"Fraid not. The details are tedious to recap, but if you've the inclination the defence white paper on trident outlines the reasons why a subsonic
unstealthy airborne detterent is shite, and it is very shite. Th whole idea was thrown into the mix as a canard- the suggestion really has no legs at all and
meets none of the key tenets of the deterrent role I'm afraid."
Maybe.. but I thought it was very interesting that one option wasn't set out in the white paper for MPs to consider. It included the following:
1. Long range aircraft equipped with cruise missiles
2. Large surface ship equipped with Trident
3. Land based silo Trident
4. Vanguard 2 with Trident
Where is SSNs equipped with nuclear cruise? Why was it excluded?
I wonder if it was because MPs might have seen it as a very attractive option?
For £20bn you could have extended Astute to 14 boats - benefiting from economies of scale - with each one carrying 10 nuclear tipped cruise missiles.That would mean that they'd still carry more conventional arms than the T boats. Or one could be nominated (secretly) as the N boat for each cycle, and carry 30 nuclear cruise.
Bad points
1. Cruise missiles aren't invulnerable, but which country out there would risk 30 cruise missiles inbound?
2. There is no distinct difference between the two types of boat. Could create confusion and raise risks.
3. Range of missile is poor for hiding your Sub.
Good points
1. Like the Vanguard they would be relatively invulnerable. You'd have to find and hit four boats on patrol, or the one N boat hidden within them.
2. You'd save vast amounts of money. The Astutes are already designed, and you'd be able to build economies. The deterrent would be proportionate to our defence budget.
3. You'd end up with 14 very useful Astutes.
Why weren't our MPs provided with this information?
Maybe.. but I thought it was very interesting that one option wasn't set out in the white paper for MPs to consider. It included the following:
1. Long range aircraft equipped with cruise missiles
2. Large surface ship equipped with Trident
3. Land based silo Trident
4. Vanguard 2 with Trident
Where is SSNs equipped with nuclear cruise? Why was it excluded?
I wonder if it was because MPs might have seen it as a very attractive option?
For £20bn you could have extended Astute to 14 boats - benefiting from economies of scale - with each one carrying 10 nuclear tipped cruise missiles.That would mean that they'd still carry more conventional arms than the T boats. Or one could be nominated (secretly) as the N boat for each cycle, and carry 30 nuclear cruise.
Bad points
1. Cruise missiles aren't invulnerable, but which country out there would risk 30 cruise missiles inbound?
2. There is no distinct difference between the two types of boat. Could create confusion and raise risks.
3. Range of missile is poor for hiding your Sub.
Good points
1. Like the Vanguard they would be relatively invulnerable. You'd have to find and hit four boats on patrol, or the one N boat hidden within them.
2. You'd save vast amounts of money. The Astutes are already designed, and you'd be able to build economies. The deterrent would be proportionate to our defence budget.
3. You'd end up with 14 very useful Astutes.
Why weren't our MPs provided with this information?
