• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

The nuclear deterrent and reasons for its replacement

'Red Beard' - only the UK could name its atomic weapons after a 1970s style porn star name...
Your knowledge of vintage indecent material is, as ever, impressive Jimbo!

Regards,
MM
 
II
From memory nothing indecent involved, nor were any animals hurt whilst making the films.
Thank god you said that, it looks like the cover up plan worked a treat!
 
How exactly do you think the US could stop a UK launch? Enlighten us - do you think there is a dual key thing, or we the boats need special codes communicated from the White House, or..........
A strongly-worded letter.

In all seriousness the main US influence on whether or not we launch would be potential unwillingness to sell us more nuclear kit in the future if they disapprove - however if it’s gotten to the stage that we’re considering a spot of mass-destruction then it might be quite far down the list of things to worry about.

It could affect any potential future descision towards NFU policy though.
 
The possession of a common delivery means also that it diminishes the chance of the US abandoning the "special relationship" as an enemy cannot differentiate between an incoming US or UK warhead.. in other words, there is a strong incentive for the US and UK governments not to fall out.. (as they did post WW2 with the McMahon acts which abandoned UK and ignored all the inputs to the Manhattan project by UK science, which were far from trivial..)
 
The possession of a common delivery means also that it diminishes the chance of the US abandoning the "special relationship" as an enemy cannot differentiate between an incoming US or UK warhead.. in other words, there is a strong incentive for the US and UK governments not to fall out.. (as they did post WW2 with the McMahon acts which abandoned UK and ignored all the inputs to the Manhattan project by UK science, which were far from trivial..)
I'll be honest, I'm a little dubious about the concept that anyone can tell the brand of SLBM whilst it's in flight.
 
I'll be honest, I'm a little dubious about the concept that anyone can tell the brand of SLBM whilst it's in flight.
Oh I think there are enough "fingerprints" such as velocity, acceleration and efflux temperature that would identify a launcher type fairly easily...
 
I’d believe that for the common-or-garden stuff such as SCUD, but given how tightly-controlled information about SLBMs is I’d have thought it was a bit harder.

Though I suppose that test launches are announced in advance (to avoid armageddon) so some data could be recorded by others.
 
RN Media Mongs strike again.

Equally apt is the new exhibition that will open at Royal Navy Submarine Museum in Gosport, exactly 50 years to the day since the launch of HMS Resolution..
You don't have to be that smart to know that Resolution didn't actually start her first patrol on the day she was launched.
Laid down: 26 February 1964
Launched: 15 September 1966
Commissioned: 2 October 1967
Start of CASD: 15 June 1968
 
RN Media Mongs strike again.


You don't have to be that smart to know that Resolution didn't actually start her first patrol on the day she was launched.
Laid down: 26 February 1964
Launched: 15 September 1966
Commissioned: 2 October 1967
Start of CASD: 15 June 1968
Fifty years since the launch of CASD.

On Friday 15th June 2018, it will be 50 years since the first operational patrol of HMS Resolution, the Royal Navy’s first Polaris submarine.

But then....

Equally apt is the new exhibition that will open at Royal Navy Submarine Museum in Gosport, exactly 50 years to the day since the launch of HMS Resolution.

I see what you mean - I blame educational standards. Still this is what the media and some of the seem to expect from carriers being launched (scandel - a carrier launched without jets on deck!) or a packet of breakfast cereal (note the serving suggestion tag with the picture).
 
Some of you might be interested in this:


Hat tip to @jim30 for flagging up his twitter channel and blog. Also it is linked from @HMSQnlz.
 
UK's nuclear deterrent infrastructure 'not fit for purpose', say MPs

Woohoo! Why not blame BREXIT?

The Trident nuclear missile programme could also be adversely affected by Brexit because of the reliance on imported material from EU countries and difficulties bringing engineers from the continent, Friday’s report said.

But surely nuclear engineers (and all submarine Marine/Weapon Engineering types) need to be UK nationals who hold Developed Vetting?

The parliamentary report is here: Multiple risks to delivery of nuclear deterrent - News from Parliament
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
Forget Brexit, in fact forget everything, what needs to be asked is can UK PLC afford to upgrade or replace any of these? We are in a hole as a country, successive decades of frittering away national treasure on welfare, NHS, wars in sandpits that cant be won (not by our rules anyway) and countless devolved parliaments (aka jumped up councillors) all crying on tv about being underfunded and whilst all of this goes on we allow foreign companies to take the piss with taxes.
The RN has blown a huge chunk of the budget on aircraft carriers, the army has wasted money on armoured vehicles we will never see and the RAF, well frankly they had a splurge on recruiting then canning pilots before completing training, ordering rubbish AWACS and planes which may be ok if we only want to defend our little island.
Frankly UK defence is in a good state and the country is in dire straits.
 
UK's nuclear deterrent infrastructure 'not fit for purpose', say MPs

Woohoo! Why not blame BREXIT?

The Trident nuclear missile programme could also be adversely affected by Brexit because of the reliance on imported material from EU countries and difficulties bringing engineers from the continent, Friday’s report said.

But surely nuclear engineers (and all submarine Marine/Weapon Engineering types) need to be UK nationals who hold Developed Vetting?

The parliamentary report is here: Multiple risks to delivery of nuclear deterrent - News from Parliament
Most of the imported materiel is from the US. The engineers will generally be UK or US nationals. When Thales took the contracts they have, they were required to form a separate UK company, with a firebreak between the UK and non-UK parts.
 
...the RAF...ordering rubbish AWACS and planes which may be ok if we only want to defend our little island...
While you appeared to be in a bit of a bad mood when you wrote the above, I'm not too fussed (and actually agree with you on several points). However, what are these 'rubbish' AWACS and homeland defence only aircraft we ordered?!

Regards,
MM
 
While you appeared to be in a bit of a bad mood when you wrote the above, I'm not too fussed (and actually agree with you on several points). However, what are these 'rubbish' AWACS and homeland defence only aircraft we ordered?!

Regards,
MM
Speaking of AWACS, is it not possible to fit them with AA missiles? Thought it would be cool...
 
Speaking of AWACS, is it not possible to fit them with AA missiles? Thought it would be cool...
It's possible and has been discussed but is not really sensible.

Regards,
MM
 

Latest Threads

Top