Thread by @AlexLuck9

Just to put some more context on these issues, as they stand right now (and attract some interest in AU for the desired used Virginia SSN to be bought). There are three principal factors in play over the next few years:

https://twitter.com/ryankakiuchan/status/1641993788037156865

1) There's Virginia Blk I-IV & theres Virginia Blk V aka the one fitted with the Virginia Payload Module. VPM comes with a notable increase in VLS capacity. It also comes with a notable increase in construction hours. One Virginia Blk V equals 1.25 regular Virginia in build time.

So right there you need to be careful measuring past and future build speed, because two Blk V equal 2.5 regular boats per year (with work for Columbia coming on top). All new boats on order will be Blk V, putting additional stress on meeting the 2 boats/year-target.

2) As I mentioned before, the yards are pulling staff from Virginia to meet agreed schedules on Columbia SSBN construction. There is a particular reason for that, and that is an intentionally aggressive schedule to deliver the lead boat for Columbia, to replace Ohio on patrols.

You see, the last four classes of (nuclear powered, naturally) USN submarines had their first of class delivered after ca 91 months. For Columbia schedule was originally 84 months. It is at present 78 months! Unsurprisingly this creates problems. Lead boat delivery due 2027.

3) HII broke ground on new "Multi Class Submarine Production Facility" 02/23. Facility is key in transferring more work from GDEB to HII. GDEB currently has lead on Columbia and alternates with HII on Virginia. New facility (and other efforts) will only come online after 2025.

So combined with delivery of lead boat 2027 (though schedule may slide) & new facilities operational by then there should (!) be significant potential increasing output on Virginia then. Even so Blk V takes more time to build & proof is in the pudding. /end

Sources for citations are CRS-reports on Columbia & Virginia.
news.usni.org/2023/01/04/rep…
crsreports.congress.gov/product/detail…

May be of interest @becstrating @redunley @DefenceProf @defence_wonk