Monday, September 11, 2023

Ooh, that's nasty!

 


Recent images of a Royal Navy Vanguard class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) taken by Sheila Weir — captured after the sub completed a six-month-long deterrent patrol — underscore the immense beating these leviathans of the deep can take while on mission for long stretches of time. The missile boat looks like a sea monster that has emerged from a long slumber at the bottom of ocean.


The photos in question were taken as the Vanguard class submarine returned to HM Naval Base Clyde, which is also known as Faslane, on the west coast of Scotland.

The Royal Navy’s four Vanguard class submarines all entered service in the 1990s, with an intended service life of 25 years. As we’ve indicated in the past, each boat has 16 missile tubes for UGM-133 Trident II submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs). However, only eight missiles are carried to comply with treaty regulations. Royal Navy SSBNs are able to carry a maximum of 40 warheads when conducting deterrence patrols, with each Trident missile able to carry multiple warheads, or multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles (MIRVs). 

10 comments:

  1. 6 months deployed is NOT 6 month submerged or on patrol, they had at least one port call to load food stores. Yes, food is the limiting factor for long deployments, even canned food takes up a lot of space. It isn't likely there is space for a double stores load, even on a Boomer.

    US Navy Fast Attack boats go on 6 month or longer deployments as regular operations, we did get some time to do maintenance during port calls and a chance to see places like Hong Kong or Perth in the process.

    ReplyDelete
  2. that filth on that sub has nothing to do with "immense beating these leviathans of the deep can take while on mission for long stretches of time" That muck is the result of shallow water, sunshine, and plant growth. Not deep submergence, not immense deep sea pressure, that sub was shallow, or surfaced, for months. Likely, in warm equatorial waters. Nothing grows on subs in motion, at depth, in the cold ocean. That right there is sea gull crap fertilized plant growth.
    But I think your blog is tops, for the wide variety.
    Thanks for your efforts to entertain us daily!
    PS, I crewed on two subs, but ask ANY sub qual'd sailor and they'll tell you the same

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jesse is correct. This is fake news.

      Delete
    2. B.S. flag thrown.

      Show surface ships, like some of the rustbuckets the US Navy is using, and we can talk.

      Delete
  3. It is time these boats were based in Portsmouth, far from Scotlands shores. They can leave their radiation there in England.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your government reports that 30% of your energy is nuclear-derived.

      Delete
  4. I was aboard the USS Simon Lake, AS-33. As a sub-tender, and we serviced and supplied many classes of subs (Darter class through Los Angeles class were active during my deployment) and many different individual boats. Although those bubble-heads could definitely put a serious beating on them, I never saw anything that looked that bad. The crews themselves usually did more damage to them than just about anything the elements could dish out.

    I'm guessing that the boat in these photos was in moth balls for a few years and was in the process of being towed to a breaking yard to be scrapped. Much like The Lake and most of the boats I saw during that time.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It's British, and British vehicles are predisposed to rusting...this just seems to be another example...!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Its more likely that she was sitting on the bottom of the Black sea for the last six months.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think this display was intended to draw attention to the need to replace the Vanguard class boats with the shiny, new and extremely expensive Dreadnaught class. (BAE will not be denied)

    I think they'll get there eventually but it would only surprise me if they did NOT cut the order to a bare minimum and accept risk that they will not have enough boats available to keep one on patrol at all times, no ability to surge, and probably not be able to train and maintain crews to maintain a constant at sea deterrent.

    The Royal Navy is a sad remnant of what it once was but then the USN is working tirelessly to match its decline.

    ReplyDelete