The nuclear deterrent and reasons for its replacement

...A sentry does not fabricate his open weapon. It does not stop him from firing it if needed.
It does if he doesn’t know how to maintain it.

My point is that our strategic deterrent cannot be said to be truly independent because we rely on the US for it’s maintenance.

Regards,
MM
 

Yokel

LE
It does if he doesn’t know how to maintain it.

My point is that our strategic deterrent cannot be said to be truly independent because we rely on the US for it’s maintenance.

Regards,
MM
Was it ever 100% independent (since the 1958 treaty anyway)? Just for comparison, what percentage of France's defence budget goes on their deterrent (including building, testing, and maintaining their own SLBMs) and how does that compare with us?
 

Trans-sane

LE
Book Reviewer
It does if he doesn’t know how to maintain it.

My point is that our strategic deterrent cannot be said to be truly independent because we rely on the US for it’s maintenance.

Regards,
MM
Then again in a very real sense theirs is also reliant on us (though to a lesser extent). Example that I'm aware of: engineering firm in Barrow, small family enterprise. Makes specialist seals and gaskets for the nuclear industry. Every Ohio class goes to sea with several installed and the company is listed on the US essential security roster.
 
Was it ever 100% independent (since the 1958 treaty anyway)?...
Not in terms of Polaris and Trident in my view.

...Just for comparison, what percentage of France's defence budget goes on their deterrent (including building, testing, and maintaining their own SLBMs) and how does that compare with us?
Open source suggests that France spends a greater amount of their GDP and defence budget on their Force de Dissuasion than we do on our strategic deterrent. However, they have more warheads than us as well as an airborne delivery system with Mirage, Rafale and ASMP cruise missiles.

Then again in a very real sense theirs is also reliant on us (though to a lesser extent). Example that I'm aware of: engineering firm in Barrow, small family enterprise. Makes specialist seals and gaskets for the nuclear industry. Every Ohio class goes to sea with several installed and the company is listed on the US essential security roster.
I don’t think we can realistically compare the US use of UK produced seals and gaskets in their strategic deterrent with our reliance on US delivery systems and associated support.

Regards,
MM
 

Trans-sane

LE
Book Reviewer
Not in terms of Polaris and Trident in my view.



Open source suggests that France spends a greater amount of their GDP and defence budget on their Force de Dissuasion than we do on our strategic deterrent. However, they have more warheads than us as well as an airborne delivery system with Mirage, Rafale and ASMP cruise missiles.



I don’t think we can realistically compare the US use of UK produced seals and gaskets in their strategic deterrent with our reliance on US delivery systems and associated support.

Regards,
MM
Without them the nuclear reactors of all US SSBNs, SSNs and CVNs cannot be operated though... They could replace them with a home developed version but it would take years (and $billions) to adequately replicate the methods and technology. Same for the American bits of the delivery system but more complicated. Its cheaper for both of our nations to cooperate.
 
Without them the nuclear reactors of all US SSBNs, SSNs and CVNs cannot be operated though... They could replace them with a home developed version but it would take years (and $billions) to adequately replicate the methods and technology. Same for the American bits of the delivery system but more complicated. Its cheaper for both of our nations to cooperate.
Would it really take years for the US to develop indigenous replacements?

However, I agree that it’s cheaper for the UK and US to cooperate.

Regards,
MM
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
Would it really take years for the US to develop indigenous replacements?

However, I agree that it’s cheaper for the UK and US to cooperate.

Regards,
MM
Who knows, perhaps by buying up and securing the supply it stops them selling the stuff elsewhere?
 
D

Deleted 24582

Guest
Would it really take years for the US to develop indigenous replacements?

However, I agree that it’s cheaper for the UK and US to cooperate.

Regards,
MM
MM
Do you know if the U.K. will or does have a low yield warhead for your Tridents?
 
Then again in a very real sense theirs is also reliant on us (though to a lesser extent). Example that I'm aware of: engineering firm in Barrow, small family enterprise. Makes specialist seals and gaskets for the nuclear industry. Every Ohio class goes to sea with several installed and the company is listed on the US essential security roster.
FFS don't publicise this. If Trump see it they'll be buying 'Merican next week by order.
 
MM
Do you know if the U.K. will or does have a low yield warhead for your Tridents?
No.

But even if I did, I wouldn’t discuss it here!

Regards,
MM
 
No.

But even if I did, I wouldn’t discuss it here!

Regards,
MM
I thought that it was open source knowledge, thanks to the 1996 Defence White Paper, that our Trident warheads were dial-a-yield. In fact, I think it was one of the ways in which we complied with START.
 
Without them the nuclear reactors of all US SSBNs, SSNs and CVNs cannot be operated though... They could replace them with a home developed version but it would take years (and $billions) to adequately replicate the methods and technology. Same for the American bits of the delivery system but more complicated. Its cheaper for both of our nations to cooperate.
I doubt there's anything we make that either EB or Westinghouse couldn't reproduce.
 
I thought that it was open source knowledge, thanks to the 1996 Defence White Paper, that our Trident warheads were dial-a-yield...
Perhaps; but I can find no official sources defining what yields are available.

Regards,
MM
 

Latest Threads

Top