Military Review

Multipurpose nuclear submarines of the Astute type. Problems and their causes

88

Lead Astute class nuclear submarine on the eve of launching, June 2007


There are currently seven multipurpose nuclear submarines in the Royal Navy's submarine forces. Three of them belong to the old Trafalgar project, four others are built according to the modern Astute. The construction of such nuclear submarines continues, and in the coming years the fleet will receive three more pennants. At the same time, the program for the development and construction of new submarines has repeatedly faced various problems.

Looking for a replacement


The first attempt to create a promising nuclear submarine to replace Trafalgar was made in the mid-eighties. Work on the SSN20 project continued until the early nineties and showed some success, but was discontinued due to a change in the military-political situation. Instead of building completely new boats, it was proposed to develop a project to modernize existing ones. It received the designation Batch 2 Trafalgar-class (B2TC).

The tender for the creation of B2TC was announced in 1993. In mid-1995, the military department accepted preliminary projects from the participants and began to study them. In March 1997, a joint project between GEC-Marconi and BMT Ltd. was announced as the winner of the tender. At this stage, the B2TC project was renamed Astute ("Insightful" or "Insidious"). It was also planned to name the head submarine of the new construction.


HMS Astute on sea trials, November 2009

It is curious that by this time the KVMF had revised its plans. It was proposed to equip Astute submarines with a number of new systems and means, including a promising nuclear reactor. Because of this, it was necessary to revise the design of the durable case and make a lot of other changes. As a result, the modernization of the existing submarine turned into a full-fledged new project, and the corresponding changes were made to the contract for the performance of work. The construction of the first three ships was estimated at 2,4 billion pounds.

The main contractor for the Astute project was GEC-Marconi, which in 1999 became part of the newly formed BAE Systems. The construction was planned to be deployed at a shipyard in Barrow-in-Furness (now BAE Systems Submarines). The laying of the lead ship HMS Astute was supposed to take place in the late nineties, when the project was ready.

First problems


Project "Discerning" ran into problems already at the stage of development of technical documentation. In order to simplify and speed up the work, it was decided to use CAD systems - for the first time in stories British underwater fleet... Harnessing these tools proved to be difficult and slow, and the project began to fall behind schedule. We dealt with these problems and gained the necessary experience.


"Astute" launches a Tomahawk rocket, November 2011

During the nineties, the shipyard at Barrow-in-Furness suffered from cut military orders and regularly cut staff. At the beginning of the decade, the plant employed more than 13 thousand people, and by 2001 only 3 thousand specialists remained. To build new submarines, it was necessary to restore production capacity and create new jobs.

Such measures made it possible to start building the lead ship. Its laying took place on January 31, 2001 - with a significant delay from the original schedule. Accordingly, the expected date of delivery of the submarine was also delayed. In the future, new problems arose, which again resulted in a shift in terms.

In the fall of 2002, the Department of Defense and BAE Systems in a joint report revealed the problems of the current program. As of August 2002, the construction program was almost three years behind the original schedule and exceeded its estimated cost. According to the terms of the contract, the expenses in excess of the established estimate were to be borne by the contractor company.


HMS Ambush - second ship of the project, December 2013

The Ministry of Defense and BAE Systems came to the conclusion that it was impossible to continue work under the existing contract. Because of this, at the end of 2003, an updated agreement appeared. The client agreed to increase the cost of the project by £ 430 million, and the contractor had to invest £ 250 million on the construction. In addition, the American company General Dynamics Electric Boat was involved in the work as a consultant and assistant.

Successful measures


The involvement of foreign specialists with extensive experience gave the desired result. They helped to master CAD systems and improve the design. In addition, with their help, construction technologies were updated and optimized. Thus, the Astute project proposed a modular assembly principle. It provided for the construction of separate sections of a robust hull with the saturation of the necessary equipment, followed by docking into a single structure.

The modules for the head boat were made in a horizontal position, but this was considered inconvenient. For the first serial ship, a new technology had to be developed: the metal "ring" was at the end during assembly. Changes in construction technology have led to new challenges that GDEB has overcome.


Submarine Ambush, aft view

Astute's program was still running out of schedule and struggling to meet the financial constraints, but now it was possible to count on a successful completion of the work. The first real proof of this was the launching of the lead boat HMS Astute in 2007.

Limited edition


The laying of the lead submarine HMS Astute (S119) took place on January 31, 2001. Due to engineering, technological and organizational difficulties, as well as due to the redesign of the project with the participation of GDEB, the ship was completed and launched only in June 2007. Three more years went to testing and fixing bugs. The first nuclear submarine of its project entered service on August 27, 2010.

The construction of the first serial boat HMS Ambush (S120) began in October 2003. It was launched at the very beginning of 2011, and commissioned on March 1, 2013.The third hull of the series, HMS Artful (S121), was built from March 2005 to May 2014. In 2016, this nuclear submarine joined the KVMF. In April 2020, the fourth submarine HMS Audacious (S122), laid down in 2009 and launched in 2017, was handed over to the customer.


HMS Ambush on board RFA Diligence, April 2013

In 2009, a few months after the start of construction on HMS Audacious, the House of Commons Defense Committee released a report with preliminary results from the Astute program. It turned out that the construction of boats is 57 months behind the original schedule - almost 5 years. The construction of the first three nuclear submarines cost 3,9 billion pounds, i.e. 53% more than the original estimate.

In this regard, contractors were ordered to take action and speed up the construction of submarines, as well as reduce their cost. These tasks, in general, were completed, but the new stage of fixes and improvements took some time and affected the delivery time of the finished ships.

Plans for the future


On October 13, 2011, the laying of the fifth Astute-class nuclear submarine took place in Barrow-in-Furness. On December 11, 2020 she was “baptized” under the name HMS Anson (S123). Since July 2013, the construction of the next building, HMS Agamemnon (S124), continues. After a significant break, in May 2018, the seventh and last of the planned submarines was laid down. It was named HMS Agincourt (S125).


Submarine Audacious on the slipway, July 2013

After a series of failures in the nineties and two thousand years, on their own and with the help of specialists from the United States, British shipbuilders were still able to establish a technological cycle for the production of modern multipurpose nuclear submarines. However, these processes did not allow to radically change the construction time. Each of the Astute boats is still a long-term construction and requires several years of labor.

According to current plans, in 2021-22. the submarine Anson will go to sea trials. It will be handed over no later than 2023-24. The next ship will be launched only in the future, and it will enter service only by 2025. The entire series of seven nuclear submarines is supposed to be completed, tested and commissioned only in 2026. Considering the events of the past, it should be noted that these are only current plans - the real result of the work may be different.

Reasons for failure


The program for the development and construction of new multipurpose submarines of the BT2C / Astute type started 27 years ago, but has not yet yielded all the desired results. Of the seven required nuclear submarines, the fleet received only four, and the delivery of the rest will take place later. It is easy to calculate that the last ship will be handed over 25 years after the lead was laid. This can be called a record, but the KVMF and industry are unlikely to be proud of it.

Multipurpose nuclear submarines of the Astute type. Problems and their causes

Baptism ceremony of submarine HMS Anson, December 11, 2020

The precondition for future difficulties was the customer's desire to build new submarines using advanced technologies and components. Their development and development, predictably, required a lot of effort, time and money. However, when drawing up the initial plans, it was not possible to foresee the complexity of the tasks set, which ultimately led to a shift in terms and an increase in the cost of the program.

At the same time, it should be remembered that the development of B2TC was carried out in the nineties, when the UK defense budget was seriously reduced - and with it the spending on current and promising projects. Among other things, this led to staff reductions in design bureaus and factories that were to participate in construction. It was possible to solve these problems only by the end of the XNUMXs.

Thus, the Astute project at all its main stages faced characteristic difficulties of various kinds, which constantly hindered its successful continuation. By now, we managed to get rid of the main part of them, but the situation still did not become ideal. It is unknown whether it will be possible to change it in the future and shift any stages of the program not to the right, as usual, but to the left. As for the customer and the contractor, they have long lost all their optimism.
Author:
Photos used:
UK Department of Defense, Wikimedia Commons
88 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. pmkemcity
    pmkemcity 27 December 2020 07: 09
    0
    It is easy to calculate that the last ship will be handed over 25 years after the lead was laid.

    Well stupid! As Zadornov would say ... They can't build seven boats!
    1. Tochilka
      Tochilka 27 December 2020 09: 19
      +8
      How many new nuclear submarines have been built in Russia in 25 years? Is it much more?
      1. pmkemcity
        pmkemcity 27 December 2020 09: 23
        +5
        Quote: Tochilka
        How many new nuclear submarines have been built in Russia in 25 years? Is it much more?

        Hyperbola (from the ancient Greek: "transition; excess, excess; exaggeration") is a stylistic figure of explicit and deliberate exaggeration, in order to enhance the expressiveness and emphasize the said thought.
        Only the "thought" I have not said, it suggests itself.
      2. Eldorado
        Eldorado 27 December 2020 11: 21
        +10
        Quote: Tochilka
        How many new nuclear submarines have been built in Russia in 25 years? Is it much more?

        Over 25 years, 15 nuclear submarines have been commissioned, 4 more are being tested or being completed afloat; 10 nuclear submarines are under construction. Plus, more than 30 diesel-electric submarines were delivered. And the nuclear deep-sea station AS-31 ("Losharik").
        1. Tochilka
          Tochilka 27 December 2020 14: 36
          -2
          Storm of the Depth website. For the indicated 25 years, 7 nuclear submarines entered service. +1 on trials, +1 being completed. Where is 15?
          1. Eldorado
            Eldorado 27 December 2020 15: 26
            +3
            K-295 (1995);
            K-157 (1995);
            K-141 (1995);
            K-150 (1996);
            K-335 (2001);
            K-152 (2009);
            K-535 (2013);
            K-550 (2013);
            K-551 (2014);
            K-560 (2014);
            K-549 (2020).
            1. Lex_is
              Lex_is 27 December 2020 15: 39
              +2
              These are 11 boats, including Kursk, which was commissioned on December 30, 1994.

              And where were 4 more boats lost?
              1. Eldorado
                Eldorado 27 December 2020 16: 01
                0
                Yes, the Kursk was accepted in 1994. It seems that I am undergoing tests or being completed afloat during these 15 tests ... repeat
                1. Lexus
                  Lexus 28 December 2020 02: 02
                  +3
                  In other words, you rudely ruffled about the nuclear submarines, which at the time of the collapse of the USSR were actually built and were simply waiting for the transfer to the Navy.
            2. Subtext
              Subtext 28 December 2020 15: 08
              0
              BS-136 2002
          2. Land defence
            Land defence 27 December 2020 18: 24
            +23
            Quote: Tochilka
            For the indicated 25 years, 7 nuclear submarines entered service. +1 on trials, +1 being completed

            I would like to remind you that in Russia it was necessary to reassemble the entire technological chain. Britain escaped such industrial disruption.
            1. SovAr238A
              SovAr238A 28 December 2020 22: 33
              +2
              Quote: Kara
              Quote: Tochilka
              For the indicated 25 years, 7 nuclear submarines entered service. +1 on trials, +1 being completed

              I would like to remind you that in Russia it was necessary to reassemble the entire technological chain. Britain escaped such industrial disruption.


              Do not lie...
              The collapse of the military-industrial complex in Europe was no less. if not more ....
              Where do you see Messerschmitt-Belkov-Blom?
              Where do you see Blom-und-Foss?
              Where is Leyland?
              Where is Kaisler Defense?
              Where is Zhiat?
              Where is Agusta?
              Where is Aerospatial?
              Where is General Dynamics?
              Where is McDonnell Douglas?
              Where is Rockwell?
              And many other companies known to those who grew up on military technology?

              I don't have them.
              It was the end of the Cold War that they did not survive.
              And they either went bankrupt or merged with other companies.

              And I didn’t write those companies that kept part of their name.
              Like Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin or BAE Systems ...
              But also, we went through a bunch of acquisitions, mergers, and other new formations like Airbus.
            2. yehat2
              yehat2 24 February 2021 15: 53
              +1
              Quote: Kara
              Britain escaped such industrial disruption

              according to Pentagon statistics, they have reduced the diversification of suppliers by 5 times. (not only bankruptcy, but also takeover and merger, etc.)
              In England, this is lower, but they initially did not have very much, so the industrial support has become very slippery, and the share of borrowed components has grown - both weapons and filling.
        2. Lexus
          Lexus 27 December 2020 15: 41
          +3
          With the nuclear submarine, it is desirable in more detail. And about "Losharik" it would be better to keep quiet.
        3. Anton Shtopany
          Anton Shtopany 16 February 2021 22: 17
          0
          And the underwater robots ??? One robot can contain an entire fleet
      3. Boris Chernikov
        Boris Chernikov 27 December 2020 13: 04
        +3
        in 30 years the British received 9 nuclear submarines, in 25 years ... that is. conditionally from the 95th year 6 boats. Russia received 30 nuclear submarines in 25 years, 25 boats in 10 years ... provided that Russia had the collapse of the USSR and priests in shipbuilding, and Britain is the "queen of the seas" hi
        1. SovAr238A
          SovAr238A 28 December 2020 22: 36
          +1
          Quote: Boris Chernikov
          in 30 years the British received 9 nuclear submarines, in 25 years ... that is. conditionally from the 95th year 6 boats. Russia received 30 nuclear submarines in 25 years, 25 boats in 10 years ... provided that Russia had the collapse of the USSR and priests in shipbuilding, and Britain is the "queen of the seas" hi


          Those. the text that the collapse in the naval shipbuilding of Great Britain was such that at the main British naval shipyard, only 13 thousand of 3 thousand workers remained - you did not manage to realize?

          Didn't you get it?
          So much you do not like to look at the truth ...
          Or are they really just stupid ...
          1. Boris Chernikov
            Boris Chernikov 28 December 2020 23: 21
            0
            laughing Yes, no, I did it, it's just that our citizens love to throw mud at Russia and kneel in front of the West, because if the British loved all the polymers, then you need to screech to throw minuses and prove that I am wrong, that the British are great and in general you saw the statistics ... and when you give statistics to you, then excuses begin in the style of "although they are all in feces, but they are correct in feces, and we look bad in feces, although in fact we have washed ourselves for a long time", so they are great, even though they are worse, and we although they have achieved something, they are still worse than them ... the main thing is not to forget to sing "God save our gracious Queen" .. After all, nothing can be good in Russia, but only bad things happen .. hi
            1. Lex_is
              Lex_is 29 December 2020 13: 18
              0
              and in general you have seen statistics ... and when you give statistics to you, then excuses begin in style


              Borenka, for now, of all the data you bring only streams of your heavy delirium.

              Here's to you, Borenka. statistics.

              The increase in the total displacement of the fleet from 2017 to 2019 in Britain was + 14.7%, in Russia -4.7%. The percentage of new ships in the fleet for 2019 is 31.3% for Britain and 20,20% for Russia. The average age of ships in Britain is 18.2, for Russia is 25.4.


              How are we there, in comparison with wretched Britain, which has lost all the polymers?
              1. Boris Chernikov
                Boris Chernikov 29 December 2020 13: 55
                +1
                laughing Here I am just about this .. by any means to prove that the British are great, and these "stupid Russians" can not do anything ... as I understand the "growth" will be achieved due to two aircraft carriers, which have not been brought to mind? personal life, that an attempt to go on the topic "someone is good, but I feel bad, then it should be bad in Russia too" .. I just gave the statistics above .. but from her you bombed mercilessly .. less hysteria) then you can recall that the composition of the British fleet: 10 nuclear submarines, 2 aircraft carriers, 6 destroyers, 13 frigates, 2 DK, 16 minesweepers, 4 patrolmen ... a total of 53 ships. and these "stupid Russians" have 60 submarines, 1 an aircraft carrier, 4 cruisers, 4 destroyers, 7 bpk, 18 frigates / sc / corvettes, 48 ​​MRK, 26 MPK, 9 IAC, 3 Patrolmen, 46 minesweepers, 60 landing ships .. But you should always take only the information that fits into the canvas "Russians cannot be better than someone in something, you should always fawn on the West." laughing
                1. Lex_is
                  Lex_is 29 December 2020 14: 08
                  -2
                  Well, as usual, nonsense and UAVs, UAVs, UAVs ...

                  46 minesweepers, 60 landing ships ..

                  And list them, over the years of construction and technical condition?
                  I'm really wondering where we have 60 BDK hid?
                  1. Boris Chernikov
                    Boris Chernikov 29 December 2020 15: 13
                    0
                    laughing and where I wrote about "60 BDK", I wrote "60 landing ships" .. everything is as usual, in front of the West they are ready to kneel .. you probably play Greencard?
                    1. Lex_is
                      Lex_is 29 December 2020 15: 42
                      -2
                      You, balabol, when will you learn to answer for your words?

                      And what are our 60 landing ships?
                      Landing boats, which are far from our ships - 38 of them were released after 90, only 26.

                      What are 46 minesweepers?

                      Lies.
                      1. The comment was deleted.
                      2. The comment was deleted.
                      3. The comment was deleted.
                      4. Lex_is
                        Lex_is 29 December 2020 18: 39
                        0
                        "60 landing ships"

                        Now they have dried up three times, it turned out that:
                        BDK of one 21 units + 2 MDKVP ..

                        And if you also look at how old they are?

                        BDK 1171 - 4 units, BDK 11711 - 2 units
                        - lies.
                        There are only 4 of them, the youngest of them is 45 years old:
                        BDK-10 - 1966
                        BDK-69 - 1968
                        Nikolay Vilkov - 1974
                        Nikolay Filchenkov - 1975

                        BDK 775 - 15 units

                        SDK-91 - 1976, SDK-182 - 1977 etc.
                        Under 30 years old of which only 3
                        BDK-54, BDK-1, BDK-61 91-91
                        DK - not ships but boats

                        "60 landing ships"

                        Dried up to two new BDK and 3 BDK 30 years old

                        Cool.
                      5. Boris Chernikov
                        Boris Chernikov 29 December 2020 18: 57
                        -2
                        laughing Well, you still play with the statistics .. and then until I see that only you dry up in your hysterics .. and then, after all, they began to cheerfully sing and whine about "the British are great!" and then began to slide on "oh old ships, oh bdk" ... lol The main thing is that, well, at least somehow to smear the British who have only 2 paratroopers ... dozens of ships have already been written off in "oh, they are wrong, they are old" ... While these large landing ships are walking and performing their tasks ... so by ... Russia has 23 BDKs from the British .. So the drain is counted on the BDK .. the main thing is not to cry that the British have problems with the nuclear submarine .. but it's true .. it's very sad to realize that the beloved British have forgotten how to use the Apl and give up 2 apl once every 1-3 years, and these bad Russians reach the pace of 4-1 nuclear submarines a year ..
                      6. Lex_is
                        Lex_is 29 December 2020 19: 03
                        0
                        And bravely rubbed the comments, guessing ... laughing
                        It was
                        60 landing ships ..
                        is a lie
                        Now already
                        .23 BDK
                      7. Boris Chernikov
                        Boris Chernikov 29 December 2020 19: 21
                        -3
                        laughing yours too? 1) I indicated 60 landing SHIPS, then you can only have a ship if it has a displacement of 5 tons .. these are your personal problems, Lesha). And yes, how cute you are trying to merge with the topic ... ehh ..
                      8. Lex_is
                        Lex_is 29 December 2020 19: 26
                        -1
                        I indicated 60 landing SHIPS, then that you can only have a ship if it has a displacement of 5 tons ..



                        Do you think this is a ship, expert?
                        And you don't want to count RIB for ships?
                      9. Boris Chernikov
                        Boris Chernikov 29 December 2020 19: 32
                        -2
                        laughing and how does this change the presence of 23 BDK versus 2 for the British? tongue
                      10. Lex_is
                        Lex_is 29 December 2020 19: 43
                        0
                        I indicated 60 AMP SHIPS

                        23 less than 60? laughing laughing

                        And only 25 large landing ships were built in 2 years.
  • Sergey Averchenkov
    Sergey Averchenkov 29 December 2020 19: 35
    -1
    Love Britain? Yes? Eh, Lyoshenka ...
    1. Lex_is
      Lex_is 29 December 2020 22: 35
      0
      No Sergey, I don't like fools.
      Some troubles with these fools, and strive, instead of work on the construction of a new on the ruins of a long time and not built by them "Urya" shout from the sofa.

      Yes, and liars, the same I dislike.
      1. Sergey Averchenkov
        Sergey Averchenkov 30 December 2020 01: 11
        +1
        Well, let's just say ... the cry of "hurray" is not a bad cry - our fathers, grandfathers, great-grandfathers, etc. went on the attack with him. And do not think that if he was distorted on "Urya" then he became something disgusting. Hell, this is more like an ideological sabotage ... At the expense of the sofas ... we are all like this here, unless of course you are not standing up to write. I have already said that if you keep repeating that everything is bad with us, then your hands may lose heart ... but why does it suffer if it is always better there than here? So everything should be balanced - constructive criticism so that you don't rest on your laurels and a small song of praise so that everything doesn't fall out of your hands. Carrot and stick, if simpler.
        It's good that you don't like fools, otherwise you defended the Royal Navy so zealously that doubt crept in. :)
  • yehat2
    yehat2 24 February 2021 15: 59
    +1
    Quote: SovAr238A
    at the main British naval shipyard, out of 13 thousand workers, only 3 thousand remained - you did not master it?

    wake up, work organization has changed a lot
    over the past century, labor productivity has grown by an average of 5 times.
  • Anton Shtopany
    Anton Shtopany 16 February 2021 22: 16
    0
    So we have ten times more of them, one of ours is like a dozen of them, so count, we are ahead of the whole planet
  • TermNachTer
    TermNachTer 27 December 2020 10: 44
    +4
    Cool. The last one will come into operation when the head one already needs to be written off.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 27 December 2020 12: 25
      +8
      Quote: TermNachTER
      The last one will come into operation when the head one already needs to be written off.

      Nicholas, hi
      And this is in a country that did not go through the nightmare of the 90s, like Russia. This is the once almighty "mistress of the seas"! At the same time, they could not even master the autocad, and without the "generals electricians" they could not have given a fret by joining the compartments ... But even with the help of the Yankees, they hand over the ones on average after 10 years.
      Therefore, only in comparison can one evaluate the work invested by our Lefties and Kulibins in ensuring that the submarine forces of the Russian fleet can give a worthy answer to the challenges of the Anglo-Saxons, the entire NATO, led by the Yankees.
      1. TermNachTer
        TermNachTer 27 December 2020 22: 54
        0
        And we are told that everything is bad in Russia, and everyone else is in chocolate))))
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 28 December 2020 01: 17
          +2
          Quote: TermNachTER
          And we are told that everything is bad in Russia, and everyone else is in chocolate))))
          No, they have everything ... democratic ...
          And you can't see the log in your own eye! laughing
          1. TermNachTer
            TermNachTer 28 December 2020 10: 49
            +2
            Yeah, but also liberal and all that, but most importantly with respect for the rights of sexual minorities)))
  • tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 27 December 2020 07: 34
    +11
    Since the saturation of the compartment with mechanisms was convenient if it was in an upright position, should the subsequent repair of the boat also take place in an upright position? what Well done are not looking for easy ways! wassat
    1. Insurgent
      Insurgent 27 December 2020 07: 46
      -1
      Quote: tralflot1832
      Since the saturation of the compartment with mechanisms was convenient if it was in an upright position, should the subsequent repair of the boat also take place in an upright position? Well done are not looking for easy ways!

      Let them make from the Premier League BUOYfloating vertically ...
      1. yehat2
        yehat2 24 February 2021 16: 01
        +1
        Quote: Insurgent
        floating vertically

        or even better - not floating
    2. Lex_is
      Lex_is 27 December 2020 08: 16
      +6
      The saturation of the compartment mechanisms took place in a horizontal position with open ends, which is really very convenient and allows you to get a much denser layout of equipment and a smaller case.
      Unsolvable problems arose precisely when the blocks were joined.
      1. armannu
        armannu 27 December 2020 10: 37
        +1
        Due to deformations?
        1. Lex_is
          Lex_is 27 December 2020 11: 06
          +4
          Yes.
          The hulls themselves have been joining for so long, but they did not take into account that there is much less tolerance for joining numerous communications.
    3. Boris Chernikov
      Boris Chernikov 27 December 2020 13: 06
      -2
      interestingly something else .. if it is a nuclear submarine with a displacement of 6,5 thousand tons with "acceleration" is being built for 7-8 years .. how much would they build at the old pace? maybe they poured the child together with water? crying
    4. The Siberian barber
      The Siberian barber 28 December 2020 00: 28
      +1
      Their auto industry is also not without "frills")))
  • Lex_is
    Lex_is 27 December 2020 07: 46
    +4
    in order to simplify and speed up the work, it was decided to use CAD systems

    CAD systems had been in use for a long time. The problem was the requirement for 3D modeling of the boat, which is quite difficult even with modern software development, but at that level of development it was from the realm of fantasy.

    The second problem was just excessive modularity and requirements for filling modules with equipment.
    The modules for the head boat were made in a horizontal position, but this was considered inconvenient.

    They did not find it inconvenient, but simply could not dock them horizontally due to the displacement of the joints. And it was possible to solve this problem only with the involvement of General Dynamics.
  • Lex_is
    Lex_is 27 December 2020 07: 59
    +6
    Best characterization of the current state of the Astute program:
    How did it go so bad that they have to spend 17 months repairing a submarine they haven't even finished yet?
  • tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 27 December 2020 09: 33
    +12
    The Americans first make a full-size model of the compartment, then the submariners are launched into it, and they climb holes at all so that it is convenient to maintain and not disassemble the floor of the compartment to get to the valve, pipe or some kind of piece of iron. this is the reason that boats can build trouble-free boats.
    1. CTABEP
      CTABEP 27 December 2020 11: 15
      +1
      Interesting, did not know.
    2. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 27 December 2020 12: 05
      +11
      Quote: tralflot1832
      Maybe this is the reason that boats are able to build accident-free boats.

      Accidents happen everywhere, but they manage to avoid disasters after the death of Thresher and Scorpio. We must pay tribute: the Yankees drew tough conclusions from the tragedy. Papa Rikover turned everyone inside out, but made the professionals exactly comply with the requirements of reliability and safety laid down in the project.
  • Magic archer
    Magic archer 27 December 2020 11: 03
    +8
    It should be admitted that only one country, the United States, builds a submarine quickly and efficiently ... Unfortunately, we also faced the problem of long-term construction. The nineties crippled us. The British also have their own problems. In general, Astyutes are good boats. Here on the resource there was an article about how an Englishwoman in a conditional battle from the beginning secretly sat on the tail of the Virgin and then conditionally drowned her. That speaks about the high combat potential of the submarine. hi
  • Sailor
    Sailor 27 December 2020 12: 00
    0
    Who can tell you how her noise is, when compared with Virginia and our Ash?
    1. Magic archer
      Magic archer 27 December 2020 12: 23
      +3
      So to speak. The minimum is not inferior. I described a dueling situation in which an American and an Englishwoman met. I think Ash is somewhere nearby
      1. timokhin-aa
        timokhin-aa 27 December 2020 14: 39
        +10
        Ash is not near. It has an irreparable joint - the propeller. This is unsolvable.
        1. Sergey Kulikov_3
          Sergey Kulikov_3 27 December 2020 17: 28
          0
          Can you confirm your conclusions with something? Well, maybe the British nuclear submarines do not have propellers, or are their propellers not repeatable?
          1. Lex_is
            Lex_is 27 December 2020 18: 24
            +1
            Can you confirm your conclusions with something?

            And what needs confirmation here?
            Is there a screw on Ash?

            Well, maybe the British nuclear submarines have no propellers


            The British Astute have no screws.
            And the American Seawolf has no screws.
            And even the Russian "Boreas" do not have the same screws.

            And all this for the simple reason that the screws are not able to provide the required noise reduction.
            1. tralflot1832
              tralflot1832 27 December 2020 20: 36
              +3
              Sorry, but what is spinning in her nozzle, obviously not an auger or a propeller. I went to the submariners' website, there is a photo after their 1st section, for me it is a propeller with a bunch of blades. hi
              1. Lex_is
                Lex_is 27 December 2020 20: 52
                +1
                Jet propulsion.
                1. tralflot1832
                  tralflot1832 27 December 2020 20: 58
                  -1
                  Is it called that now? bully
                  1. Lex_is
                    Lex_is 27 December 2020 21: 48
                    +1
                    It has been called that for many decades laughing
                    It’s very strange for me to tell anyone to anyone about this, you were much more like me on the seas.

                    Have you ever seen such a thing?
                    Not interested in what it is called?
                    1. tralflot1832
                      tralflot1832 27 December 2020 22: 18
                      +2
                      This is a screw in the nozzle, but the version with a pump impeller is a completely different matter, therefore, both we and they secret. How to blow backward? In general, the secret is sealed.
                      1. Lex_is
                        Lex_is 27 December 2020 22: 35
                        +1
                        This is the screw in the nozzle


                        Wake up, these are the first Soviet water cannons, and in all the documentation they are called that:
                        On the external sling behind the transom stern of the Kaverna boat, two prototypes of VVD were mounted with impellers with a diameter of 0.37 m, opposite the direction of rotation
                    2. Subtext
                      Subtext 28 December 2020 15: 16
                      +2
                      It looks like this
            2. Usher
              Usher 27 December 2020 21: 01
              -3
              What do you smoke?
  • Boris Chernikov
    Boris Chernikov 27 December 2020 12: 55
    +2
    Cyril! Immediately take off, the great British cannot build 1/3 longer than the APL, which is half the size of the Borei, only the Russians always pull everything, but in the Holy West everything is always fine laughing
    1. Lex_is
      Lex_is 27 December 2020 14: 46
      +1
      Great Britons cannot build 1/3 longer apl, which is half the size of Borei


      Sadly, they really can't.
      Even on the most failed project, the British could not surpass us.

      Astute
      Development commenced June 1991
      The laying of the lead submarine on January 31, 2001 entered service on August 27, 2010.
      Built for 9 years

      955 project "Borey"
      Development began in November 1985, the lead boat was laid down on November 2, 1996, and commissioned on January 10, 2013.
      It took 16 years to build.

      885 project "Ash"
      Development began in 1977, the lead boat was laid down on December 21, 1993, and was commissioned on June 17, 2014.
      Built for 21 years.
      1. Boris Chernikov
        Boris Chernikov 27 December 2020 15: 28
        -2
        tongue and now opening the last boat in both projects? 8 years versus 11 ... oh yes laughing
        1. Lex_is
          Lex_is 27 December 2020 16: 00
          0
          and now have you opened the last boat in both projects? 8 years versus 11 ..


          Boris, I don’t remember that we were drinking.

          Well, let's open the last ones, all three mentioned series:

          Audacious S 122 2009 - 2020

          K-549 "Prince Vladimir" 2012 - 2020

          K-561 "Kazan" 2009 -2021 (plan).
          1. Boris Chernikov
            Boris Chernikov 27 December 2020 19: 20
            -5
            those. Unexpectedly the British profuse polymers hi
            1. Lex_is
              Lex_is 27 December 2020 20: 29
              0
              Boris, I never cease to be amazed at your inquiring mind and insight! laughing laughing laughing

              Just a few light hints:

              Even on the most failed project, the British could not surpass us.


              B2TC development was carried out in the nineties, when the UK defense budget was severely reduced - and with it spending on current and future projects.


              At the beginning of the decade, the plant employed more than 13 thousand people, and by 2001 only 3 thousand specialists remained.


              the Astute project at all its main stages faced characteristic difficulties of various kinds, which constantly hindered its successful continuation.


              And you, in just 12 hours of reflection, were able to guess that this was the most disastrous project in Britain in recent times!
              1. Boris Chernikov
                Boris Chernikov 27 December 2020 20: 39
                -3
                laughing and that is why they are a well-oiled project that "uses innovations in the construction industry", a boat that is much smaller in size than Borey is being built STAFFLY longer than these "Russian Boreas" .. but of course you need to start hysterically proving that everything is fine with the British, this is with the Russians everything is bad ... at least when you try to pose in front of the British, wave your tail not so much tongue
                1. Lex_is
                  Lex_is 27 December 2020 21: 28
                  +1
                  For the gifted, I'll explain.

                  The British, since 1997, had an absolutely wonderful government, which declared that the British fleet was not needed, constantly cut the budget of the army and navy and cut the budget of the fleet.
                  The British have a courtier firm BAE, which has a revolving door to the government and is very dashing in pushing and assimilating budget money. (unkind Englishmen write that a third of that money BAE brazenly steals and distributes in the form of bonuses to their tops)
                  In general, a complete mess and sodomy instead of military construction, and even a much smaller military budget.

                  In our country, the state sincerely, daily and tirelessly cares about the fleet, excellent and honest managers of the state corporation spend every penny of budget money prudently on strengthening the fleet.

                  Only, after all, what miracles:
                  Purposefully destroying the fleet and declaring that they do not need a fleet, the British government, plundering the remnants of the military budget, has built 2000 fourth generation nuclear submarines since 4, two aircraft carriers, 6 destroyers, 2 frigates, 2 landing ships.
                  Moreover, all programs were accompanied by epic failures and scandals.

                  And here, tirelessly thinking about the development and strengthening of the fleet, since 2000, in a series of bright victories, have mastered from a large: 6 nuclear submarines of the fourth generation, 2 frigates, 4 corvettes, 1 large landing ship

                  Straight some kind of mystery of nature!
                  1. Orkraider
                    Orkraider 27 December 2020 22: 09
                    +2
                    And here, tirelessly thinking about the development and strengthening of the fleet, since 2000, in a series of bright victories, have mastered from a large: 6 nuclear submarines of the fourth generation, 2 frigates, 4 corvettes, 1 large landing ship


                    Forgot:
                    * 3 frigates of project 11356R.

                    Inaccuracies by number:
                    * 7 Corvettes 20380/5-for today, in a couple of days will be 8 units... The thundering one will raise the flag this year.
                    * 2 BDK ("Petr Morgunov" project 11711 - December 23, at the Northern Fleet).
                    1. Lex_is
                      Lex_is 27 December 2020 22: 21
                      +3
                      Yes, I have not listed everything.
                      Also the fact that you have listed and minesweepers and a bunch of MPK and DPL and third-generation nuclear submarines.

                      I paid attention to large and new projects.
                  2. Boris Chernikov
                    Boris Chernikov 27 December 2020 22: 13
                    -2
                    laughing well, as I wrote above .. the tail wagging in the style of "the British are good, and we are bad" .. especially touched about "their big" .. Well, bring them to a heap of 4 minesweepers and 4 misunderstandings called River .. and all ..In the same 20 years Russia received: 5 frigates, not 2, 7 corvettes, 3 patrolmen, 11 MRKs, 3 IACs, 3 patrol boats, 2 large landing ships, and not 1 as indicated, 4 minesweepers, 8 diesel-electric submarines to the heap). And you are singing about "tirelessly thinking" here ... the difference is that the British did not have the same problems as in Russia due to the collapse of the USSR and the 90s, which led to the loss of competence, now it is being restored ... but admit that in Russia something could be better than in the Holy West .. it’s too hard .. you probably already tears from the inside .. The key problem of the British is not an "enemy in the government", but a banal attempt to jump overhead in the form of those two two aircraft carriers which they are now forced to patiently bring to mind without having the finances for the rest of the fleet hi
                    1. Lex_is
                      Lex_is 27 December 2020 22: 28
                      +2
                      Boris.
                      Once again for the gifted:

                      In Britain, the Navy sucks.
                      None of the major projects were implemented without a bunch of scandals.
                      The Britons howl that the unfinished government was ruined by the fleet and its pitiful remnants are not able to cope with the tasks before it.
                      1. Boris Chernikov
                        Boris Chernikov 27 December 2020 22: 41
                        -4
                        laughing Well, of course, they howl. When the Russian frigate has to send a
                      2. Lex_is
                        Lex_is 27 December 2020 23: 53
                        +1
                        Yes, they even send wooden rafts.
                        This does not mean that we need to happily ride their rake with idiotic cries of "Urya".

                        We need a fleet.
                        We need good radars and guidance systems.
                        We need modern communication systems.
                        We need the production of powerful marine engines.
                        And still a lot of what is needed, and even yesterday, and not in pictures and projects but on ships.

                        And the construction of Potemkin villages, under the joyful cries of approval, ends very badly and you have to pay for it with a lot of blood, and there are many examples of this.
                      3. Sergey Kulikov_3
                        Sergey Kulikov_3 28 December 2020 05: 37
                        -2
                        Who needs it? Who you are?
                      4. Boris Chernikov
                        Boris Chernikov 28 December 2020 11: 09
                        -2
                        And that is why you joyfully defend the British, shouting "they are doing well, and if it is bad, it is not their fault, but you Russians are doing so badly" ... Does the British flag hang on the wall by chance?
                      5. Lex_is
                        Lex_is 28 December 2020 14: 55
                        0
                        Boris, if you have any problems understanding what you have written, these are purely your problems. There is nothing I can do to help you.

                        Smart people study the enemy, analyze his mistakes and achievements, see what can be useful for himself and what is definitely not necessary to do, and they firmly know that there is always room for improvement and what to do better.

                        - with shouts of "Urya", everything is good and nothing needs to be done, they happily jump on unparalleled rakes.
                      6. Boris Chernikov
                        Boris Chernikov 28 December 2020 16: 55
                        -3
                        laughing yes yes yes .. that is why you write about "ah Britons" and immediately defend them and kick Russia .. just write, they screwed up so much that even Russia having problems with shipyards at one time now came out on topics significantly superior to them .. you can't ... you can't write well about Russia .. We urgently need to prove that Russia is worse and smear the British ... hmm .. "topvar's experts" as usual show that they are quietly praying to the West in the hope of dumping there.
  • lopuhan2006
    lopuhan2006 27 December 2020 13: 04
    +2
    Quote: pmkemcity
    Quote: Tochilka
    How many new nuclear submarines have been built in Russia in 25 years? Is it much more?

    Hyperbola (from the ancient Greek: "transition; excess, excess; exaggeration") is a stylistic figure of explicit and deliberate exaggeration, in order to enhance the expressiveness and emphasize the said thought.
    Only the "thought" I have not said, it suggests itself.

    This is CA in the form of one gyrus))) There, both with humor and with a double meaning, tight)))
  • Narak-zempo
    Narak-zempo 28 December 2020 15: 57
    0
    Mastering such funds turned out to be difficult and slow business, and the project began to fall behind schedule

    Damn, yes, autocad or solid can be mastered in a month, and how much did these calves?
  • Narak-zempo
    Narak-zempo 28 December 2020 16: 00
    0
    During the nineties, the shipyard at Barrow-in-Furness suffered from cut military orders and regularly cut staff. At the beginning of the decade, the plant employed more than 13 thousand people, and by 2001 there were only 3 thousand specialists.

    Your pizza will be delivered to you by a shipbuilder laughinglaughinglaughing