The 90,000 tonne USS Miguel Keith expeditionary staging base (ESB-5) (Photo courtesy USN's Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Hector Carrera). The US military doesn't do things by halves!
---
About subs, military/naval, missiles, nuclear weapons & enrichment; political issues. New Aussie subs have been just talk since 2009. The Collins LOTE 2028-2040? might help sub availability temporarily. UUVs help. POTUS 2031 may cancel AUKUS Virginias as USN needs all SSNs to the 2040s. Australian Gov ignoring higher priority US Columbia SSBN production is minimising Virginia production until 2043. Shawn C is an excellent author. Gessler is back.
On 14 May 2026, Australia announced a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Norwegian government to domestically manufacture the NSM and JSM in Australia, making Australia a regional missile production and support hub for the popular cruise missile.
This MoU will see Australia invest A$850 million to set up production and maintenance facilities in Newcastle, New South Wales, from 2027, and contribute to Australia’s push for self-reliance in defence.
The NSM was selected in 2018 as the main anti-ship missile system of the much-delayed Maharaja Lela-class Littoral Combat Ships (LCS), and Malaysia has paid 95% of the contract value. According to USNI News, Norwegian officials informed the Malaysian Defence Minister Khaled Nordin that new export controls have limited NSM sales to NATO and NATO partner nations, and Malaysia is not a NATO partner nation, unlike Australia.
In an article written mainly about the S4* (the fourth & final Arihant-class boat) sailing out for sea trials, Chakra News has reported that the first two boats (out of a reported four-boat order) of the “S5”-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) are already under construction for the Indian Navy as of late 2025.
It serves to know that Chakra News was co-founded by Sandeep Unnithan, the veteran journalist who is the go-to media authority on India’s nuclear submarine program, with well-placed sources inside the program, as I have previously noted on SubMatts.
![]() |
| Provisional sketch of the S-5 class SSBN (based on an older iteration of the hydrodynamic testing models). Courtesy H.I. Sutton of Covert Shores. - |
Both these
assumptions turned out to be correct. We never heard about the funding being
granted for commencing the S-5’s build program, or when the build had actually
started. Also, it becomes clear that the S-5 program is now in a much more advanced stage
than the P-77 SSN.
So what is
the S-5?
To refresh
everyone’s memory, the “S-5” is a class of four SSBNs planned to succeed the
Arihant-class (inclusive of the Arihant Stretch sub-class) in the all-important
role of serving India's equivalent of what the UK would refer to as Continuous At-Sea Deterrence (CASD), by ensuring a credible Nuclear Second-Strike capability. As such, the S-5 can be regarded as the
second generation of Indian SSBNs.
The S-5 is
widely reported (including by Mr. Unnithan) as displacing around 13,500 tons
surfaced (so around ~16,000 tons submerged), about the same as the Royal Navy’s
Vanguard-class SSBNs, and more than twice as much as the first-generation
Arihant-class. The S-5’s deterrence mission is expected to be served by no less
than 12 missile tubes carried behind the sail/conning tower, as opposed to 4
tubes on the Arihant-class (SSBN hulls S2 and S3) and 8 tubes on the Arihant Stretch variant (SSBN hulls S4 and S4*). These 12
tubes are expected to house the upcoming K-5 and/or K-6 submarine-launched
ballistic missiles (SLBMs) with MIRV'ed nuclear warheads. I’ll be writing more
about developments in that missile program later.
![]() |
| An example of an older (c. 2018-19) hydrodynamic model of the S-5 SSBN. Image sourced via the website of Manjira Machine Builders Pvt. Ltd, a private defence contractor involved in the process. - |
While previous reportage on the CLWR-B2 PWR quotes it as having an output of 190 MWth (MegaWatt Thermal), the Times of India report linked above describes it as being 200 MW (an editorial oversight by the newspaper means they erroneously write it as MWe (MegaWatt Electric) instead of MWth, 200 MWe would translate into 650-700 MWth which is obviously not attainable for a submarine-based reactor given the size & weight limitations of onboard heat-exchanging & primary/secondary loop equipment).
This
electrical output will likely drive a 35 MW Nuclear-Electric Propulsion setup
(also known as a Turbo-Electric Drive, where the noisy mechanical reduction gearbox is replaced with a silent electric motor serving as transmission), which I had also written about in my article
dealing with the SSN program. This NEP/TED setup, much like the 190-200 MWth
PWR, will likely be utilized across both submarine classes (assuming it does
end up getting implemented), and just like the reactor, it will likely be ‘tuned’
to support each class’s unique power-delivery requirements.
![]() |
| An example of a newer (c. 2023-24) hydrodynamic model of what is presumed to be the S-5 SSBN. This is a cropped image with AI-based resolution upscaling, enhanced sharpness, contrast and colour-correction. The original, uncropped image can be found here. - |
With a maximum of around 35 MWe going to the submarines' motive/propulsion needs (though the propulsion won't generally be using 35 MWe all the time), it would still leave about 15-25 MWe on the table to serve other electrical purposes (for powering Sensors, Life Support Systems, Combat Management Systems, the boats' own Integrated Platform-Management System, etc.) even while the submarine is in a high-speed transit.
For comparison, the French Navy (Marine Nationale)'s Barracuda/Suffren-class SSN uses a 20 MWe nuclear-electric propulsion system (consisting of 2 x 10MWe turbo-generators) while the Triomphant-class SSBN is believed to use a 30.5 MWe system. Assuming the French K15 reactor (150 MWth) and secondary systems, shared by both Suffren & Triomphant classes, have a similar ~30% efficiency ratio (providing about 45 MWe of total electrical power), the French boats would also be left with a similar amount of power on the table (15-25 MWe) for non-propulsion needs. Note that, as stated earlier, just because an electric motor is of a certain power rating doesn't necessarily mean it will use that much all the time. The full rated power of the propulsive motor will likely only be used when the submarines are in high-speed transits.
A further note would be that, while at least the Suffren-class only uses its electric motors for transit up to a certain unspecified speed (switching to conventional reduction gearing for speeds beyond that, as mentioned in my previous article), it's not known how the Indian boats are configured for higher-speed transits. It's also not known if the 35 MWe setup is only for the S-5 SSBN while the P-77 SSN will get a smaller motor rated for less power or if the same motor with the same power rating will be shared by both classes, which I think is unlikely though much will depend on how big the P-77 SSN turns out to be, which is information that's not yet public knowledge though some informed sources put it at around the 6,000 tons (surfaced) figure while others say it will be 10,000 tons.
On topic, the first S-5 SSBN is expected to be commissioned into active service at some point in the mid-2030s. All four boats under this class could be in service by the late-2030s or possibly the early 2040s.
New Dry-Dock
A new, large dry dock that was being constructed at the Ship-Building Centre (SBC) right outside the city of Vizag on the eastern coast of India appears to be either complete or close to completion. The new dock, which I wrote about earlier, is situated beside the smaller, but longer, older one (which built the Arihant-class) and is part of the same SBC complex, dedicated for the construction of nuclear-powered submarines for the Indian Navy.
![]() |
| Three Astute-class SSNs of the UK Royal Navy, seen under various stages of construction inside BAE's Devonshire Dock Hall at Barrow-in-Furness, northern England. BAE Systems image, sourced via Navy Lookout. - |
![]() |
| A clear view of the SBC complex, just outside the city of Vizag, south-eastern India. Image sourced via Twitter/X. - |
![]() |
| A presentation believed to show CAD images of L&T's Hazira module-fabrication facility, located in the western State of Gujarat. Real images of the interior of this facility have never been seen. This picture is also sourced via Twitter/X. - |
In this case, it could mean that final assembly of the S-5s could happen at either dry dock, old or new. That remains to be seen.
![]() |
| The stern section of a Columbia-class SSBN of the US Navy being transported on a barge toward the final assembly site. Image via General Dynamics Electric Boat. - |
Thanks Anonymous for your 5/10/2026 11:33 AM comment.
More Than 12 Columbias?
Given rising threats from Russian and Chinese nuclear submarine fleets the US should strongly consider building more than the 12 scheduled Columbia-class SSBNs. More than 12 might already be a top secret intention.
- For the US that will be 12 scheduled Columbias to construct until ~ 2043. In addition the US may well build 4 or more additional Columbias to achieve parity with an enlarged combination of new high quality threats (SSBNs and SSNs) from Russia and now also China. The China threat was not fully considered when the US was settling on Columbia production numbers in the 2010s.
So potential threats to the US include:
= 12 x Russian Borei SSBNs already built/building and 12 x Yasen SSNs built/building/planned
= China has not yet revealed its plans in nuclear submarine quality and quantity. However to build a global blue water nuclear submarine force China may want qualitive and quantitative parity with Russia and must also consider 4 to 6 x future Indian S5 SSBNs and up to 6 x Indian Project 77 SSNs as threats.
= China has the shipbuilding capacity to design and high rate build 12+ x Type 096 SSBNs each with at least 16 x JL-3 or JL-4 SLBMs and 12+ x Type 095 SSNs.
Australia's AUKUS Needs?
Directly competing with the Columbia build is the Virginia SSN build and Virginia maintenance programs. Indirectly, 3 to 5 Virginias earmarked for Australia under AUKUS, exacerbates problems with the Columbia build.
More broadly all of Australia's real or imagined SSN allies (US, UK and France) are fully committed with current SSN construction. For example the Virginia program will reduce its construction drumbeat rate from 1.15 to 0.8 standard Virginias per year due to 1 Columbia per year being built from 2029. UK - final Astute(s) for UK Navy only, then straight to 15-20 years of Dreadnought SSBN production. France - final Suffrens for the French Navy only, then 20 years of SNLE-3G/newly named L'Invincible class SSBN production. All this prevents any spare SSN construction capacity for the Royal Australian Navy (RAN). That is unless South Korea's formidable SSN production potential kicks in to save Australia.
France is also building/planning 3-5 non-Suffren, non-SSBN designs namely 4 x Orkas for the Netherlands, 1 x Brazilian Álvaro Alberto SSN, and perhaps 2 classes of small Scorpenes for Indonesia and the Philippines.
I'll write further on nuclear submarine considerations of the UK, France and Australia around May 19, 2026.
