New Nukes: Britain’s Next-Gen Missile Submarines

Mar 20, 2013 15:25 UTC by Defense Industry Daily staff

HMS Vanguard
(click to view full)

“We are committed to working towards a safer world in which there is no requirement for nuclear weapons… However, the continuing risk from the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and the certainty that a number of other countries will retain substantial nuclear arsenals, mean that our minimum nuclear deterrent capability, currently represented by Trident, is likely to remain a necessary element of our security.”     – UK SDSR, 1998

Britain has a big decision to make: do they remain a nuclear weapons power, or not? In an age of collapsing public finances and an uncertain long-term economic future, the money needed to design new nuclear missile submarines is a huge cost commitment that could crowd out other needs. Then again, in an age of collapsing non-proliferation frameworks, clear hostility from ideologies that want nuclear weapons, and allies who are less capable and dependable, the downside of renouncing nuclear weapons is a huge risk commitment. Pick one, or the other. There is no free lunch.

This article covers that momentous decision for Britain, and the contracts and debates associated with it.

Contracts & Key Events

Britain’s government took the first big steps in 2006-2007, a joint US-UK “Common Missile Compatment” project was launched in 2008, and initial gate approval for Britain’s “Successor” project followed in 2011. Other contracts have followed, covering design, infrastructure, and even the new kind of nuclear reactor the submarines are expected to use.

March 19/13: Politics. With an SNP-sponsored debate on Trident set to take place in the Scottish Parliament this week, a Labour Party that depends on its advantage in Scotland needs to be clear on its policy. British media are reporting that the Labour Party is looking to backtrack slightly, and propose replacing the 4 Vanguard Class submarines with just 3 successors. Labour Shadow Defence Secretary Jim Murphy continues to support the idea of a Trident replacement, saying that:

“North Korea is trying to develop nuclear weapons, as is Iran. If they do, then Saudi Arabia and Turkey may do the same. The UK shouldn’t just give up our nuclear deterrent by ourselves…. The precise shape of the future deterrent will be based on capability and cost.”

See: UK BBC | Daily Record | The Guardian | The Telegraph | left-wing New Statesman magazine.

March 7/13: Scotland. With a 2014 referendum looming that could deprive the UK of its nuclear submarine base in Scotland, Britain’s House of Commons Scottish Affairs Committee weighs in. Bottom line? The SNP seems to have taken a leaf from their counterparts in Quebec, Canada, and decided to be extremely vague regarding their plans in a potentially controversial area. After all, 6,700 work at Falsane and Coulport now, which is expected to rise to 8,100 after they house all of Britain’s Astute and Trafalgar Class boats and other facilities. Parliament will be pressing the issue hard and publicly:

“Unfortunately, the Scottish Government has gone on evasive manoeuvres over the issue of what they will really do in the event of Separation. Their response dodges the central question, which is what they really mean by their stated policy of the ‘speediest safe transition’ of Trident from Scotland. As we said in our report, in reality, Trident can be deactivated within a matter of days and the warheads removed from Scotland within twenty four months. In the process, the UK would lose the ability to operate its nuclear deterrent. Alternatively, it would take approximately 25 years for new facilities to be created elsewhere in the UK. We believe the Scottish Government must be honest and open about their intentions. Tomorrow we will be taking evidence from the Convener and Shop Stewards at the Coulport and Faslane. They represent the workers who will bear the brunt of job loss…”

Really? 25 years? If so, the whole issue of the Successor Class could become moot very quickly. Which would be fine with the SNP, who want to eliminate the Trident program if Scotland does vote to stay in the UK. Expect to hear more of this sort of to-and-fro, what with another 5,000 jobs on the line in shipbuilding, 15,000 in the UK government 4 Army infantry battalions, 2 Royal Marine Commando units and 5 squadrons of Tornado and Typhoon fighter aircraft in Scotland. UK HoC | SNP | Aviation Week | The Scotsman.

Feb 13/13: Reactors. The UK MoD signs a 10-year, GBP 800 million (then about $1.2 billion) contract with Rolls Royce, financing the Submarines Enterprise Performance Programme (SEPP) envisioned in the 2010 SDSR. The goal is to consolidate costs under one contract with consistent incentives, and improve operational efficiency in the infrastructure that delivers and supports the UK’s naval nuclear propulsion systems. They’re hoping for a GBP 200 million saving over this 10 years. Time will tell.

SEPP isn’t technically part of any one program. Contracts for products and services to deliver and support the submarine programs themselves will continue in parallel. Royal Navy | Rolls Royce.

Jan 25/13: Electrical. HMS Vengeance’s GBP 350 million Long Overhaul Period and Refuel (LOP(R)) will feature a switch that’s likely to be a precursor for Britain’s next-generation SSBNs. Vengeance is replacing the maintenance-heavy rotating machinery of motor generators (MGs) with fixed solid-state Main Static Converters (MSCs), as a key component of the boat’s electrical system.

The new MSCs are derived from the system developed for Britain’s Astute Class SSNs, but adapted for the higher power requirements of an SSBN. They also had to be smaller, due to space limitations in the Vanguards. Finally, they had to successfully integrate into the Vanguard submarines’ existing electrical, control, and coolant systems. Installations have now begun, and a modified version is almost certain to to be part of Britain’s Successor Class. Its designers are likely to be watching the MSCs’ performance in the Vanguards closely. Babcock, via ASD.

Dec 18/12: The British Ministry of Defense submits its 2012 report to Parliament [PDF] on the future nuclear deterrent, noting the ramp up in public and private resources via an Integrated Programme Management Team (IPMT). A whole boat System Definition Review is scheduled to take place in 2013. With respect to the big items:

“Of the [GBP] 3Bn we plan to spend in the Assessment Phase, the expenditure to the end of Financial Year 2011/2012 has totalled [GBP] 315M. This is some [GBP] 30M lower than expected at the time of the Initial Gate approval, principally as a result of slower than expected manpower build-up in our Industrial partners… still expects to deliver the Assessment Phase within the approved cost of [GBP] 3Bn… Current forecast costs, including planned SEPP efficiency measures, indicate that we remain within the 2006 White Paper estimates of [GBP] 11-14Bn (at 2006/7 prices) for the Successor platform costs (assuming a four boat fleet).

The 2006 White Paper also recognised that investment of [GBP] 4-6Bn (at 2006/7 prices) would be required for supporting infrastructure and a replacement warhead ([GBP] 2-3 Bn for each element). As set out in the 2011 report, the MOD plans to spend some [GBP] 8M between 2011 and 2013 assessing the requirement for additional infrastructure investment. The 2011 report also noted that a decision on whether to refurbish or replace the existing warhead design could be deferred until the next Parliament, as the current warhead design is now planned to continue in service until the 2030s.”

Oct 29/12: Design contracts. The UK commits GBP 350 million to design their next-generation SSBN submarine, which will incorporate CMC. The work will be divided GPB 315 million to BAE Systems, who already has over 1,000 people working on this program, and a further GBP 38 million to Babcock. This award is part of the GBP 3 billion design phase (vid. May 18/11 entry).

The current Vanguard Class submarines are scheduled for replacement from 2028, and Britain is busy moving its entire submarine force to Falsane in Scotland, which will grow to 8,000 jobs by 2017.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, who leads Britain’s Liberal Democrat party, angrily denounced the way the move was presented by the government. The government presented it as another step toward renewing the submarine deterrent, but Clegg sees that as ‘jumping the gun.’ His party has set up a review that’s looking at options like shorter-range cruise missiles launched from the torpedo tubes of existing Astute Class fast attack submarines, or to air-launched nuclear missiles. UK MoD | BAE Systems | UK’s Daily Mail.

June 18/12: Reactors. Britain’s Ministry of Defense signs a GBP 1.1 billion contract with Rolls Royce for submarine nuclear reactor cores, (GBP 600 million) and industrial investment in the Raynesway plant that manufactures them (GBP 500 million). The contracts will secure 300 jobs at Rolls-Royce.

The nuclear reactor cores will be used to power the 7th and final SSN Astute Class fast attack submarine, and the 1st of the Royal Navy’s next generation of SSBN nuclear deterrent submarines, currently known as the Successor Class.

Rolls Royce is the sole Technical Authority for the UK Nuclear Steam Raising Plant, whose reactors have powered British nuclear-powered submarines for the past 50 years. The GBP 500 million infrastructure contract aims extend the operating life of the Rayneway plant in Derby, UK, by more than 40 years. Rolls-Royce will continue to maintain and operate its existing reactor core manufacturing facility, while undertaking a parallel phased rebuild and modernization of buildings on site. UK MoD | Rolls Royce | The Telegraph.

May 22/12: Design contracts. The UK MoD issues a series of design phase (vid. May 18/11 entry) contracts for its next-generation “Successor” Class SSBNs, while re-iterating that a decision on the final design and build contracts won’t be made until 2016. The design work has to be done, or it would be impossible to make an informed decision about costs.

BAE Systems Maritime – Submarines receives the main design contract, worth GBP 328 million.

Babcock receives a GBP 15 million contract to focus on designing parts of the in-service support program.

Rolls Royce receives over GBP 4 million to integrate a new reactor design into the submarine. The reactors themselves will be separate design/ build contracts.

May 15/12: 5 bn for AWE. The UK MoD announces a multi-billion pound agreement with the AWE Management Limited (AWEML) joint venture, which manages Britain’s Atomic Weapons Establishment. The AWEML joint venture includes Jacobs Engineering, Serco and Lockheed Martin, and they signed the current 25-year management contract in 2000.

Scientists at the AWE’s Berkshire sites are involved from the initial concept and design of British nuclear warheads, through manufacture and support, to their decommissioning and disposal. Under the agreement, the ministry will invest GBP 1 billion a year over the next 5 years in skills and facilities at the company’s Aldermaston and Burghfield sites in Berkshire, where more than 4,500 staff are based. Around 40% cent of this money will be invested in essential capital projects, including production and research facilities. The remainder will be spent on operating and maintaining the AWE.

March 23/11: New reactor? Britain is reportedly shifting toward the passive-cooling PWR3 nuclear reactor design for its future SSBN nuclear missile submarines. The PWR2 design used in its SSBN Vanguard Class, as well as the SSN Trafalgar, and new SSN Astute Class fast attack boats, reportedly shares unwelcome features with the Fukushima reactors, in that they entirely on back-up power supplies to provide emergency cooling in the event of an accident.

In contrast the PWR3, which is widely used in modern US nuclear submarines, uses “passive” cooling. That makes it less reliant on back-up power, and offers additional methods of injecting coolant into a reactor.
www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/mar/23/navy-submarines-nuclear-reactors

March 19/09: Report. Edward Leigh MP, Chairman of the Committee of Public Accounts, makes a statement as the committee publishes “The United Kingdom’s future nuclear deterrent capability” :

“The Department’s timetable for completing the design and build process for the replacement submarines is extremely tight. It has 17 years to do it, even though the Department itself accepts that such a process usually cannot be completed in under 18. The MOD’s track record in delivering major defence projects on time is not exemplary.

The MOD must make absolutely fundamental decisions about the design of the new submarines by September of this year. These include the main design features; whether to develop a new type of nuclear reactor requiring substantial research and development; and, crucially, the design and size of the missile compartment.”

Oct 26/07: Concepts. BAE presents 2 SSBN concept designs at DSEi 2007, labelled Concept 35 and Advanced Hull Form (AHF). Concept 35 is an evolution of the SSBN Vanguard Class and SSN Astute Class. The Advanced Hull Form uses a broad y-shaped stern with twin propulsor shrouds, which reportedly houses much of the boat’s machinery outside of the pressure hull. See Beedall for pictures.

Oct 18/07: IPT opened. BAE Systems announces that Rear Admiral Paul Thomas CB, FREng chairman of the defence nuclear safety committee, has officially opened the Future Submarines (FSM) Integrated Project Team office at Barrow-in-Furness.

“This element of the Future Submarines IPT will be based on the BAE Systems Submarine Solutions site and will be manned by a collaboration of up to 128 personnel made up from the Ministry of Defence, BAE Systems, Rolls Royce and Babcock Marine. Working with the FSM IPT office in the MoD’s Abbey Wood offices, the team will, over the next two years, develop a concept design for the submarine component of the future deterrent programme.”

Additional Readings

• BAE – Successor

• Navy Matters – Future Submarines

• DID – CMC Program to Define Future SSBN Launchers for UK, USA

• DID – Trident II D5 Missile: Keeping Up with Changing Times

• DID (March 27/12) – GBP 350M for Final Refit of UK’s Vanguard Nuclear Missile Subs. Final? Other refits may be needed in future, in order to keep the Vanguards in service until the new submarines arrive. These will be the last British nuclear submarines to require a Long Overhaul Period and Refuel (LOP-R) during their service lives. The New PWR2 Mk.2 reactor in refitted Vanguard and current Astute submarines, and the PWR3 reactors in the new submarines, will last for the submarine’s entire lifetime.

Official Reports

• UK Ministry of Defence (Dec 18/12) – The United Kingdom’s Future Nuclear Deterrent: 2012 Update to Parliament [PDF]

• UK Parliament (May 19/11) – Statement on the nuclear deterrent

• UK Committee on Public Accounts (March 19/10) – The United Kingdom’s future nuclear deterrent capability

• UK Defence Committee (May 24/07) – The Future of the UK’s Strategic Nuclear Deterrent: the White Paper: Government Response to the Committee’s Ninth Report of Session 2006-07

• UK Defence Committee (Dec 19/06) – Fourth Report of Session 2006-07, The future of the UK’s strategic nuclear deterrent: the manufacturing and skills base, HC 59

• UK MoD – The Future of the United Kingdom’s Nuclear Deterrent: Defence White Paper 2006 [PDF]

Other News

• LabourList beta (Jan 29/13) – Will Trident split the Labour Party in half?