Trident review suggests alternatives unlikely
The long-awaited review into possible alternatives to the UK’s nuclear deterrent has failed to find any cost effective replacements.
The review analysed whether a new system based on nuclear-tipped cruise missiles or aircraft-delivered bombs would be a value for money option. They would replace the existing four Vanguard-class ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) that house the Trident D5 nuclear missiles instead of building new Successor SSBNs at a cost of almost £20 billion.
It assessed four main alternatives based on either: six large aircraft; 36 Joint Strike Fighters; five vertical launch nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSNs) known as ‘hunter-killer’ submarines; or three
Already have an account? Log in
Want to keep reading this article?
More from Defence Notes
-
UK Chancellor commits £2 billion to make the country a “defence industrial superpower”
Rachel Reeves announced port upgrades, protected budgets for innovation and investment in novel technologies.
-
Avalon 2025: Australian defence budget meets the low expectations of show attendees
The Australian Budget was marked by tax cuts and a looming general election which led to little hope that there would be a substantial defence boost even with a big bill for nuclear submarines due.
-
Launch of Gilat Defense targets DoD market
The communications company Gilat launched its new Gilat Defense division at the Satellite 2025 expo, with future solutions aimed at US military customers.
-
Collins MAPS Gen II to equip US DoD watercraft
US services have already conducted multiple tests with military maritime systems fitted with the system.
-
OCCAR expects substantial boost in programme numbers “in the coming months”
Europe’s Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation (OCCAR) “has to establish itself…as a centre of excellence for cooperative Defence Equipment Programmes” in the face of growing threats and the need for rearmament, according to the organisation’s chairman.