UK to replace Trident

[K9dug]

After the butchering of The Army how can this be cost effective?


let the Americans carry the big stick, in a post colonial world who listens to Brittain with out looking over her shoulder at America?

[JoJo82]

We still have the S and the V boats. Not too sure how the RN is gonna swing this but we still have enough subs to operate, guess they are cutting back on guel, maintenance etc. I Know the T's have been in and out of dry dock a few times, how ever, they have also been bouncing off iceburgs and the sea bed more than a good few times over the past few years Don't worry though, they announced the T's decommission but they will still be in service, my guessing until 2019. It takes along time to weed out our RN's ships and boats!

But keep in mind that the RN is about to launch the Astute (SSN), Which if I remember is to replace the Swiftsure class. The Astute class weapons load will be alot higher and should stand at 50% greater than T boats (Trafalger) Class boats.This should include ( again if I am correct) a number of weapons,Spearfish torpedoes and Tomahawk missiles etc

If I am correct, the below sonar is already ative on 4 of the T boats;

The Asute class will be fitted with the 2076 sonar, both passive and active operations or another way, search and attack Also towed arrays.

Countermeasures systems will include Electronic Support Measures obv. decoys (ESM). For the ESM system this will bring onboard the UAP(4). UAP(4) has two passive/active antenna arrays which are mounted on the two non-hull masts.

The Asutes are amodern and update version boat and therefore the RN won'/t be losing anything by axing the T boat but gaining.

And breath.....................................haven't talked about a sub like that since I was a navy lass, you are lucky this is what I hunted!

[jos]

In the very dangerous and changing world where nukes are being developed by third world nations I would like to believe that if they ever threaten us or use one and incinerate my family that get back what they gave.
F*ck the law and niceties I'm all for revenge when it comes to my family.
In this as in a lot of matters Israel got it right. Don’t rely on anything one ecept yourself and you won’t be disappointed.

Any one country that had to rely on the USA never got the support expected now or in the past. Therefore I believe in being self-sufficiency.


Even in WWII we were financially bled dry by America and then America only entered the war when attacked.

I'm not anti-American as my sister and Mother are US citizens but I am a realist and I remember history.

Hit me and not only will I hit you back I’ll flatten you…..

Talk softly but carry a big stick

[JoJo82]

You forgot, America may have the money and the people but they lack the Intelligence when it comes to the Military, this is why time on time they use the UK military for a guide and training.

Yes, Blair has made a mistake pairing us off with the US and yes this has effected our state with other countries but every one makes mistakes. People who know what the UK can do will still stand by us. The UK have better ships than the US,, so I would like to believe.

Have you been on a US ship? Its all big and fancy but is it practical in a UK sense? Nope. Keep in mind that in an average wafare trade in the Navy our lads and lasses have a mutiple ranges of trades in one trade, if you get what I Mean? The USN has 1 person per job, if it is a battle of knowledge, intelligence and wit, the UK will out mount the US.

However, times are changing, the problem being is the RN lacks money to replace every thing in one go.

This isn't a battle and I think the initial thread should be reworded as this is not the actual topic that includes why the T's are being replaced.

[K9dug]

Why replace anyway?

We will never use them, why not have 10 more infantry Bn.s that will be used time and time again?

I'm not anti-RN , I think the New carriers are great for force projection, but i fail to see the point of a Trident replacement when we are going to have to ask the yanks to use it it first

[JoJo82]

Why replace anyway?

We will never use them, why not have 10 more infantry Bn.s that will be used time and time again?

I'm not anti-RN , I think the New carriers are great for force projection, but i fail to see the point of a Trident replacement when we are going to have to ask the yanks to use it it first

T's have been around since the 70's or this class any how. Its just an upgrade, the RN is moving on with the likes of the T45. Think of the T22 boxer class etc, upgraded with the T22's such as cornwall, campbeltown but these are slowly going aswell. To be a good force every thing will soon be evolved.

[K9dug]

in the '70's we were lined up for a conventional war with the Warsaw Pact, the world is a different place now

[JoJo82]

in the '70's we were lined up for a conventional war with the Warsaw Pact, the world is a different place now

I can see your views but you are thinking and going about this the wrong way. The T's use up more energy than the new Asute coming out. If we are able to have a more efficient boat then crack on with it. Things get old and eventually will need to be replaced. The T's are good boats and b@stards to keep track of once they dive.

However, we are evolving in time. The Russians still use the SSK class and Typhon class. You are lucky to spot a Typhon let alone track one during an RN career, I saw one up in the Baltic and what was surfaces was as big as a normal sub, these things are monsters!

However or CHOPS (S) did seem to get a lil too excited about this

[K9dug]

I just can't see it we are recycling units through Iraq faster than ever due to the government cutting Infantry Bn.s but we are going to keep something that has little or no use in the future

[JoJo82]

I just can't see it we are recycling units through Iraq faster than ever due to the government cutting Infantry Bn.s but we are going to keep something that has little or no use in the future

How well do you know how the RN works? Apart from what you read on the net or hear in the news?

Army and troops are a whole different story as to how the RN and it's ships and boats work. I do not mean to offend but you can not put these 2 in the same bag.

The T only has room for hot bedding which means the lads don't get their own pit, like onboard ship. The asute has a bed to each person. The army you get a room, whether it be your own or sharing, the RN get the pace of 2 mtrs by 3 foot as their space.

I think you may want to go away and read up on this subject a little more, google it and find how much it costs to run 2 sub that is over 20yrs old. Also find out the workings of the RN today and you may get a better understanding how this service is run differently to the other 2.

[K9dug]

Whoa there Tiger no-one is slagging the RN!

I know as much about the Navy as you do about the Army by the looks of things, when not aboard ship do sailors have their own room or share, likewise on ops Soldiers (esp Infantry) live in very poor accomodation, the space of a yank cot and a mossie net somtimes.

As for cost I'm affraid it is in the same bag as the Army (& RAF) its called the defence budget.

If a 20 year old boat cost to much and there is no reason for a replacement scrap it.

The money could go much further if it were spent on a couple more battalions, more helicopters or some half decent air support (the latter 2 we seem to rely on the yanks why not rely on the Yanks for nuclear defence?)

[JoJo82]

Like ships, subs are for different defenses etc

You have T22 for surface to surface, surface to air, surface to water. T23 for surface to air, surface to water etc Different class of subs go different places. The V's are hardly run ye stay manned and the T's tend to be out more.

Guess I am trying to say that each class is used in a different operational sense. They wouldn't cut any of the classes and not replace then
m. The V's/S's and T's are all very useful, to be honest we have less subs than a good few other countries.

[Tab]

The Nuclear weapons have stopped a major conflict breaking out since the end of WW2. Now that unstable countries are getting them, do you think it is wise to give our nuclear weapons up. These unstable countries will be only to happy to hit out at countries that can't hit back, and a dozen infantry battalions can easily be incinerated in one blast. Whether you like it or not the Atomic bomb is the ultimate deterrent.

[Tam527]

If the UK has the minimum nuclear deterrent necessary, then surely it makes sense to update Trident and make future-proof along with the new subs which will carry them.
As for the Army, well, they will always get the s**t end of the stick, always having to make do with what they've got, but it was a crime to get rid of some battalions & complete regiments when it's so stretched at the moment.

[sneaky beaky]

JoJo82

I have been on subs quite a lot.
I am, obviously, of the previous era of "A" and "O" boats.
JoJo, you are talking above my head and I suspect a few others heads. Could you please clarify all your previous posts and put them in terms that the lay man can understand?
I do understand the need to upgrade all weapons technology on a regular basis but you are talking service technical terms. Us old farts don't recognise them!
Sneaky