John,

Once again….deterrence isnt something you can pick up and put down when you feel like it. If we need to have it in the future it has to be maintained NOW. That means starting work on designing successor submarines, while the V-boats are still in fully in service, that means keeping the crews trained and competent in what is a very difficult discipline.

There is no deterrent system in service, or publicly acknowledged as under design, that could be installed on an SSN at this time anywhere in service with anyone. None.

As I said initially on this it may be possible to fit, perhaps, 4 SLBM-style missile tubes into a future SSN for TLAM/UAV/SF when not used for SLBM carriage. We would need to independently develop our own ‘Small-SLBM’ design though so that we could pack enough weapons into the tubes to represent a deterrent effect. An SSN with 4 Tridents, for example, would not offer a great deal of flexibility in targetting nor, perhaps, quite enough warheads and pen-aids to be assured of getting through on a very well defended target.

In theory though I’ve no problem with them binning successor-SSBN if the Follow-on SSN

a) would be configured with at least 4 SLBM tubes for, perhaps, 12 Small-SLBM’s (think navalised Midgetman) each with single MARV and multi-penaid capability, or, tactical configuration when not in ‘bomber mode’.

and

b) wont lose any of its tactical stealth and maneuverability by the addition of the VL strategic missile bay.

It wont be cheaper than Successor SSBN and it wont do anything for Carrier Strike right now, but, we will have a more flexible deterrent. One last point to consider though, and one I’ve noted on this site before, is that there is an inherent safety in Trident.

It is, after all, a very big hammer and as with such big hammers they are only wielded when absolutely necessary. You give the politicians a tool which is more easily used, more ‘tailored’ to the strategic situation we face right now, then you have to recognise the risk that some brightspark will like the idea of using it. In my book here’s to big lumpen Trident and the fervent hope that a really ‘useful’ nuclear warhead never appears in our inventory!.

I couldn’t agree more, special thumbs up to the last sentence.

Good stuff.

I don’t recall seeing anything about where they are being built though, is this UK build or foreign build?

No it’s a new design, supposed to have a completely different reactor in it, I’m sure I read somewhere that it was based on a US design but that’s just from memory so could be bull.

Also seem to recall reading something about us wanting 12 tubes verses the US wanting 20 but again that’s just my memory so could be wrong.

I doubt you will hear much in the way of concrete information for the time being.

Really disappointed that CEC has been kicked into the very long grass! CEC makes up for in many ways the reduction of the Type 45 class to six by turning the Type 23 and 26 into missile bins for the more capable AAW destroyer. Also makes our fleet more interoperable with the US.

Actually Lockheed Martin put up a nice video (cartoon :D)this week with an De Zeven Provinciën class frigate using its SMART-L to queue missiles launched from an Arleigh Burke class destroyer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMaOxAqT2Qc

I know it’s the second time it’s happened as well!

Good news about the SDB

I thought SPEAR 3 would be a cruise missile rather than a glide bomb?

It’s basically a mini cruise missile, yes there is a little similarity between them but SPEAR 3 will have longer range, probably a bigger warhead too.

The implication behind this BAE conspiracy is that the UK would have been better off with all US F18s than with the F35B.

Utter piffle. Instead we get a much more advanced fighter (for which we have had decades of input into the design and specification) with a UK weapons fit compatible with what we are currently planning….

Agreed it is all very silly, it seems some people are willing to acuse BAE of anything.

so are you reassured by that? It was what you worried about no?

1 of the major things, as in all things though some details of what it entails would be reassure me a good deal more.

If he previously mentioned the integration of Storm Shadow and Brimstone onto Typhoon, and taking this quote into account: ‘Eurofighter Typhoon upgrades are also to be funded, Hammond says, without giving details of which enhancements are due.’, then it must be more than just the integration of these missiles. And one must be aware that, from what I believe, the Typhoon needs more than just the software of P1E (which has already been funded and is due to enter operational frontline service) to operate these missiles. So its most certainly he has other enhancements in mind, who knows may be the second part of P1E known as ‘B’, further funding for Captor-E, Meteor, SDB, other forms of software and such.

As is quoted, he’s not giving away any details about the enhancements, and we already know about Brimstone and Storm Shadow – for quite some time I can say, which I remember it was stated that funding has gone ahead back when the Lybian Campaign was ongoing, middle of ’11. And as I say P1E is already funded, so…

Interesting times indeed.

We’re looking at SDB for Typhoons, since when has that been on the table?