Rear Admiral Roger Lane-Nott was Captain of HMS Splendid during the Falklands War and Flag Officer Submarines from 1993-1996. In this article, he examines the state of the submarine flotilla and the RN’s ability to counter a growing Russian submarine threat.
At a meeting of the Commons Defence Select Committee this week there were some strong words from General Sir Richard Barrons who made the accusation that a lack of money and policy of denial have left the Armed Forces not fit for purpose and at risk of “institutional failure.” At the same meeting the former First Sea Lord Admiral Sir George Zambellas stated that “the country’s ability to hunt Russian submarines was inadequate.” That is an understatement.
The Submarine Flotilla is in a difficult place at the moment. The Flotilla moved everyone to Faslane but kept the Submarine School at HMS Raleigh in Cornwall (good planning that). The four Vanguard submarines have been joined by the SSNs from Devonport and the Flotilla HQ moved from Northwood now under Rear Admiral Submarines – why did we change from Flag Officer Submarines? West Dunbartonshire and the SNP are very hostile to the Navy and the Leader of the Opposition wants to scrap Trident despite supporting it being Labour party policy. We are struggling with the rump (3) of the Trafalgar class and insufficient Astute class (just 3 operational). Now we have the scandal of the Captain and Executive Officer of HMS Vigilant being relieved due to inappropriate behaviour involving female crew members. How can you have women in submarines when the Navy has a no-touch rule is beyond me. Recruitment is poor and the challenge of recruiting and training nuclear engineer officers is still proving difficult.
Veteran submariners are dismayed at the current state of the Flotilla and what is a proud history. This year in June nearly all the living Submarine Qualified Commanding Officers got together to celebrate 100 years of the Perisher and there was considerable chatter about the current state of the Flotilla and Government commitment to it. This is supposed to be the ‘Year of the Royal Navy’ but apart from HMS Queen Elizabeth, I can’t see it. Of course, there is jam tomorrow in the form of the four Dreadnought Trident submarines with a £31bn budget with £10bn contingency fund to build the successor submarines to the Vanguard class. This is good news, but the building rate of the Astute class is dreadfully slow and seven is just not enough. We need twelve at least and quickly but where is the political will?
While numbers and capability has been reduced to dangerous levels recruiting is a big challenge and the cuts of 2010 have left their mark. The strength of the Royal Navy in September 2017 was 22,470 plus 6,620 Royal Marines – a total of 29,420.
The submarine service in September 2017 had 840 officers and 3170 ratings making a total of 4,010. This is depressingly small. Despite these figures, submariners remain as stoical as ever. Jerry Hendrix in the National Review stated in May 2017 that “The Russian Bear has emerged from a long hibernation to threaten American and NATO interests with highly capable submarines in the Atlantic and Mediterranean. But neither the United States nor its allies are prepared to meet the Kremlin’s challenge.” And he argued that NATO had to strengthen its ASW equipment, skills, sensors and platforms.
The Anti-Submarine Warfare [ASW] capability of the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force is at an all-time low. Just 20 years ago we were the best in the world and admired by NATO nations, the USA and the Russians. What has happened is a loss of assets and a complete failure by Government and the Ministry of Defence to realise the importance of this defence capability.
ASW is not just a legacy of the Cold War when submarine, towed array frigates with helicopters and maritime air all ensured that Russian submarines never got the upper hand. In 1993 as Chief of Staff to Flag Officer Submarines I visited Severomorsk and met with the Commander of the Northern Fleet who admitted to me that the Royal Navy’s ASW capability was much better and a real challenge for them.
Some would say that the submarine threat has reduced significantly since the end of the Cold War but today Russia is expanding its submarine force again and is choosing to test our resolve by deploying into the Atlantic, and further afield together with Russian Bear MPAs and threatening our shores and making efforts to track our Trident submarines as they leave their Faslane base.
Despite protests from Governments and NATO the chilling fact is that the organisations, relationships, intelligence, and capabilities that once supported a strong ASW network in the North Atlantic no longer exist. NATO, and the UK, are in a bad place with regard to Russia’s underwater resurgence. “Two things have happened” naval historian Norman Polmar has said. “One, their submarines are quieter, and two, we have dismantled a large portion of our ASW capabilities.” Developing an effective ASW capability requires the marrying of several layers of capability. Each layer has a particular function, contributing to the overall effectiveness of the UK’s ASW performance. And this includes systems and skills.
We have lost the Nimrod MPA which was so good, SOSUS has gone, Towed array frigates like the Batch 2 Type 22 have been sold for small sums to other nations. The air gap is filled at the tactical level by the Royal Navy’s Merlin HM1 ASW helicopter and its AQS-950 dipping sonar. Required to prosecute a submerged target quickly, Merlin operates from its host platform, a Type 23 frigate. The Royal Navy will have 30 Merlins, scheduled to stay in service until 2029. What is far from clear is if and for how long these numbers can survive sustained spending cuts.
Nine new Boeing P-8 Poseidon MPA have been ordered but they are not due until 2020 and they are not enough. Seven planned Astute Class SSNs is just so far off the force levels required that it will be difficult to deploy as we used to between 1970 and 2000. It is simply not enough if it is to be deployed East of Suez and be Tomahawk capable. The Type 26 frigate, the UK’s indigenous variant of the Global Combat Ship concept, will replace the Type 23s as a multi-purpose but primarily ASW platform.
The submarine threat is a significant national security issue, not just a Cold War hangover. The UK remains committed to a minimum independent strategic nuclear deterrent. Whether it is a Russian Akula or another nation’s submarine showing an interest, the single SSN supporting the deterrent is a critical strategic asset. And so is the MPA.
But an effective ASW capability is not just about protecting the deterrent. The oceans remain largely impermeable, where the simple – confirmed or otherwise – presence of a submarine can deny the use of a geographical area (as the Argentinians found out in 1982) because the risk of operating a strategic asset there is too great. Many nations are now investing in submarine capabilities. And these could pose a threat to commercial shipping transiting key maritime choke points around the world, or sea-based logistics chains supporting operations such as in Afghanistan – which a submarine is well placed to expose and exploit.
Apart from spending money on kit we can do more. First write a new UK ASW strategy that considers the Russian submarine threat and capability now and potential for the future. And then plan force levels to match the threat. Secondly, create a new ASW “Centre of Excellence” that can bring NATO’s navies together to create common NATO anti-submarine warfare tactics. And thirdly, technological readiness setting up a NATO standard for encrypted transmission of ASW sensor data.
So, it is high time to take a serious look at the SSN numbers and the UK’s ASW capability and invest heavily in those layers of capability – MPA, Towed array frigates, ASW helicopters, and above all more SSNs. It would be nothing short of dereliction of duty not to do so.
Main image: HMS Trenchant conducts a personnel transfer during Exercise Saxon Warrior, 2017. (US Navy photo)
I agree with every word of this. The dereliction of duty is breathtaking.
What’s more deeply depressing is I don’t see an ounce of political will to change it from any direction.
The 2% GDP target has morphed from a minimum shaming tool to kick France & Germany into a mental comfort blanket for under pressure pilitians to hide behind.
Restoring the military to drive an ambitious industrial policy should have been at the heart of any Brexit plan.
It’s all very deeply depressing
The politicians have never been good at understanding and providing for defence for many years. It was only by a whisker we were spared the humiliation of losing the Falklands. John Nott the man who was in the course of destroying the Royal Navy’s ability to retake the Falklands should have been immediately dismissed and put on trial for running the country into danger. He should never have been knighted.
Unless there is some penalty the politicians will never react. It seems a great sadness that the present Government will unlikely ever be brought to account. People die when there is war and more die when there is defeat or losses caused by rampant political neglect. The politicians should be made aware they will be held responsible personally for the decisions taken. At present there is no judicial means to do this. There should be; uniquely as regards defence.
‘Pour encourager les autres’.
I always thought you were 5th Watch …. 😉
Britain has the world’s 5th largest economy. We are still a world power. We can afford to outfit a
decent size Navy. Are spending priorities are all discombobulated by politicians who every few years kick the stuffings out of our Navy. I just don’t get it.
We’re too busy paying tens of billions in foreign aid to countries whose GDP spend on military far outmatches ours.
I agree, just look at the aid we send to India and they managed to get the P8 into their service before us, how does that work???
Our only hope may be a rise in productivity (driven by AI) and growth from post-Brexit trade deals.
And yes, I’m fully aware that even positing that shows how damned arrogant I am, I apologise for that. I just don’t see any other way. A Royal Commission sorting out the managerial elements of the NHS? Probably wouldn’t make enough savings. Improving the foreign aid budget? Could do something, but probably not enough. Meh.
Completely agree with everything in this post. I think i’ll copy my comment from the last one on submarines….
‘It’s absolutely ridiculous that we have been paying BAE NOT to be build more subs at Barrow when the Royal Navy said for years it had a minimum requirement of 8 SSN’s. The 10 year gap between the last Trafalgar and first Astute was another disastrous move fueled by a post Cold War illusion of safety. When will the decision makers get it into their heads that the only products of this kind of dithering are inflated costs, a critical loss of skills/experience and our Armed Forces left with increasingly clapped out hardware. A regular drumbeat of orders is good for the industry, good for cost control and good for our military capability. The fact that the Royal Navy has only received 3 new SSN’s and not a single new frigate since 2002 is a disgrace!’.
2% of GDP just isn’t enough in an increasingly fragmented world when our armed forces are being forced to look in multiple directions. Setting a minimum spending target in this way is clearly counterproductive when the spending can be fudged (pensions, benefits etc) and it detracts from having serious discussions about capabilities and strategy.
Sadly there is precious little responsibility or integrity shown on the part of politicians and no joined up thinking with a clear industrial strategy.
The money is out there….we just need a government willing to collect it from individual tax dodgers as well as the likes of Amazon and Starbucks instead of turning a blind eye and harping on about the rest of us ‘living within our means’ whilst they try to squeeze a few more pennies out of the poorest in society. Does anyone seriously think people will spend a fortune uprooting their interests if corporation tax goes up a percent or two, or companies will pull out of a multi billion pound market because they are asked to pay a tiny slither more….please!
Some good points but also some inaccurate reports. Two of the remaining T boats are moving to Faslane, this will happen next year. Your point that all T boats have moved to Faslane is incorrect. The Submaine School is also moving to Faslane, it is under construction. Submarine HQ was spilt years ago between Faslane and Devonport and hasn’t just moved in recent years from Northwood.
People are the big problem. If we ordered 3 extra SSN we could not crew them. The Navy needs a radical new employment model to attract and retain staff. It’s not just money, the Navy needs to treat its sailors totally differently if it’s to be able to grow. If you have good skills and a good attitude it’s not difficult to get into the Navy today, but people aren’t joining. In addition to high a percentage of thoes that do don’t say long term. Big change is needed, lots of old fashioned traditions will need to go to create a modern place to work that people want to make a career out of.
‘How can you have women in submarines when the Navy has a no-touch rule is beyond me.’ Really! Maybe put them in Burkas if the men can’t help themselves. When you are struggling to recruit you can’t ignore 50% of the population.
Nailed it my man!
I think the commentbwas more around the cramped conditions absolutely requires contact as you move around. Privacy is none existent in this environment, not so much about restraint of individuals.
I totally disagree. As a serving submariner on a boat with females I can say that most of the ‘wrens’ are good to work with and have no problem with privacy or close contact. They are happy to just get on with their job like the rest of us. At the end of the day if they are capable to do the job, why shouldn’t they?
The only problem I can see with women on submarines is relationships and once again this is a deaf argument. Wether there are women on submarines or not relationships still happen. Are we to stop homosexual people from serving on submarines as well? As soon as people realise that women serve on submarines now and no matter how much they complain (not saying that you are) that this will not change and then it will be better for the service I believe.
I am very much a believer of……if they can do the job, why shouldn’t they?
Just to be clear this is a guest post and SRN does not object to women serving at sea. They can clearly do the job every bit as well as the men.
However, as Rodger suggests, allowing them in the uniquely cramped and pressurised environment of a submarine was almost certain to lead to relationship issues and temptation to break the rules. The experience of the surface fleet suggested this was inevitable. While relationships within the chain of command are very serious on a surface ship, on an SSBN it is doubly concerning.
I left the submarine service in 2016. I hadn’t been to sea for the last 4.5 years! Old boats breaking down, too much uproar between companies trying to fix them. What a joke.
Spot on, Chris,
A good place to start would be retiring the remaining T boats NOW, and speeding up the build time for the remaining Astutes. Seven to nine years to build an SSN? The Americans can turn out a boat in circa 30 months, and Virginia Class SSNs are just as complex as Astutes.
With the money saved from retiring boats that are well passed their sell-by date, let’s look at building an eighth boat, thus relieving some of the strain on the flotilla.
Yes, we have to do something about manning, so let’s give people attractive terms and conditions, and above all, tell these people they are valued.
Front line truth not Govt spin
So much common sense in this article that it is difficult to argue any point raised within it.
Sadly, common sense seems to have gone out of the window in modern day UK – with everyone in it for themselves.
I really hope Teresa May is an avid reader of this forum….. unlikely I know, but we can live in hope
I hope no one objects to a contribution from one who has never served? A thought on recruitment (and also creative thinking, much lacking I fear).
Recruitment. Average U.K. student debt is currently 50,000 G.B.P. and rising (1). For most (I speak as a retired lecturer) this represents an increasing poor return. There are (always were) other routes into a career; moreover, ones that paid a wage, sometimes small, but nevertheless, income. I recently had a trained gas fitter in my home. He had spent seven years in H.M. Forces and came out with qualifications. He has no debt and as far as I can see a job for life supporting his young family. The military gave him his start and he has not got 50,000 quid to repay!
Surely, the R.N. could offer something along the lines of a campaign “Join us, get a qualification and no debts”, flexible two, three or five year contracts? Some supermarkets have run trainee management courses that equipped people for career paths. It seems to me that there isn’t a sense of innovation in attracting recruits. If Whitehall can’t do the business than get people in who can.
Procurement: It wasn’t obvious how flogging off or scrapping viable units (maybe not cutting edge but still useful) in 2010-15 was going to benefit the Fleet. Today’s omishambles has resulted in reported low morale and most certainly, loss of capability. Retiring ships that work (and trained crews) that have a few more years in them on cost grounds is bonkers if there are not replacement units coming on stream. I blame Civil Servants and career officers for this. A school student could spot this mistake. I have read (here most likely) that plans for the future frigate programme are seventeen or eighteen years old! We now have potentially two large aircraft carriers with no aircraft and too few escorts and supply vessels. Who do we shoot?
‘Too many cooks spoil the broth’. I sense behind the scenes the requirements for any sort of vessel are chopped and changed endlessly and the subsequent delays pile up costs to the point that the projects are scrapped at the paper stage and then its start again with a blank piece of paper. No airline could be managed this way. It has taken years to arrive at a fairly obvious idea such as building modules in different yards to spread both expertise and speed up procurement. What’s the betting?
Things were once done quicker and with more creativity (2). The results might have been less than glamorous, but ‘ready by Thursday’ they were. And we won.
(1) Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-40493658
(2) Source: http://www.naval-history.net/xGM-Chrono-05CVE-aEscort%20Carriers.htm
4000 crew for 11 boats seems like a lot to me. 100 crew per SSN and 130 crew per SSBN, double that and it is still only about 2400. What are the other 1600 doing? Do we need over a 1000 shore based submariners? Could we release some of them to help surface fleet crew shortfalls? I am genuinely curious as to why we need so many people to keep maybe 5/6 boats at sea. I may be missing something obvious but if so I am not sure what.
Perhaps, God forbid, having some family time or doing something shoreside to balance out their months below surface or being away from home (unless they live in Scotland)?
Retention is bad enough already without asking people to spend half of their life away from family.
Mostly ageing equipment, draconian pay and conditions by today’s expectations, being forced to live out of a bag or move a family to Scotland and a government that really doesn’t care about anything apart from lining its friend’s pockets is a recipe for staffing trouble.
The state of our ASW capabilities is depressing to say the least. What is even more apparent is that the RN will have to take on the responsibility of plugin the UK-Iceland-Greenland gap without the aid of SOSUS. With only seven Astutes available of which two will be allocated to the Carrier Battlegroup and one as a SSBN escort that leaves four, Two of these will be undergoing refit-repair and work ups leaving only two. However if in time of conflict the second CBG is at sea or an Amphibious group then these two would also be required. So it means that we have enough to carry out the basic escort tasks but nothing left for defensive or offensive operations.
It means that the UK-Iceland-Greenland Gap is open for Russian submarines to use and endanger the Convoy routes from the US.
Yes the US would send some of their SSNs to assist, but what would happen if the US could not because of commitments in the Pacific or protection of their Eastern Coastline. Polish and German SSKs would have their hands full with the Baltic, Norway would have a picket line up North, Italy and Spain would be operational in the Med. That leaves the French 6 SSNs, but would the French commit them, I don’t know, especially as they also need them to escort their carrier group and SSBNs.
Maybe to help with this the UK and MoD needs to think outside the box.
When I was looking at the life span of the US Ohio class I noticed that they will be almost 50 years old when they will be replaced possibly even older, whilst our four Vanguards will be thirty years old. I wonder if the Hulls of the Vanguards could last another 20 years, if so then maybe something different could be done with them rather than scrapping them. For example remove the SLBM tubes and replace half of them with cruise missile tubes, the space where the other half was could be converted into a SOSUS/ EW centre with the sub having an extra long tail. They would then become the GAP picket line replacing the SOSUS line that is decommissioned that was based in Iceland. They would be mobile, quiet, able to get out of there if need be or take on a surface group or submarine if required.
Its only an idea but I can’t see why it would not work.