Cameron Speaks on Trident Policy

It's a pity that he chopped its top cover for a square root of bugger all saving. No doubt he will throw new money, that we don't have, on a not quite replacement.


Lantern Swinger
Lets buy them from China. Probably better value than the yanks and about as trustworthy. If scratching head at this comment look for US gives Russia UK warhead serial numbers.
I was working with a guy from the Institute of Navy Medicine last year and as an aside he mentioned to me they were working on the idea of only having 3 SSBN's and doing 8 month patrols. what are the thoughts on this. surely you'd crack up.
8 Months with Zero ability to send anything to your family and one short message from them every so often......... That would probably be one way to take morale outside and shoot it dead.

Can the SSBNs carry 8months food, stores and other essentials or would it require a replenishment at sea?
(apologies if its a bone question but I honestly have no idea. I saw a programme on the SSNs (Astutes) once on Ch4 but cant remember what it said)


War Hero
Book Reviewer
If you surface to RAS (even if that is designed in so as to be possible), the satellites will get you. The idea of 8 months submerged has obviously been dreamed up by somebody who isn't really human.

PS re wurz' alarmist post, it's about the ser nos of the missiles, not the warheads. Warheads are Brit.
Last edited:


Lantern Swinger
PS re wurz' alarmist post, it's about the ser nos of the missiles, not the warheads. Warheads are Brit.
Re my "alarmist" post, I read it in the Torygraph which was posting a wikileak. Obama is an untrustworthy turd. Quoted below from which is repeating the Telegraph article. Whatever the data is this how you would have your alleged greatest ally behave?

9:25PM GMT 04 Feb 2011

Information about every Trident missile the US supplies to Britain will be given to Russia as part of an arms control deal signed by President Barack Obama next week.

Defence analysts claim the agreement risks undermining Britain's policy of refusing to confirm the exact size of its nuclear arsenal.

The fact that the Americans used British nuclear secrets as a bargaining chip also sheds new light on the so-called "special relationship", which is shown often to be a one-sided affair by US diplomatic communications obtained by the WikiLeaks website.

Details of the behind-the-scenes talks are contained in more than 1,400 US embassy cables published to date by the Telegraph, including almost 800 sent from the London Embassy, which are published online today. The documents also show that:

• America spied on Foreign Office ministers by gathering gossip on their private lives and professional relationships.

• Intelligence-sharing arrangements with the US became strained after the controversy over Binyam Mohamed, the former Guantánamo Bay detainee who sued the Government over his alleged torture.

• David Miliband disowned the Duchess of York by saying she could not "be controlled" after she made an undercover TV documentary.

• Tens of millions of pounds of overseas aid was stolen and spent on plasma televisions and luxury goods by corrupt regimes.

A series of classified messages sent to Washington by US negotiators show how information on Britain's nuclear capability was crucial to securing Russia's support for the "New START" deal.

Although the treaty was not supposed to have any impact on Britain, the leaked cables show that Russia used the talks to demand more information about the UK's Trident missiles, which are manufactured and maintained in the US.

Washington lobbied London in 2009 for permission to supply Moscow with detailed data about the performance of UK missiles. The UK refused, but the US agreed to hand over the serial numbers of Trident missiles it transfers to Britain.

Professor Malcolm Chalmers said: "This appears to be significant because while the UK has announced how many missiles it possesses, there has been no way for the Russians to verify this. Over time, the unique identifiers will provide them with another data point to gauge the size of the British arsenal."

Duncan Lennox, editor of Jane's Strategic Weapons Systems, said: "They want to find out whether Britain has more missiles than we say we have, and having the unique identifiers might help them."

While the US and Russia have long permitted inspections of each other's nuclear weapons, Britain has sought to maintain some secrecy to compensate for the relatively small size of its arsenal.

William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, last year disclosed that "up to 160" warheads are operational at any one time, but did not confirm the number of missiles.
I may be missing something but does it really matter how many missiles/warheads we have provided "n=enough to pose a deterrent" + "we have the capability to deliver them onto a target" - any nuclear war was never going to be long term tit-for-tat affair and was to be avoided at all costs or it was "lights out for humanity" - we have some ergo we have enough!

Similar threads

New Posts