Columbia-class SSBN (SSBN-X Future Follow-on Submarine)

Desertfox said:
The Russians don't want us uploading any more than we want them, they will play ball until the treaty ends.
Click to expand...
The Russians have specifically stated they have withdrawn from all parts of New Start except the warhead limits. That said, the elephant in the room is the chinese, and what will happen there.

As for SSGN(X) - you definitely don't want to mix nuke subs + conventional weapon shooters, as boomers are your secure second strike. If the program picks up pace, I would expect congress to accelerate the last few ships in columbia class, and then finish out with a few conventional shooters, who have had some pricey bits removed.

The problem with modern over-optimized dod mega programs is that every ounce of slack and margin is removed - so whether we like it or not, the original plan will continue, or capabilities will get cut.
 
zevets said:
As for SSGN(X) - you definitely don't want to mix nuke subs + conventional weapon shooters, as boomers are your secure second strike. If the program picks up pace, I would expect congress to accelerate the last few ships in columbia class, and then finish out with a few conventional shooters, who have had some pricey bits removed.
Click to expand...
Exactly my thoughts.

Once EB and NNS get a couple of Columbia class built, they'll have ideas for how to simplify and speed up construction (see what happened to the Virginias), and will be able to speed up production. Then build ~6x SSGNs at either full Columbia size or slightly shortened so the conventional shooters can be identified from satellite. If the timing works out, the UK might have bought the first of the diver quadpacks.
 
How are the current Ohio based SSGNs different so they can be identified?
 
bobbymike said:
How are the current Ohio based SSGNs different so they can be identified?
Click to expand...
Externally they are not, unless they are carrying a dry deck shelter. Though I would argue if you are not physically in Kings Bay or Bangor that you are almost certainly looking at an SSGN.

There is no reason to make SSGNs visibly identifiable; physical inspections can confirm the nature of the platform in the unlikely event there is an new arms control treat.
 
bobbymike said:
How are the current Ohio based SSGNs different so they can be identified?
Click to expand...
The turtleback is wider where the DDS sit. The standard BN turtleback tapers up, the GN turtleback up forward goes straight up.

Here's a picture of USS Floridia SSGN without DDS, you can see where the turtleback is wider.
USS_Florida_%28SSGN-728%29.jpg

Also, note the lack of nonskid for a long stretch of the turtleback.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TomS said:
I think it was done to keep the two DDS from overhanging the sides of the turtleback. You can really see it here:

View attachment 731654
Click to expand...
^^ That was the picture I was looking for and didn't find quickly, Tom, thank you!

And yes, it's more likely to have been done for making a place for the DDS to land square to the turtleback. Look at the line of nonskid and how it basically lines up on the inner rails for the DDS.

But it also makes a convenient "Look at this spot, it's different from the SSBNs" for the Compliance folks to look at. See also the Yankee Notch sub on the Russian side.

As a side note, that SSGN is sitting deep in the water by a couple of feet, you should be able to see the limber line clear of the water and a bit of pressure hull out of the water, not just the turtleback.
 
Last edited:
Scott Kenny said:
Building the same very large objects, so similar layout is to be expected. Or they may have bit the bullet and bought the layout from HII if it was somehow proprietary.
Click to expand...
There's more than one way to skin a cat, while this new Austal building looks a lot like a larger take on HII's SMOF, HII also has a new module site at the JMAF on the north end of their NN yard which doesn't share the layout. I think this is more a case of the linear site leading them to a SMOF-like set of decisions.
 
So... new plants in Alabama and Florida producing materials and modules (so not nuc-certified work) - accesses new worker population bases and thus potentially frees nuc-certified workers to increase build rate.
 
BlackBat242 said:
So... new plants in Alabama and Florida producing materials and modules (so not nuc-certified work) - accesses new worker population bases and thus potentially frees nuc-certified workers to increase build rate.
Click to expand...
Not really, The biggest choke point hasn't widen.

The Number of Reactor made per year, both the core, pressure vessel and all the other bits of a ship reactor.

Which is like 3 per year and one of thoses are for the CVNs.

Basically like the old battleships, the big hold up on those was the Armor and turrets. Alot of the Time you had a BB Hull sitting work on for days cause they hit the point of need to install either of those to continue.

And they didn't arrive yet.


Same issue here. Apparently one of the yarda have two Virginias all but complete, waiting for their reactors to arrive.

To really increase the build ability we need to make more everything on the reactor, not just the technicians.

Or figure out how to make a modern diesel sub with 20k miles of range.
 
Firefinder said:
Not really, The biggest choke point hasn't widen.

The Number of Reactor made per year, both the core, pressure vessel and all the other bits of a ship reactor.

Which is like 3 per year and one of thoses are for the CVNs.

Basically like the old battleships, the big hold up on those was the Armor and turrets. Alot of the Time you had a BB Hull sitting work on for days cause they hit the point of need to install either of those to continue.

And they didn't arrive yet.


Same issue here. Apparently one of the yarda have two Virginias all but complete, waiting for their reactors to arrive.

To really increase the build ability we need to make more everything on the reactor, not just the technicians.

Or figure out how to make a modern diesel sub with 20k miles of range.
Click to expand...

Ah, that IS an issue.
 
Virginias increased in cost by 20% over the last 3 years on top of a 20% increase in shipyard staff costs, ouch. Also the federal government directly allocating $518m funds for a wage rise at two private business seems a bit odd, normally you would just negotiate an increase in the price you were paying for the work, which they are already doing in this allocation.
 
Last edited:
WatcherZero said:
Virginias increased in cost by 20% over the last 3 years on top of a 20% increase in shipyard staff costs, ouch. Also the federal government directly allocating $518m funds for a wage rise at two private business seems a bit odd, normally you would just negotiate an increase in the price you were paying for the work, which they are already doing in this allocation.
Click to expand...
I believe that is to allow the shipyard to offer a competitive wage to the highly skilled welders that they need, to draw them away from the petroleum industry.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom