Virginia-class submarine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Virginia class submarine)
Jump to: navigation, search
Virginia-class submarine
USS Virginia (SSN-774)
USS Virginia underway in Groton, Connecticut, July 2004.
Class overview
Name: Virginia
Builders: General Dynamics Electric Boat
Newport News Shipbuilding and Drydock Company
Operators:  United States Navy
Preceded by: Seawolf-class attack submarine
Cost: $2.688 billion per unit (FY2016)[1][note 1]
Built: 2000–present
In commission: 2004–present
Building: 5[2]
Planned: 48
Completed: 13
Active: 12
General characteristics
Type: Attack submarine
Displacement: 7,900 metric tons (7,800 long tons)
Length: 377 ft (115 m)
Beam: 34 ft (10 m)
Propulsion: S9G reactor 40,000 shp (30,000 kW)
Speed: 30–35 knots (56–65 km/h) or over
Range: unlimited
Endurance: Only limited by food and maintenance requirements.
Test depth: +800 ft (240 m)
Complement: 135 (15:120)
Armament: 12 × VLS (BGM-109 Tomahawk (missile)) tubes

4 × 533 mm torpedo tubes (Mk-48 torpedo)

27 × torpedoes & missiles (torpedo room)[3]

The Virginia class, also known as the SSN-774 class, is a class of nuclear-powered fast attack submarines (hull classification symbol SSN) in service with the United States Navy. The submarines are designed for a broad spectrum of open-ocean and littoral missions. They were conceived as a less expensive alternative to the Seawolf-class attack submarines, designed during the Cold War era, and they are planned to replace the older of the Los Angeles-class submarine, twenty-one of which have already been decommissioned (from a total of 62 built). The class was developed under the codename Centurion, renamed to NSSN (New SSN) later on.[4] The "Centurion Study" was initiated in February 1991.[5] Virginia-class submarines will be acquired through 2043, and are expected to remain in service past 2060.[6] Based on recent updates to the designs, some of the Virginia-class submarines are expected to still be in service in 2070.[7]

Innovations[edit]

The Virginia class incorporates several innovations not found in previous US submarine classes.[8]

Photonics masts[edit]

Instead of a traditional periscope, the class utilizes a pair of AN/BVS-1 telescoping photonics masts[8] located outside the pressure hull. Each mast contains high-resolution cameras, along with light-intensification and infrared sensors, an infrared laser rangefinder, and an integrated Electronic Support Measures (ESM) array. Signals from the masts' sensors are transmitted through optical fiber data lines through signal processors to the control center.[9] Visual feeds from the masts are displayed on liquid-crystal display interfaces in the command center.[10]

The Photonics Masts are built by L-3 KEO[11] (previously Kollmorgen)[12][13]

The design of earlier optical periscopes required them to penetrate the pressure hull (reducing the structural integrity of the pressure hull as well as increasing the risk of flooding) and required the submarine's control room to be located directly below the sail/fin.[14] Implementation of photonics masts (which do not penetrate the pressure hull) enabled the submarine control room to be relocated to a position inside the pressure hull which is not (necessarily) directly below the sail.[15]

Due to their unique visual appearance (which, if detected, distinctly identify the submarine as a U.S. Navy submarine) Photonics Masts will be replaced with Low-Profile Photonics Mast (LPPM) which better resemble traditional submarine periscopes.[15]

In the future a non-rotational Affordable Modular Panoramic Photonics Mast may be fitted enabling the submarine to obtain a simultaneous 360° view of the sea surface.[16][17]

Photonics Masts are mounted to the Universal Modular Mast (UMM), first installed on USS Memphis, a Los Angeles-class submarine.[18] The UMM is an integrated system for housing, erecting, and supporting submarine mast-mounted antennas and sensors. The UMM on Virginia-class submarines is used to accommodate eight mast-mounted sensors.[19] Apart from two Photonics Masts, the UMM also accommodates:[15]

  • two (tactical) communication masts[15]
  • one or two high-data-rate satellite communication (SATCOM) masts,[20] built by Raytheon,[21] enabling communication at Super High Frequency (for downlink) and Extremely High Frequency (for uplink) range[21][22]
  • radar mast (carrying AN/BPS-16 surface search and navigation radar)[23]
  • electronic warfare mast (AN/BLQ-10 Electronic Support Measures) used to detect, analyze, and identify both radar and communication signals from ships, aircraft, submarines, and land-based transmitters[24][25][26]
  • snorkel mast

Propulsor[edit]

In contrast to a traditional bladed propellor, the Virginia class uses pump-jet propulsors (built by BAE Systems),[27] originally developed for the Royal Navy's Swiftsure-class submarines.[28] The propulsor significantly reduces the risks of cavitation, and allows quieter operation.

Improved sonar systems[edit]

Sonar arrays aboard Virginia-class submarines have an 'Open System Architecture' (OSA) which enables rapid insertion of new hardware and software as they become available. Hardware updates (dubbed Technology Insertions) are usually carried out every four years while software updates (dubbed Advanced Processor Builds) are carried out every two years. Virginia-class submarines feature several types of sonar arrays.[29]

  • BQQ-10 bow-mounted spherical active/passive sonar array[29][30] (Large Aperture Bow (LAB) sonar array from SSN-784 onwards)
  • a wide aperture lightweight fiber optic sonar array (consisting of three flat panels mounted low along either side of the hull)[31]
  • two high frequency active sonars mounted in the sail and bow. The chin-mounted (below the bow) and sail mounted high frequency sonars supplement the (spherical/LAB) main sonar array enabling safer operations in coastal waters, enhancing under-ice navigation as well as improving anti-submarine warfare performance.[32][33]
  • Low-Cost Conformal Array (LCCA) high frequency sonar. Mounted on both sides of the submarines sail. Provides coverage above and behind the submarine.[34]

Virginia-class submarines are also equipped with a low frequency towed sonar array and a high frequency towed sonar array.[35]

  • TB-16 or TB-34 fat line tactical towed sonar array[36][37]
  • TB-29 or TB-33 thin line long-range search towed sonar array[36][37]

Other improved equipment[edit]

Virginia-class Diesel Generator Control Panel
  • Modernized version of the AN/BSY-1 integrated combat system[4] designated AN/BYG-1 (previously designated CCS Mk2) and built by General Dynamics AIS (previously Raytheon).[40][41] AN/BYG-1 integrates the submarine Tactical Control System (TCS) and Weapon Control System (WCS).[42][43]
  • USS California was the first Virginia-class submarine with the advanced electromagnetic signature reduction system built into it, but this system is being retrofitted into the other submarines of the class.[44]
  • Integral 9-man lock-out chamber.[45]

Rescue equipment[edit]

  • SEIE MK11 suit(s) - enable ascent from a sunken submarine (maximum ascent depth 600 feet)[29][46]
  • Submarine Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacon (SEPIRB)[47][48]

History[edit]

Virginia-class submarines were the first US Navy warships designed with the help of computer-aided design (CAD) and visualization technology.[10][49] By 2007 approximately 35 million labor hours were spent on designing the Virginia-class.[50] Around 9 million labor hours are required for the construction/completion of a single Virginia-class submarine.[49][51][52] Over 4,000 suppliers are involved in the construction of the Virginia class.[53] Each submarine is projected to make 14-15 deployments during its 33-year service life.[54]

The Virginia class was intended, in part, as a cheaper ($1.8 billion vs $2.8 billion) alternative to the Seawolf-class submarines, whose production run was stopped after just three boats had been completed. To reduce costs, the Virginia-class submarines use many "commercial off-the-shelf" (or COTS) components, especially in their computers and data networks. In practice, they actually cost less than $1.8 billion (in fiscal year 2009 dollars) each, due to improvements in shipbuilding technology.[8]

In hearings before both House of Representatives and Senate committees, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) and expert witnesses testified that the procurement plans of the Virginia class – one per year, accelerating to two per year beginning in 2012 – would result in high unit costs and (according to some of the witnesses and the committee chairman) an insufficient number of attack submarines.[55] In a 10 March 2005 statement to the House Armed Services Committee, Ronald O'Rourke of the CRS testified that, assuming the production rate remains as planned, "production economies of scale for submarines would continue to remain limited or poor."[56]

In 2001, Newport News Shipbuilding and General Dynamics Electric Boat Company built a quarter-scale version of a Virginia-class submarine dubbed Large Scale Vehicle II (LSV II) Cutthroat. The vehicle was designed as an affordable test platform for new technologies.[57][58]

The Virginia-class is built through an industrial arrangement designed to keep both GD Electric Boat and Newport News Shipbuilding and Drydock Company (the only two U.S. shipyards capable of building nuclear-powered vessels) in the submarine-building business.[59] Under the present arrangement, the Newport News facility builds the stern, habitability and machinery spaces, torpedo room, sail and bow, while Electric Boat builds the engine room and control room. The facilities alternate work on the reactor plant as well as the final assembly, test, outfit and delivery.

O’Rourke wrote in 2004 that, "Compared to a one-yard strategy, approaches involving two yards may be more expensive but offer potential offsetting benefits."[1] Among the claims of "offsetting benefits" that O'Rourke attributes to supporters of a two-facility construction arrangement is that it "would permit the United States to continue building submarines at one yard even if the other yard is rendered incapable of building submarines permanently or for a sustained period of time by a catastrophic event of some kind", including an enemy attack.

In order to get the submarine's price down to $2 billion per submarine in FY-05 dollars, the Navy instituted a cost-reduction program to shave approximately $400 million in costs off each submarine's price tag. The project was dubbed "2 for 4 in 12," referring to the Navy's desire to buy two boats for $4 billion in FY-12. Under pressure from Congress, the Navy opted to start buying two boats a year earlier, in FY-11, meaning that officials would not be able to get the $2 billion price tag before the service started buying two submarines per year. However, program manager Dave Johnson said at a conference on 19 March 2008, that the program was only $30 million away from achieving the $2 billion price goal, and would reach that target on schedule.[60]

The Virginia Class Program Office received the David Packard Excellence in Acquisition Award in 1996, 1998, 2008, "for excelling in four specific award criteria: reducing life-cycle costs; making the acquisition system more efficient, responsive, and timely; integrating defense with the commercial base and practices; and promoting continuous improvement of the acquisition process".[61]

In December 2008, the Navy signed a $14 billion contract with General Dynamics and Northrop Grumman to supply eight submarines. The contractors will deliver one submarine in each of fiscal 2009 and 2010, and two submarines on each of fiscal 2011, 2012 and 2013.[62] This contract will bring the Navy's Virginia-class fleet to 18 submarines. And in December 2010, the United States Congress passed a defense authorization bill that expanded production to two subs per year.[63] Two submarine-per-year production resumed on 2 September 2011 with commencement of Washington (SSN-787) construction.[2]

On 21 June 2008, the Navy christened New Hampshire (SSN-778), the first Block II submarine. This boat was delivered eight months ahead of schedule and $54 million under budget. Block II boats are built in four sections, compared to the ten sections of the Block I boats. This enables a cost saving of about $300 million per boat, reducing the overall cost to $2 billion per boat and the construction of two new boats per year. Beginning in 2010, new submarines of this class will include a software system that can monitor and reduce their electromagnetic signatures when needed.[64]

The first full-duration six-month deployment was successfully carried out from 15 October 2009 to 13 April 2010.[65] Authorization of full-rate production and the declaration of full operational capability was achieved five months later.[66] In September 2010, it was found that urethane tiles, applied to the hull to damp internal sound and absorb rather than reflect sonar pulses, were falling off while the subs were at sea.[67] Admiral Kevin McCoy announced that the problems with the Mold-in-Place Special Hull Treatment for the early subs had been fixed in 2011, then the Minnesota was built and found to have the same problem.[68]

Professor Ross Babbage of the Australian National University has called on Australia to buy or lease a dozen Virginia class submarines from the United States, rather than locally build 12 replacements for its Collins-class submarines.[69]

In 2013, just as two-per-year sub construction was supposed to commence, Congress failed to resolve the United States fiscal cliff, forcing the Navy to attempt to "de-obligate" construction funds.[70]

Technology barriers[edit]

Because of the low rate of Virginia production, the Navy entered into a program with DARPA to overcome technology barriers to lower the cost of attack submarines so that more could be built, to maintain the size of the fleet.[71]

These include:[72]

  • Propulsion concepts not constrained by a centerline shaft.
  • Externally stowed and launched weapons (especially torpedoes).
  • Conformal alternatives to the existing spherical sonar array.
  • Technologies that eliminate or substantially simplify existing submarine hull, mechanical and electrical systems.
  • Automation to reduce crew workload for standard tasks

Virginia Payload Module[edit]

The Block III submarines have two multipurpose Virginia Payload Tubes (VPT) replacing the dozen single purpose cruise missile launch tubes.[73]

The Block V submarines built from 2019 onward will have an additional Virginia Payload Module (VPM) mid-body section, increasing their overall length. The VPM will add four more VPTs of the same diameter and greater height, located on the centerline, carrying up to seven Tomahawk missiles apiece, that would replace some of the capabilities lost when the SSGN conversion Ohio-class submarines are retired from the fleet.[1][74] Initially eight payload tubes/silos were planned[74] but this was later rejected in favour of 4 tubes installed in a 70-foot long module between the operations compartment and the propulsion spaces.[74][75][76]

The VPM could potentially carry (non-nuclear) medium-range ballistic missiles. Adding the VPM would increase the cost of each submarine by $500 million (2012 prices).[77] This additional cost would be offset by reducing the total submarine force by four ships.[78] More recent reports state that as a cost reduction measure the VPM would carry only Tomahawk SLCM and possibly unmanned undersea vehicles (UUV) with the new price tag now estimated at $360–380 million per boat (in 2010 prices). The VPM launch tubes/silos will reportedly be similar in design to the ones planned for the Ohio class replacement.[79][80] As of September 2013 the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) was still hoping to field the VPM from 2027,[81] but deployment now seems unlikely since the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) moved the program in February 2013 from the 'Prompt Strike' budget to the main Navy shipbuilding account, which is already under financial pressure.[82]

Specifications[edit]

The christening of USS Texas (SSN-775)
USS Virginia (SSN-774) under construction
USS New Hampshire (SSN-778) the first of the Block II vessels

Boats[edit]

Block I[edit]

Modular construction techniques were incorporated during construction.[92] Earlier submarines (e.g. Los Angeles-class SSNs) were built by assembling the pressure hull and then installing the equipment via cavities in the pressure hull. This required extensive construction activities within the narrow confines of the pressure hull which was time consuming and dangerous. Modular construction was implemented in an effort to overcome these problems and make the construction process more efficient. Modular construction techniques incorporated during construction include constructing large segments of equipment outside the hull. These segments (dubbed rafts) are then inserted into a hull section (a large segment of the pressure hull). The integrated raft and hull section form a module which when joined with other modules forms a Virginia-class submarine.[93] Block I boats were built in 10 modules with each submarine requiring roughly 7 years (84 months) to build.[94]

Block II[edit]

Block II boats were built in four sections rather than ten sections, saving about $300 million per boat. Block II boats (excluding SSN-778) were also built under a multi-year procurement agreement as opposed to a block-buy contract in Block I, enabling savings in the range of $400 million ($80 million per boat).[1][54] As a result of improvements in the construction process, New Hampshire (SSN-778) was 500 million USD cheaper, required 3.7 million fewer labor hours to build (25% less) thus shortening the construction period by 15 months (20% less) compared to USS Virginia (SSN-774).[93]

Block III[edit]

North Dakota (SSN-784) is first of the VPT-equipped Block III Virginias
Overhead view of the Block III North Dakota

SSN-784 through approximately SSN-791 are planned to make up the Third Block or "Flight" and began construction in 2009. Block III subs feature a revised bow with a Large Aperture Bow (LAB) sonar array, as well as technology from Ohio-class SSGNs (2 VLS tubes each containing 6 missiles).[107] The horseshoe-shaped LAB sonar array replaces the spherical main sonar array which has been used on all U.S. Navy SSNs since 1960.[54][108][109] The LAB sonar array is water-backed—as opposed to earlier sonar arrays which were air-backed—and consists of a passive array and a medium-frequency active array.[110] Compared to earlier Virginia class submarines about 40% of the bow has been redesigned.[clarification needed][111]

Block IV[edit]

The most costly shipbuilding contract in history was awarded on 28 April 2014 as prime contractor General Dynamics Electric Boat took on a $17.6 billion contract for ten Block IV Virginia-class attack submarines. The main improvement over the Block III is the reduction of major maintenance periods from four to three, increasing each ship's total lifetime deployments by one.[125]

The long-lead-time materials contract for SSN 792 was awarded on 17 April 2012, with SSN 793 and SSN 794 following on 28 December 2012.[126][127] the U.S. Navy has awarded General Dynamics Electric Boat a $208.6 million contract modification for the second fiscal year (FY) 14 Virginia-class submarine, SSN-793, and two FY 15 submarines, SSN-794 and SSN-795. With this modification, the overall contract is worth $595 million.[128] Block IV will consist of 9-10 submarines.[129] Based on the planned split between block IV and block V boats, the block IV procurement should comprise the following hull numbers.[130]

Block V[edit]

Block V subs may incorporate the Virginia Payload Module (VPM), which would give guided-missile capability when the SSGNs are retired from service.[74] The Block V subs are expected to triple the capacity of shore targets for each boat.[7]

Future acquisitions[edit]

The Navy plans to acquire at least 30 Virginia-class submarines,[140][141] however, more recent data provided by the Naval Submarine League (in 2011) and the Congressional Budget Office (in 2012) seems to imply that more than 30 may eventually be built. The Naval Submarine League believes that up to 10 Block V boats will be built.[52][142] The same source also states that 10 additional submarines could be built after Block V submarines, with 5 in the so-called Block VI and 5 in Block VII, largely due to the delays experienced with the "Improved Virginia". These 20 submarines (10 Block V, 5 Block VI, 5 Block VII) would carry VPM bringing the total number of Virginia-class submarines to 48 (including the 28 submarines in Blocks I, II, III and IV). The CBO in its 2012 report states that 33 Virginia-class submarines will be procured in the 2013–2032 timeframe,[3] resulting in 49 submarines in total since 16 were already procured by the end of 2012.[129] Such a long production run seems unlikely but it should be noted that another naval program, the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, is still ongoing even though the first vessel was procured in 1985.[143][144] However, other sources believe that production will end with Block V.[145] In addition, data provided in CBO reports tends to vary considerably compared to earlier editions.[3]

In 2013 execution of a 10-submarine contract was put in doubt by Budget sequestration in 2013.[146] On 28 April 2014, the Navy awarded a $17.6 billion order for two subs to be built during each of the next five years.[147]

SSN(X)/Improved Virginia[edit]

Initially dubbed Future Attack Submarine[148] and Improved Virginia-class in Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reports,[3] the SSN(X) or Improved Virginia-class submarines will be an evolved version of the Virginia-class.[3] It was planned that the first submarine would be procured in 2025. However, their introduction (i.e. procurement of the first submarine) has been pushed back to 2033/2034.[3][149]

In late 2014, the Navy began early preparation work on the SSN(X), a new nuclear attack submarine class that will eventually replace the Virginia-class. The long-range shipbuilding plan is for the new SSN to be authorized in 2034, and become operational by 2044 after the last Block VII Virginia is built. Roughly a decade will be spent identifying, designing, and demonstrating new technologies before an analysis of alternatives is issued in 2024. An initial small team has been formed to consult with industry and identify the threat environment and technologies the submarine will need to operate against in the 2050-plus timeframe. One area already identified is the need to integrate with off-board systems so future Virginia boats and the SSN(X) can employ networked, extremely long-ranged weapons. A torpedo propulsion system concept from the Pennsylvania State University could allow a torpedo to hit a target 200 nmi (230 mi; 370 km) away and be guided by another asset during the terminal phase. Targeting information might also come from another platform like a patrol aircraft or an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) launched from the submarine.[150]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

Notes
  1. ^ The US Navy's budget request for two Virginias in financial year 2016 (FY2016) is US$5,376.9 million, including $2,030.4m of advance funding from previous years.
Citations
  1. ^ a b c d O'Rourke, Ronald (26 March 2015). Navy Virginia (SSN-774) Class Attack Submarine Procurement: Background and Issues for Congress (PDF) (Report). Congressional Research Service. p. 6. Retrieved 4 June 2015. 
  2. ^ a b c "Construction Begins on SSN 787; Navy Transitions to Building Two Virginia Class Submarines Per Year" (Press release). Washington, DC: NAVSEA - Naval Sea Systems Command. 8 September 2011. Retrieved 11 November 2011. 
  3. ^ a b c d e f "An Analysis of the Navy's Fiscal Year 2013 Shipbuilding Plan" (PDF) (Pub. No. 4456). Congressional Budget Office. July 2012. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  4. ^ a b "SSN-774 Virginia class". Retrieved 23 November 2012. [dead link]
  5. ^ "Navy Report on New Attack Submarine (Senate - July 21, 1992)". Federation of American Scientists. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  6. ^ Osborn, Kris (12 February 2014). "Navy Considers Future After Virginia-Class Subs". Defensetech.org. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  7. ^ a b Thompson, Loren (6 May 2014). "Five Reasons Virginia-Class Subs Are The Face Of Future Warfare". Forbes. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  8. ^ a b c Baker, A. D. III (1998). Combat Fleets of the World, 1998–1999. USA. p. 1005. ISBN 1-55750-111-4. 
  9. ^ Paschoa, Claudio (11 September 2014). "UMM Photonics Mast for Virginia-class Attack". Marinetechnologynews.com. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  10. ^ a b Graves, Barbara; Whitman, Edward (Winter 1999). "Virginia Class: America's Next Submarine". Undersea Warfare (US Navy) 1 (2). Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  11. ^ "Submarine Imaging". .l-3com.com. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  12. ^ "L-3 Completes Acquisition of Kollmorgen Electro-Optical" (Press release) (212-697-1111). L-3com.com. 7 February 2012. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  13. ^ "L-3 completes $210M Kollmorgen acquisition". Optics.org. SPIE Europe Ltd. 8 February 2012. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  14. ^ Holian, Thomas (Fall 2004). "Eyes from the Deep: A History of U.S. Navy Submarine Periscopes". Undersea Warfare (US Navy). Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  15. ^ a b c d "Sea Power" (February/March 2015). Navy League of the United States. 19 February 2015. pp. 22–25. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  16. ^ "Affordable Modular Panoramic Photonics Mast". Office of Naval Research. October 2012. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  17. ^ "Affordable Modular Panoramic Photonics". Office of Naval Research. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  18. ^ "Photonics Mast Program" (PDF). L-3 KEO. 20 March 2008. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  19. ^ "U.S. Navy: Vision...Presence...Power". US Navy. 30 July 1998. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  20. ^ RADM Fages' 2000 Testimony (Speech). Chief of Naval Operations, Submarine Warfare Division. 27 June 2000. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  21. ^ a b "Raytheon to Produce SATCOM System for New Virginia Class Submarine; Contract Valued at $29.4 Million" (Press release). Raytheon. 28 July 2000. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  22. ^ "Factsheets : Advanced Extremely High Frequency System". Air Force Space Command. 25 March 2015. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  23. ^ "AN/BPS-15/16 Radar". Fact File. US Navy. 6 December 2013. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  24. ^ "Ships, Sensors, and Weapons" 3 (3). US Navy. Spring 2001. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  25. ^ Phelps, William (29 October 2002). AN/BLQ-10(V): Submarine Electronic Warfare Support for the 21st Century (PDF). 39th Annual AOC International Symposium and Convention. Nashville, Tennessee: Association of Old Crows. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  26. ^ "AN/BLQ-10 Submarine Electronic Warfare Support System" (PDF). dote.osd.mil. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  27. ^ "BAE Systems Delivers First U.S. Navy Submarine Propulsor from Louisville Facility, Receives Additional $24.3 Million Contract" (Press release). BAE Systems. 1 June 2012. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  28. ^ Hool, Jack; Nutter, Keith (2003). Damned Un-English Machines, a history of Barrow-built submarines. Tempus. p. 180. ISBN 0-7524-2781-4. 
  29. ^ a b c d "US Navy Program Guide 2013" (PDF). US Navy. 2013. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  30. ^ "APPENDIX C Exercise and Sonar Type Descriptions" (PDF). December 2008. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  31. ^ "Submarine Hull Arrays". Northropgrumman.com. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  32. ^ "Special Purpose Sonar". Ultra Electronics Ocean Systems. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  33. ^ Moreavek, Leonard, LTJG; Brudner, T.J (1999). "USS Asheville Leads the Way in High Frequency Sonar". Undersea Warfare 1 (3). Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  34. ^ Keller, John (25 March 2012). "Lockheed Martin to provide Navy submarines with 360-degree situational-awareness sail-mounted sonar". Military & Aerospace Electronics. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  35. ^ "Virginia Class Attack Submarine - SSN". Military.com. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  36. ^ a b "Acoustic Rapid Commercial Off‑the‑Shelf (COTS) Insertion (A-RCI) and AN/BYG‑1 Combat Control System" (PDF). dote.osd.mil. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  37. ^ a b "Acoustic Rapid Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) Insertion for Sonar AN/BQQ-10 (V) (A-RCI)" (PDF). GlobalSecurity.org. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  38. ^ Kearney, Tom, CDR (Spring 2001). "Status Report: PCU Virginia (SSN-774)". Undersea Warfare (US Navy) 3 (3). Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  39. ^ "NSSN Virginia Class Attack Submarine". naval-technology. 15 June 2011. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  40. ^ "Raytheon Delivers Submarine Combat System to Royal Australian Navy". Raytheon. 30 January 2006. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  41. ^ "General Dynamics To Upgrade Submarine Weapons Control Systems". Defense Industry Daily. 21 July 2009. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  42. ^ "AN/BYG-1 Submarine Tactical Control System (TCS)". General Dynamics. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  43. ^ "General Dynamics continues project to upgrade submarine electronics with COTS computers". Military & Aerospace Electronics. 27 June 2013. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  44. ^ "GAO-09-326SP" (PDF). Government Accounting Office. March 2009. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  45. ^ a b c "USS Virginia SSN-774-A New Steel Shark at Sea". Applied Technology Institute. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  46. ^ Crafty Devil - Survitec Group. "Products » RFD Beaufort - SEIE MK11". Survitec Group. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  47. ^ "Ultra Electronics Ocean Systems - Underwater Communications". Ultra Electronics. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  48. ^ SSN 774 Class Guard Book - Disabled Submarine Survival Guide - Aft Escape Trunk (Logistics Escape Truck) (PDF). US Navy. 29 March 2012. Card 6I. Retrieved 4 June 2015. 
  49. ^ a b "Submarine Industrial Base Council". Submarinesuppliers.org. 22 December 2008. Archived from the original on 2012-01-19. Retrieved 6 February 2013. 
  50. ^ Schank, John F.; Arena, Mark V.; DeLuca, Paul; Riposo, Jessie; Curry, Kimberly; Weeks, Todd; Chiesa, James (2007). "Sustaining U.S. Nuclear Submarine Design Capabilities" (PDF). National Defense Research Institute. ISBN 978-0-8330-4160-9. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  51. ^ "Naval Submarine League". Navalsubleague.com. 27 September 2012. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  52. ^ a b [1] Archived 13 November 2013 at the Wayback Machine
  53. ^ Roberts, Jim (Winter 2011). "Double Vision: Planning to Increase Virginia-Class Production". Undersea Warfare (US Navy) (43). Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  54. ^ a b c Butler, John D., RAdm (ret) (June 2011). "The Sweet Smell of Acquisition Success". Proceedings (U. S. Naval Institute) 137 (6/1,300). Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  55. ^ "Statement of The Honorable Duncan Hunter, Chairman, Subcommittee on Military Procurement, Submarine Force Structure and Modernization". FAS Military Analysis Network. Federation of American Scientists. 27 June 2000. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  56. ^ "Statement of Ronald O'Rourke Specialist in National Defense Congressional Research Service before the House Armed Services Committee Subcommittee on Projection Forces Hearing on Navy Force Architecture and Ship Construction" (PDF). 10 March 2005. Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 September 2006. Retrieved 1 March 2008. 
  57. ^ "AUV System Spec Sheet Cutthroat LSV-2 configuration". Antonymous Undersea Vehicle Applications Center. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  58. ^ Fox, David M., CDR (Spring 2001). "Small Subs Provide Big Payoffs for Submarine Stealth" (PDF). Undersea Warfare 3 (3). Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  59. ^ "SSN-774 Virginia-class NSSN New Attack Submarine". Federation of American Scientists. 19 January 2009. Archived from the original on 7 July 2011. Retrieved 6 August 2011. 
  60. ^ [2][dead link]
  61. ^ "Navy's Virginia Class Program Recognized for Acquisition Excellence" (Press release). Washington, DC: Team Submarines Public Affairs. 8 November 2008. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  62. ^ "General Dynamics And Northrop Awarded Submarine Deal". The New York Times. 22 December 2008. [dead link]
  63. ^ McDermott, Jennifer (23 December 2010). "House, Senate ok defense bill for 2011; sub plan stays on track". The Day (New London, Connecticut). Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  64. ^ Pike, John. "SSN-774 Virginia-class NSSN New Attack Submarine". Global Security. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 
  65. ^ Communication, Mass. "VARFD.aspx". Public.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 22 February 2014. Retrieved 26 July 2013. 
  66. ^ "Virginia Class Program Reaches Major Milestone" (Press release). Washington, DC: United States Navy. 10 October 2010. Retrieved 26 July 2013. 
  67. ^ Hooper, Craig (6 September 2010). "Virginia Class: When does hull coating separation endanger the boat?". Next Navy. Retrieved 30 September 2012. 
  68. ^ Hooper, Craig (7 November 2013). "The Virginia Peel: Why are $2 Billion Dollar Subs Losing Their Skin?". Next Navy. Retrieved 7 November 2013. 
  69. ^ Mahnken, Tom (9 February 2011). "Growing concern down under". Foreign Policy. Retrieved 23 November 2012. 
  70. ^ 4 March 2013 @ 21:38 (2 March 2013). "U.S. Navy Sets Budget-cutting Plans in Motion.". Blogs.defensenews.com. Retrieved 26 July 2013. 
  71. ^ O’Rourke, Ronald (23 June 2005). Navy Ship Acquisition: Options for Lower-Cost Ship Designs — Issues for Congress (PDF) (Report). RL32914. Congressional Research Service. Retrieved 23 November 2012. 
  72. ^ "Tango Bravo". Strategic Technology Office. DARPA. Retrieved 17 October 2012. 
  73. ^ Freedberg Jr., Sydney J. (16 April 2014). "Navy Sub Program Stumbles: SSN North Dakota Delayed By Launch Tube Troubles". Breaking Defense (Breaking Media, Inc.). Retrieved 16 April 2014. 
  74. ^ a b c d Hasslinger, Karl, CAPT, USN (ret); Pavlos, John (Winter 2012). "The Virginia Payload Module: A Revolutionary Concept for Attack Submarines". Undersea Warfare (US Navy) (47). Retrieved 16 April 2014. 
  75. ^ "Navy Selects Virginia Payload Module Design Concept". USNI News (U. S. Naval Institute). 4 November 2013. Retrieved 17 November 2013. 
  76. ^ "Document: PEO Subs Overview of U.S. Navy Undersea Programs". USNI News (U.S. Naval Institute). 24 October 2013. Retrieved 17 November 2013. 
  77. ^ Grossman, Elaine M. (1 August 2012). "U.S. Senate Panel Curbs Navy Effort to Add Missiles to Attack Submarines". Nuclear Threat Initiative. Global Security Newswire. Retrieved 6 February 2013. 
  78. ^ Cavas, Christopher P. (4 February 2013). "Navy cuts fleet goal to 306 ships". Navy Times. Retrieved 6 February 2013. 
  79. ^ Ross, Robert T. (17 May 2013). "Lower Ohio-Class Replacement Cost Tied To VA-Class Multiyear Deal: Could Achieve 8 To 15 Percent Savings". State of Connecticut, Office of Military Affairs. Retrieved 26 July 2013. 
  80. ^ Osborn, Kris (28 January 2014). "Navy, Electric Boat Test Tube-Launched Underwater Vehicle". Groton, Connecticut: Defense Tech. Retrieved 9 February 2014. 
  81. ^ Greenert, Jonathan, Admiral (18 September 2013). Statement Before The House Armed Services Committee On Planning For Sequestration In FY 2014 And Perspectives Of The Military Services On The Strategic Choices And Management Review (PDF) (Report). US House of Representatives. Retrieved 21 September 2013. 
  82. ^ Grossman, Elaine M. (31 July 2013). "Pentagon, Lawmakers Deal Blows to Navy Fast-Strike Missile Effort". Washington, DC: National Journal. Global Security Newswire. Retrieved 4 June 2015. 
  83. ^ Ragheb, M. (11 November 2010). Nuclear Marine Propulsion (PDF) (Thesis). Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Retrieved 4 June 2015. 
  84. ^ "U.S. Naval Reactors". Retrieved 4 December 2012. 
  85. ^ "Attack Submarines – SSN". Fact Sheet. U.S. Navy. 10 September 2010. Retrieved 5 July 2007. 
  86. ^ Thomas, Doug (2008). "Submarine Developments: Air-Independent Propulsion" (PDF). Canadian Naval Review 3 (4). Retrieved 15 December 2012. 
  87. ^ Ted Kennedy; John Conyers (20 October 1994). "Lessons of Prior Programs May Reduce New Attack Submarine Cost Increases and Delays" (PDF). Government Accountability Office. Retrieved 12 November 2013. 
  88. ^ "Virginia Class Sub Program Wins Acquisition Award". Defenseindustrydaily.com. 20 November 2008. Retrieved 23 March 2013. 
  89. ^ Cowan, Simon (5 November 2012). "Facts favour nuclear-powered submarines". Retrieved 9 November 2012. 
  90. ^ "NSSN Virginia Class Attack Submarine – Naval Technology". Retrieved 23 November 2012. 
  91. ^ "Acoustic Countermeasures". Ultra Electronics Ocean Systems. Retrieved 15 December 2012. 
  92. ^ Patani, Arif (24 September 2012). "Next Generation Ohio-Class". Navy Live. US Navy. Retrieved 21 April 2013. 
  93. ^ a b Holmander, John D.; Plante, Thomas (Winter 2011). "The Four-Module Build Plan: The Second Decade of Virginia-class Construction Gets Better". Undersea Warfare (43) (US Navy). Retrieved 4 June 2015. 
  94. ^ Johnson, David C., RDML (sel.); Drakeley, George M.; Smith, George M. (23 September 2008). Engineering the Solution: Virginia-Class Submarine Cost Reduction (PDF). Engineering the Total Ship (ETS) 2008. Falls Church, Virginia: American Society of Naval Engineers. Retrieved 21 April 2013. 
  95. ^ Piggott, Mark O. (24 October 2004). "Commissioning of USS Virginia Ushers in New Era of Undersea Warfare" (Press release). Norfolk, Virginia: Commander, Submarine Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet Public Affairs. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  96. ^ Shoffner, Scott (5 September 2006). "Texas Arrives In Galveston" (Press release). Galveston, Texas: Commander, Naval Submarine Force, Atlantic Fleet Public Affairs. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  97. ^ Elinson, Ira J. (5 May 2007). "Navy Commissions USS Hawaii" (Press release). Groton, Connecticut: Naval Submarine Base New London Public Affairs. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  98. ^ Zeldis, Jennifer, LT (4 May 2008). "USS North Carolina Joins the Fleet" (Press release). Wilmington, North Carolina: Fleet Public Affairs Center Atlantic. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  99. ^ Zeldis, Jennifer, LT (26 October 2008). "USS New Hampshire Joins Fleet" (Press release). Kittery, Maine: Fleet Public Affairs Center Atlantic. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  100. ^ McKnight, Kleynia (27 March 2010). "Submarine New Mexico Joins the Fleet" (Press release). Norfolk, Virginia: Navy Public Affairs Support Element - East. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  101. ^ Merritt, T.H. (1 August 2010). "USS Missouri Joins Commissioned Fleet" (Press release). Groton, Connecticut: Submarine Group 2 Public Affairs. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  102. ^ "USS Missouri". United States Navy. 29 August 2010. Retrieved 29 August 2010. 
  103. ^ Durie, Eric, ENS (29 October 2011). "Navy's Newest Submarine, California Namesake Joins Fleet in Norfolk" (Press release). Norfolk, Virginia: Commander, Submarine Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet Public Affairs. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  104. ^ Sims, Hayley, LT (4 June 2012). "USS Mississippi Commissioned in Namesake State" (Press release). Pascagoula, Mississippi: Commander, Submarine Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet Public Affairs. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  105. ^ "Navy to Christen Submarine Minnesota" (Press release). Washington, DC: Department of Defense Public Affairs. 25 October 2012. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  106. ^ Lindberg, Joseph (24 October 2012). "Submarine USS Minnesota to be commissioned Saturday". St. Paul Pioneer Press. Retrieved 27 October 2012. 
  107. ^ "Virginia Block III: The Revised Bow". Defense Industry Daily. 21 December 2008. Retrieved May 20, 2008. 
  108. ^ "Submarine Technology Through the Years". Chief of Naval Operations, Submarine Warfare Division, Submarine History. US Navy. 19 July 1997. Retrieved March 23, 2013. 
  109. ^ Lambert, Paul. "Official USS Tullibee (SSN 597) Web Site - USS Tullibee History". Retrieved March 23, 2013. 
  110. ^ "North Dakota (SSN-784)". NavSource Online: Submarine Photo Archive. Retrieved 22 April 2014. 
  111. ^ LaGrone, Sam (17 April 2014). "Navy Delays Commissioning of Latest Nuclear Attack Submarine". USNI News (U.S. Naval Institute). Retrieved 22 April 2014. 
  112. ^ Copeland, Kevin (25 October 2014). "USS North Dakota Commissioned" (Press release). Groton, Connecticut: Commander, Submarine Force Atlantic Public Affairs. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  113. ^ "Future USS North Dakota (SSN 784), First Block III Virginia Class Submarine Delivered to US Navy". August 30, 2014. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  114. ^ "Navy Names Virginia Class Submarine USS John Warner" (Press release). Washington, DC: Department of Defense. 8 January 2009. Retrieved 9 January 2009. 
  115. ^ "Newport News Shipbuilding Celebrates Series of Firsts During Keel-Laying Ceremony for John Warner" (Press release). Huntington Ingalls Industries. 16 March 2013. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  116. ^ Copeland, Kevin. ""On a Mission to Defend Freedom" - USS John Warner is Commissioned". America's Navy. Retrieved 2 August 2015. 
  117. ^ Prunera, Jeff, LTJG (25 June 2013). "First Sailors Report to PCU Illinois" (Press release). Groton, Connecticut: Submarine Group 2 Public Affairs. Retrieved 22 April 2014. 
  118. ^ "Navy's newest submarine to be named USS Washington". KOMO News. 13 April 2012. Retrieved 30 September 2012. 
  119. ^ "Newport News Shipbuilding Lays Keel for Block III Virginia-Class Submarine Washington (SSN 787)". November 25, 2014. 
  120. ^ "Navy Secretary to Host USS Colorado Naming Ceremony" (Press release). Washington, DC: Defense Media Activity - Navy. 21 June 2012. Retrieved 28 May 2014. 
  121. ^ "General Dynamics Electric Boat Hosts Keel-Laying Ceremony for Submarine Colorado". gdeb.com. March 9, 2015. 
  122. ^ "Navy Names Five New Submarines". defense.gov. April 13, 2012. 
  123. ^ "Navy Secretary Hosts USS South Dakota Ceremony". KELOLAND TV (Sioux Falls, South Dakota). 23 June 2012. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  124. ^ "Attack Submarines - SSN". U.S. Navy Fact Sheet. 14 August 2014. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  125. ^ LaGrone, Sam (28 April 2014). "U.S. Navy Awards ‘Largest Shipbuilding Contract’ in Service History". USNI News (U.S. Naval Institute). Retrieved 28 April 2014. 
  126. ^ "Contracts" (Press release). U.S. Department of Defense. 17 April 2012. Retrieved 26 July 2013. 
  127. ^ "Contracts" (Press release). U.S. Department of Defense. 28 December 2012. Retrieved 26 July 2013. 
  128. ^ "General Dynamics Awarded $209 Million for Future Virginia-class Submarines" (Press release). Groton, Connecticut: General Dynamics - Electric Boat. 1 July 2013. Retrieved 26 July 2013. 
  129. ^ a b "Funding For U.S. Navy Subs Runs Deep". Aviation Week. 10 April 2013. Retrieved 26 July 2013. 
  130. ^ "Ohio Replacement". On Watch 2012 - Shipbuilding. Naval Sea Systems Command. Retrieved 6 February 2013. 
  131. ^ "Navy Secretary: Submarine to be named USS Vermont". WPTZ Burlington (Burlington, Vermont). Associated Press. 18 September 2014. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  132. ^ "SECNAV Names Virginia-class Submarine, USS Vermont" (Press release). Burlington, Vermont: Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus. 18 September 2014. 
  133. ^ "Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus Names Virginia-Class Submarine USS Oregon" (Press release). Portland, Oregon: Secretary of the Navy Public Affairs. 10 October 2014. Retrieved 4 June 2015. 
  134. ^ http://www.ktvq.com/story/29918284/public-invited-to-navy-ship-naming-ceremony-honoring-billings
  135. ^ LaGrone, Sam (9 January 2015). "Navy Names Attack Boat After Rickover". USNI News (U.S. Naval Institute). Retrieved 9 January 2015. 
  136. ^ Mabus, Ray, Secretary of the Navy (January 2015). 60th Anniversary of “Underway on Nuclear Power” Ceremony and Naming Ceremony for USS Hyman G. Rickover (SSN 795) (PDF) (Speech). Washington Navy Yard, Washington, DC. Retrieved 5 June 2015. 
  137. ^ "Secretary of the Navy Names Virginia-Class Submarine USS New Jersey" (Press release). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Defense, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs). 26 May 2015. Retrieved 4 June 2015. .
  138. ^ Petroski, William (1 September 2015). "New Navy submarine will be named USS Iowa". Des Moines Register. Retrieved 1 September 2015. 
  139. ^ New submarine will be named USS Idaho
  140. ^ "US Navy 21st Century - SSN Virginia Class". Jeffhead.com. Retrieved 25 February 2013. 
  141. ^ "Submarine Industrial Base Council". Submarinesuppliers.org. 22 December 2008. Retrieved 25 February 2013. 
  142. ^ "Naval Submarine League". Navalsubleague.com. Retrieved 25 February 2013. 
  143. ^ O'Rourke, Ronald (22 October 2013). "Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress" (PDF). Congressional Research Service. Retrieved 12 November 2013. 
  144. ^ McCullough III, Bernard, VAdm (ret) (January 2013). "Now Hear This - The Right Destroyer at the Right Time". Proceedings (U.S. Naval Institute) 139 (1/1,319). Retrieved 17 November 2013. 
  145. ^ Pike, John. "SSN-774 Virginia-class NSSN New Attack Submarine". Globalsecurity.org. Retrieved 25 February 2013. 
  146. ^ Freedburg, Sydney (12 September 2013). "Navy To HASC: We’re About To Sign Sub Deals We Can’t Pay For". Breaking Defense. Retrieved 12 November 2013. 
  147. ^ Cavas, Christopher P. (28 April 2014). "Navy orders 10 new submarines for record $17.6B". Navy Times (Washington, DC). Retrieved 28 May 2014. 
  148. ^ "Future Attack Submarine". fas.org. 
  149. ^ An Analysis of the Navy’s Fiscal Year 2011 Shipbuilding Plan (PDF) (Report) (Pub. No. 4116). Congressional Budget Office. May 2010. Retrieved 4 June 2015. 
  150. ^ Majumdar, Dave (23 October 2014). "Navy Starting Work on New SSN(X) Nuclear Attack Submarine". USNI News (U.S. Naval Institute). Retrieved 4 June 2015. 

Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]