Groucho Marxism

The ‘Astute’ class is the latest class of nuclear-powered fleet submarines in service with the Royal Navy. The Astute program began in 1986 when the UK’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) launched several studies to determine requirements for replacement of its existing submarines. These studies were conducted during the Cold War, when the Royal Navy maintained a strong emphasis on anti-submarine warfare to counter increasingly capable Soviet submarines. However, by 1990 the Cold War had come to an end. The project was promptly cancelled and a new set of design studies were started, this time with cost control as a key objective. As we will see, to say that this objective was not met is something of an understatement.

A joint design by GEC-Marconi and British Maritime Technology was favoured both cost and capability grounds. With the signing of the contract in 1997, GEC-Marconi started work on developing a complete and comprehensive design for the Astute program. In 1999, British Aerospace purchased GEC-Marconi and created BAE Systems. By 2002 both BAE and the MoD recognized they had underestimated the technical challenges and costs of the program, as much rework was needed once the detailed designs were complete. In 2009, a House of Commons Defence Select Committee found that delays due to technical issues brought the Astute program to a position of being 57 months late and £1.3 billion (53%) over budget, with a forecast cost of £3.9 billion for the first three boats.

In 2015, the National Audit Office (NAO) forecast that the total cost of producing seven boats would be £9.6 billion, £1.4 billion (17%) over budget. In 2024, the Infrastructure and Projects Authority reported the total cost of the Astute programme had risen to £11.3 billion, explained by “inflation and delivery cadence within the shipyard”. And in 2025, the MoD reported that the Astute program will cost £12.2 billion. This £12.2 billion figure is almost three times the initial £4.3 billion forecast made by the NAO back in 2001. Some of the £7.9 billion discrepancy is attributable to inflation, which has been higher than predicted since 2022. But the vast majority is due to a combination factors that could have been avoided.

These factors included design failures, a shortage of technical expertise, poor contract management, a lack of quality control, and a declining industrial base. The project was initially viewed as “low-risk” but turned into a 70% new design. In 2001, it had been nearly 17 years since the UK had built a first-of-class submarine, resulting in a shortage of skilled workers. Early contractual agreements were counterproductive, with engineering work having to be ripped out and redone. Early ships in the class suffered from problems with subcontractors providing sub-standard materials, leading to costly repairs and extensive testing. And the supply chain for specialized submarine components had declined significantly by 2001.

These issues led to long delays, which meant the program required more labor hours than estimated, with additional costs also stemming from the need to manage complex, shifting technical requirements. To put the £7.9 billion overspend figure into perspective, with this money the government could have built around 20 new hospitals, 100 new schools, or 40,000 new council houses. And that’s just the overspend. The £12.2 billion spent on the project as a whole would have paid for around 30 new hospitals, 150 new schools, or 60,000 new council houses. As eye watering as these figures seem, however, they pale into insignificance when compared to the costs of another submarine program known as Dreadnought.

The UK maintains a stockpile of around 215 nuclear warheads, with around 120 active (usable). Since 1998 the British nuclear arsenal has been wholly submarine-based. Dreadnought is name of the program to replace the four Vanguard class submarines, which have provided the ‘continuous at-sea defence’ since 1992, with four new submarines that will be built in the UK. The four new submarines will be introduced, on current plans, from the 2030s onwards and will have a lifespan of at least 30 years. The Dreadnought submarines will carry the Trident Missile System. In 2011, the UK government approved the initial assessment phase for the new submarines and authorized the purchase of long lead-time items.

When the project was approved in 2011, manufacturing the four submarines was forecast to cost £25 billion in total. In 2015, this figure was updated to £31 billion. These costs do not include the related Trident missile renewal, new infrastructure projects at the re-nationalized Atomic Weapons Establishment, or new nuclear fuel production facilities at Rolls-Royce. Annual in-service costs are expected to be approximately 6% of the defence budget (around £3 billion). The Nuclear Information Service and the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament estimate a lifetime cost in the region of £200 billion. With this money the government could build around 500 new hospitals, 2,500 new schools, or 1 million new council houses.

Meanwhile, politicians tell us there is no money to properly fund public services! They must think we are stupid.