3 ms·
> Why only the UK? Retirement of UK air-delivered Sunshine was based entirely on cost grounds, regardless of loss of flexibility. Nuclear handling processes,
by dingaling 12y ago
> Why only the UK?
Retirement of UK air-delivered Sunshine was based entirely on cost grounds, regardless of loss of flexibility.
Nuclear handling processes, storage, maintenance are all very expensive. The decision was made to concentrate these costs in the Trident force where they are partially shared with the USA. All the associated knowledge and skills have been lost from the Royal Air Force and will not return.
Every now and again the Ministry of Defence issues a 'report' on how SLBMs are the most cost-effective solution for the UK, willfully ignoring their complete non-usability.
- lmm 12y agoWhat non-usability? The missile has demonstrated reliability (the warhead perhaps less so, but not at the point you'd want to bet your country on it fizzling). It can hit anywhere on the planet's surface, and there's no credible countermeasure short of burying yourself deep underground. The submarines are very difficult to track and we always have at least one at sea. I guess the missiles are expensive and single-use whereas a bomber might carry enough bombs to make them affordable for tactical "battlefield" use, but that's a terrible idea strategically; a scenario where two sides were both sufficiently committed to a war to drop hundreds of nuclear warheads and restrained enough to not escalate to attacking each other's cities is immensely implausible. The SLBMs do the job of providing a UK nuclear deterrent, which if you're talking about having nuclear weapons at all is presumably something you consider valuable. We have full second-strike capability. And we have it cheaper than any other nation with the same. What is it you think we're missing?