To make this website work, we log user data. By using Shephard's online services, you agree to our Privacy Policy, including cookie policy.

×
Open menu Search

Trident review suggests alternatives unlikely

16th July 2013 - 17:39 GMT | by Tim Fish in London

RSS

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?

Read this Article

Get access to this article with a Free Basic Account

  • Original curated content, daily across air, land and naval domains
  • 1 free story per week
  • Personalised news alerts
  • Daily and weekly newsletters
Create account

Unlimited Access

Access to all our premium news as a Premium News 365 Member. Corporate subscriptions available.

  • Original curated content, daily across air, land and naval domains
  • 14-day free trial (cancel at any time)
  • Unlimited access to all published premium news
Start your free trial
Tim Fish

Author

Tim Fish


Tim Fish is a special correspondent for Shephard Media. Formerly the editor of Land Warfare …

Read full bio

Share to

Linkedin