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


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
  • 2 free stories 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


Tim Fish

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

Read full bio

Share to