• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

NSSN Virginia-class - current status and future

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,610
Reaction score
1,762

With the 4X Trident quad packs filled with hypersonic strike missiles? Here’s hoping.
Without the quad packs. The current Navy Secretary wants a "pure" SSN like the -21s. He appears to be unreceptive to the idea of payload tubes being part of the equation.
Do you have a quote for that I don’t see it in the article. Seeing these will be built starting maybe 2030 he might not have much say in the matter.

CBO has some analysis along these lines. It's not impossible that there would also be some vertical launchers but it's difficult to see room for a number of VPM-like launchers and a large torpedo room.

 

Firefinder

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
104
Reaction score
140

With the 4X Trident quad packs filled with hypersonic strike missiles? Here’s hoping.
Without the quad packs. The current Navy Secretary wants a "pure" SSN like the -21s. He appears to be unreceptive to the idea of payload tubes being part of the equation.
Do you have a quote for that I don’t see it in the article. Seeing these will be built starting maybe 2030 he might not have much say in the matter.

CBO has some analysis along these lines. It's not impossible that there would also be some vertical launchers but it's difficult to see room for a number of VPM-like launchers and a large torpedo room.

It depends on where they put it.

If they descide to stuff them amidships like the APHNAS Design or the Russian Yasen class they could do it. Or Re-jigger the bow systems to go around them.

Honestly considering the Viriginia's are still new boats with more on order its extremely early to tell...
 

Moose

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,394
Reaction score
385
View: https://twitter.com/lfx160219/status/1331156014297612291

Enk3T5gUcAUbxE_
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
14,047
Reaction score
3,859
I stongly suspect that this will indeed be Dead On Arrival with the incoming administration.
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
959
Reaction score
52

With the 4X Trident quad packs filled with hypersonic strike missiles? Here’s hoping.
Without the quad packs. The current Navy Secretary wants a "pure" SSN like the -21s. He appears to be unreceptive to the idea of payload tubes being part of the equation.
Do you have a quote for that I don’t see it in the article. Seeing these will be built starting maybe 2030 he might not have much say in the matter.

CBO has some analysis along these lines. It's not impossible that there would also be some vertical launchers but it's difficult to see room for a number of VPM-like launchers and a large torpedo room.

It depends on where they put it.

If they descide to stuff them amidships like the APHNAS Design or the Russian Yasen class they could do it. Or Re-jigger the bow systems to go around them.

Honestly considering the Viriginia's are still new boats with more on order its extremely early to tell...


There is evidence that creating a design and building lots of them - or at least variations of them, while continuing to improve your processes and product is a good idea. Production is much more difficult than prototypes with repetition, solving problems, and building a competent supply chain and work force making the difference in improving many aspects of the product. With some notable exceptions, the build quality, speed of build, and cost management improve over time. Tesla Model Y uses ~75% of the the parts of a Model 3. They are constantly improving the production line. Margins, tech, speed of build etc are all improving dramatically. Virginia-class delivery time dropped dramatically (till those times it didn't). Cost growth has been managed through changes in technology, build processes, and build time.

For those reasons, and others, I would like to see SSN(X) be a shorter variation of Columbia, once the kinks are worked out with Columbia tech. Re-using much of Columbia's design and systems will, over time, provide a better solution for the life of both platforms. Folks here know much better than me the advantages provided by the larger diameter and dual class systems use. A deeper magazine than Virginia would be beneficial as well. In the mean time, keep introducing advancements into Virginia-class through at least Block-VII -or- when a sound Columbia variant can be built in 60 months.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
14,047
Reaction score
3,859

The Navy's present plan is to field IRCPS first on its future Block V Virginia class submarines, each of which will have four large-diameter multi-purpose vertical launch tubes, very similar to those on Ohio class boats, in an additional hull section known as the Virginia Payload Module (VPM). The service has also already conducted at least one test involving the firing of a missile carrying a prototype C-HGB from one of its Ohio class boats. There has been at least one ground-based test of the boost-glide vehicle, as well, but testing of full prototype IRCPS/LRHW missiles is not set to begin until later this year.

If the FPM and APM are indeed related, it would also strongly suggest that it would only take limited effort to integrate IRCPS onto Ohio class boats, either SSBNs or SSGNs, as well as the Columbia class submarines and possible future Large Payload Submarines. The Large Payload Submarine is an SSGN-like design concept the Navy has been exploring in recent years. If nothing else, the APMs would allow each Block V Virginia to carry up 12 IRCPS missiles at a time.
 
Last edited:

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
10,726
Reaction score
1,801
Love the Large Payload Submarine idea. The future fight is in the Pacific you should be able to walk from Guam to Hawaii to the US West Coast keeping your feet dry on the hulls of submarines (if they weren’t submerged obviously)
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
14,047
Reaction score
3,859
Love the Large Payload Submarine idea. The future fight is in the Pacific you should be able to walk from Guam to Hawaii to the US West Coast keeping your feet dry on the hulls of submarines (if they weren’t submerged obviously)
Nay sir, Heavy cruisers, Battlecruisers, and Battleships for the win! (all nuclear powered of course).
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
10,726
Reaction score
1,801
Love the Large Payload Submarine idea. The future fight is in the Pacific you should be able to walk from Guam to Hawaii to the US West Coast keeping your feet dry on the hulls of submarines (if they weren’t submerged obviously)
Nay sir, Heavy cruisers, Battlecruisers, and Battleships for the win! (all nuclear powered of course).
Let’s compromise and get both :D
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
10,726
Reaction score
1,801
We should return to a Cold War sized attack boat fleet size. SSNs are our biggest current tech overmatches vis a vis China/Russia IMO.
 

Similar threads

Top