- Reaction score
- 5,981
- Points
- 1,260
If I'm understanding the concept correctly, the new guy thinks there's room for a civvy-staffed (and owned?) sub fleet to train crews & do other work while freeing up "fighting" subs to get out there and fight.
www.navalnews.com
Quick summary from the piece:

Submarines “As-a-Service” Will Get More Players on the Field Today - Naval News
A “submarines-as-a-service” model—leveraging private industry and allied diesel-electric submarine producers—presents a way to quickly field Navy-trained, civilian-crewed undersea vessels that can fill critical training and development gaps.

Seems to be a take on flight training models these days.... The process is straightforward: The Navy partners with an innovative commercial entity that has relationships with allied submarine builders. This partner purchases and refits the submarines, which the Navy then leases for training and RDT&E. If the model proves successful, it could eventually support ISR and clandestine logistics in key theaters. While this would require a shift in thinking about operational authorities and employment, it would ensure the capability exists when needed.
The financial case for this approach is clear. According to Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates, operating a Virginia-class SSN costs approximately $1.6 million per operational day. In contrast, a conventionally powered diesel-electric submarine can operate at a significantly lower daily cost—approximately 40% less than an SSN. The math is simple: more submarines at a lower cost translate directly into increased readiness and strategic flexibility. Integrating conventionally powered submarines into the fleet would allow high-end SSNs to focus on their most pressing missions while providing the Navy with more platforms for training, experimentation, and operational support ...