Suppose for a moment that the UK decided to either spend the money to develop themselves – perhaps due to taking a more French national sovereignty position or not heading down the HTP path – or manage to negotiate with the Americans so that they were able to sell nuclear powered submarines to other countries if they wanted. Which ones do people think would be potential customers, and in what sort of timeframe?
Nuclear Submarine Export Customers?
There is the AUKUS recently, a treaty to build nuclear submarines for Australia, with british, US or even french designs (idk if was decided). So this is already happening.
Interesting would be if was possible for a similar treaty happening early and with other countries.
The only one that is building nuclear submarines recently is Brazil. India leased soviet designs. Maybe these could be potential customers?
Interesting would be if was possible for a similar treaty happening early and with other countries.
The only one that is building nuclear submarines recently is Brazil. India leased soviet designs. Maybe these could be potential customers?
Possible customers for British built SSNs
Australia
Brazil (possibly)
Canada
Chile
India
Japan (If the Japanese constitution allows)
Could Argentina be a possibility before Falklands? Their aircraft carrier during that was british made, for example.
Riain
Banned
Just a word on what it takes to field a submarine arm. The RN kept 3 subs in Australia until 1969 to train the RAN in ASW, the RAN ordered 4 Oberons to replace this ASW training capability. The RAN planned to acquire another 4 Oberons to boost its submarine arm from an ASW training arm into an offensive force, but in the end only got 2 Oberons and a further batch of A4 Skyhawks for the FAA. 4-6-8 diesel submarines is of course dependent on Australias unique geographical and alliance circumstances , the differences are only in degree rather than order of magnitude. If Australia needs 4 subs for ASW training and 8 for offensive the a NATO member likely needs 3 and 6.
Canada looked at SSNs a couple of times, 1958-60 and 1987-88. However Canada tightarsed the whole process, they dropped the SSN idea, looked at expensive US Barbel class SS, then 6 cheaper Oberons then 3 Oberons the delayed the buy because the British didn't offset the purchase in Canada fast enough. The 80s Canada class SSNs wasn't much better, it was opposed by the US for starters who had the right to do so, and again the Canadians weren't really keen on C$8 billion on subs. So Canada is out.
Nuclear was mentioned in the Collins class in the 80s, but nuclear in Australia was so far off the radar that it sounded ludicrous, same with Collins replacement. Indeed until the AUKUS announcement the merest suggestion of nuclear submarines would be laughable. However I think that with a different nuclear history, if Australia got a nuclear power reactor in the 60s, the idea of a nuclear submarine wouldn't be quite so laughable even if it was rejected on cost and international political grounds.
As for others. In the 60s an Oberon cost 3 million pounds, the first 2 British production SSNs cost 25 and 21 million pounds. That is an absolute fuckload of money, 2/3 the cost of CVA01, which was cancelled for being too expensive. Which countries have that sort of money, and the requirement for such naval power?
Canada looked at SSNs a couple of times, 1958-60 and 1987-88. However Canada tightarsed the whole process, they dropped the SSN idea, looked at expensive US Barbel class SS, then 6 cheaper Oberons then 3 Oberons the delayed the buy because the British didn't offset the purchase in Canada fast enough. The 80s Canada class SSNs wasn't much better, it was opposed by the US for starters who had the right to do so, and again the Canadians weren't really keen on C$8 billion on subs. So Canada is out.
Nuclear was mentioned in the Collins class in the 80s, but nuclear in Australia was so far off the radar that it sounded ludicrous, same with Collins replacement. Indeed until the AUKUS announcement the merest suggestion of nuclear submarines would be laughable. However I think that with a different nuclear history, if Australia got a nuclear power reactor in the 60s, the idea of a nuclear submarine wouldn't be quite so laughable even if it was rejected on cost and international political grounds.
As for others. In the 60s an Oberon cost 3 million pounds, the first 2 British production SSNs cost 25 and 21 million pounds. That is an absolute fuckload of money, 2/3 the cost of CVA01, which was cancelled for being too expensive. Which countries have that sort of money, and the requirement for such naval power?
Not French, AUKUS ended the French conventional submarine program (which was trying to turn their SSN design into a SSK) and will replace it with a SSN design, though what that is is another question given production schedules and demands for both the USN and RN.
Riain
Banned
My money is on the British, I think there would be more scope for joint work than with the US.
I remember some sources at time speculating that they maybe would use a french SSN design, after the backlash of conventional sub program cancellation, but again, that could be just speculation.
I think the French basically said "if you had asked for a SSN design, thats what we would have offered, you asked for a SSK", but the AUKUS deal was pretty clearly a US/UK/Australia hook up, the French angle was fairly dead by that point.
While the Astute makes more sense for budget/manpower issues, how does that work in schedules? Would the RN even think about giving up one of the last couple of Astutes for Australia? The SSBN project is already in full swing so the build hall is going to be occupied for over a decade, so is there even physical space for an extra hull build? And haven't RR stopped producing the reactor for the Astutes, with the Dreadnought and SSN(R) using a new design thats bigger than the Astutes? Can Australia keep the Collins operational till the SSN(R) in 20+ years from now?
Historically Canada seemed to briefly consider buying SSN’s so they might be a possible customer in an alternative time line ?
In an alternate time line where the UK was actively marketing SSN’s from say the early 60’s onwards I wouldn’t entirely rule out Canada as a customer. Depending on a bunch of stuff
I could see Canada deciding that SSN’s offered another approach to ASW in the early 1960’s. Later I could see a replacement program in the late Cold War era with perhaps more emphasis on Arctic operations and perhaps anti surface ship capabilities as well as ASW.Perhaps they drop their carrier earlier and maybe delete one of their unrep ships and some destroyers to help fund the 1960’s era SSN‘s in an alternate time line (and maybe they don’t modernize some older surface ships ?). Presumably they would also delete the Oberons.
Last edited:
Riain
Banned
ScoMo said from day 1 that the SSNs will be built in Adelaide, and everyone seems to have forgotten that Australia has significant submarine building capability. I think its more than likely that significant portions of even early subs will be built here, other portions/modules will be built in the UK (or US) and shipped here for assembly rather than assembled in the UK (or US) and taking up their space.
Let’s not talk about massive current Australian SSN procurement and manufacturing fuck ups.
Let’s project past massive Australian SSK procurement and manufacturing fuck ups onto past massive Australian SSN procurement and manufacturing fuck ups.
Remember when they shot the BLF leader and “Balmain Labour Party” mayor over the refueling transport at 3am?…cause Australian SSNs are going to be garden island “fun” in the late 70s
Let’s project past massive Australian SSK procurement and manufacturing fuck ups onto past massive Australian SSN procurement and manufacturing fuck ups.
Remember when they shot the BLF leader and “Balmain Labour Party” mayor over the refueling transport at 3am?…cause Australian SSNs are going to be garden island “fun” in the late 70s
Riain
Banned
The UK uses US reactor technology so has to get US permission to share that technology, and the US doesn't share that sort of thing. This is what scuppered the Canadians in the 80s.