generations boomers.
Perhaps they will cemented on the next START ?

 

[StevoJH]

15,000 tons and 16 missiles...that's in same legue with Borei's..
Just wandering if there's already some unwritten agrrement between Russia and US on the size and capacity for the next generations boomers.
Perhaps they will cemented on the next START ?

Its Probably some sort of efficiency sweetspot, as the Vanguard and new french ships are also fairly similar.

 

[AndrewMI]

sounds like the vanguard class to me, the chances of a joint US/UK design just went through the roof

Agreed. Hopefully lessons learned from both the Astute and Virginia class will be incorporated into this design, and any future SSN.

 

[Ananda]

Its Probably some sort of efficiency sweetspot, as the Vanguard and new french ships are also fairly similar.

Well considering that Virginia was planned to replace the Los Anggeles close to one on one ratio, and Virginia is larger and more expensive (even in constant index USD value), then US not realy in the efficiency mode with the SSN fleet.
In such US still financially able to have 20 or 24 missiles boomers for the next gen SSBN.

From other forum I heard that the next START, US and Russia will keep 2(Russia):3(US) ratio on SLBM. Borei's is planned to be 8 boats, whille SSBN(X) according to this will be 12, and will have simmilar dimmensions and missiles capacity to Borei . It's 2:3 ratio.

Can't anybody confirm that ?

 

[F-15 Eagle]

15,000 tons and 16 missiles...that's in same legue with Borei's..
Just wandering if there's already some unwritten agrrement between Russia and US on the size and capacity for the next generations boomers.
Perhaps they will cemented on the next START ?

No there is no agreement on the size or capacity for SSBNs. The Borei's are new so the US wants the SSBN(X) to counter the Borei class subs. The arms race is still going on.

 

[Grim901]

sounds like the vanguard class to me, the chances of a joint US/UK design just went through the roof

The missile compartment is already being jointly designed, except that the British version will lose 4 tubes.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

The missile compartment is already being jointly designed, except that the British version will lose 4 tubes.

I think the new SSBN(X) will be a larger version of the Virginia class.

 

[Belesari]

I think the new SSBN(X) will be a larger version of the Virginia class.

Probably. The need for such a HUGE amount of warheads on one vehicle now is far less. Plus this should make them more efficent and need less crew etc.

Plus makes it harder for the enemy attack subs etc to take out our boats. Wonde if they will try to use many of the same parts from the virginia class?

 

[Ananda]

I think the new SSBN(X) will be a larger version of the Virginia class.

From what I gather the last time US used SSN as development base for SSBN, was at the time of the OLd George Washinton SSBN (based on Skipjack SSN). From what I've read, USN never used Sturgeon and Los Angeles Class SSN as a basis for SSBN development.

Why now using Virginia as the basis for SSBN(X) ?

 

[MrQuintus]

The missile compartment is already being jointly designed, except that the British version will lose 4 tubes.

That was something gordan brown spouted at a press conferance and has had no bearing on the actual design study, just as his proposal to cut to 3 hull was ignored. It would make no sense for a joint hull design to differ in such a way.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

From what I gather the last time US used SSN as development base for SSBN, was at the time of the OLd George Washinton SSBN (based on Skipjack SSN). From what I've read, USN never used Sturgeon and Los Angeles Class SSN as a basis for SSBN development.

Why now using Virginia as the basis for SSBN(X) ?

They are using the design, but it will be twice the size because the Virginia class design is proven so if they just make one 15,000 tons and put 16 missiles they are good to go plus its cheaper than building a whole new design.

Probably. The need for such a HUGE amount of warheads on one vehicle now is far less. Plus this should make them more efficent and need less crew etc.

Plus makes it harder for the enemy attack subs etc to take out our boats. Wonde if they will try to use many of the same parts from the virginia class?

16 missiles is still the same amount as it was during the cold war.

And yes I think they will use some of the design elements from the Virginia class and incorporate it in the SSBN(X) but just make it larger.

 

[hunter3203]

They are using the design, but it will be twice the size because the Virginia class design is proven so if they just make one 15,000 tons and put 16 missiles they are good to go plus its cheaper than building a whole new design.



16 missiles is still the same amount as it was during the cold war.

And yes I think they will use some of the design elements from the Virginia class and incorporate it in the SSBN(X) but just make it larger.

The Ohio class boats have 24 missiles. Previous US SSBN's did use 16 missiles.

 

[Belesari]

They are using the design, but it will be twice the size because the Virginia class design is proven so if they just make one 15,000 tons and put 16 missiles they are good to go plus its cheaper than building a whole new design.



16 missiles is still the same amount as it was during the cold war.

And yes I think they will use some of the design elements from the Virginia class and incorporate it in the SSBN(X) but just make it larger.

I was saying if they wanted the smaller numbers of tubes as someone mentioned.

 

[fretburner]

And yes I think they will use some of the design elements from the Virginia class and incorporate it in the SSBN(X) but just make it larger.

Maybe the hull design and modularity?

They do have VERY different roles, and I don't think the SSBN(X) would need those sonars/controls which allows the Virginia to navigate on shallow waters and stay still even strong undersea currents.

What happens though to those SSBNs which were converted to carry tomahawks? Weren't there 2 Ohio-class subs that were converted?

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Maybe the hull design and modularity?

They do have VERY different roles, and I don't think the SSBN(X) would need those sonars/controls which allows the Virginia to navigate on shallow waters and stay still even strong undersea currents.

What happens though to those SSBNs which were converted to carry tomahawks? Weren't there 2 Ohio-class subs that were converted?

4 were converted and IMO in addition to the 12 SSBN(X) subs they should build 4 more of the same design such as SSGN(X) to replace the 4 Ohio class SSGNs as well instead of just retiring them with no replacement that the Navy is planing on right now.

 

[Belesari]

4 were converted and IMO in addition to the 12 SSBN(X) subs they should build 4 more of the same design such as SSGN(X) to replace the 4 Ohio class SSGNs as well instead of just retiring them with no replacement that the Navy is planing on right now.

Which is a great thing those ships can put one heck of a world of hurt on someone.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Which is a great thing those ships can put one heck of a world of hurt on someone.

I agree, I don't know why the USN wants to retire the SSGN fleet without a proper replacement.

 

[kev 99]

That was something gordan brown spouted at a press conferance and has had no bearing on the actual design study, just as his proposal to cut to 3 hull was ignored. It would make no sense for a joint hull design to differ in such a way.

There's plenty of speculation from several years before Mr Brown made his announcements that the UK successor class would have a reduced number of ballistic missiles tubes, most of the information available suggests 12 tubes, I very much doubt that the US and UK will have a common class of SSBN, even allowing for a common missile compartment, the USN one will almost certainly be larger and more expensive.