World Naval Ships Forums  

Go Back   World Naval Ships Forums > Naval History > US Navy Ships and Crews
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

US Navy Ships and Crews Topics relating to a specific American ship or ships.

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 28-10-2011, 16:22
derek s.langsdon derek s.langsdon is offline
Vice Commodore
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: norfolk uk
Posts: 763
Default US Must Rethink New Subs (and Bombers).

From the latest US DefenseNews - (Gannet Govt Media Corp) (Edited=dsl):

"Twenty years after the break-up of the Soviet Union. The US Navy plans to build 12 Submarines to carry more than 1,000 nuclear warheads into the 2070's,at a total cost of almost $350 billion. (The Air Force wants a strategic bomber that will cost at least $50 billion,as well s a new ground based missile.

As the Pentagon searches for hundreds of millions in budget reductions,can the United States afford to spend in excess fof $400 billion on nuclear weapons over the next decades....No it can't ! General James Cartwright (outgoing Vice-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said in July....."The challenge here is that we have to re-capitalize all three legs (of the nuclear triad) and we don't have the4 money to do it"
Under the US/Russian START Treaty,both sides are limited to 1,550 deployed nuclear warheads . Planners are looking to stay at that limit, but to do ity in a "more financially responsible fashion"

The US Navy's planned 12 new submarines will cost $29 billion per boat,the most expensive nuclear program by far. Potential budget savings would be if the Navy build only eight subs instead of 12 saving $27 billion over ten years and $120 billion over the lifetime of the program.

Eight operational boats would still allow the US Navy to deploy the same number of sea-based warheads (about 1,000) as planned under the new START Treaty.

Key to this plan is that the Navy has extra space on it's missiles.
Each Trident missile deployed on subs can carry up to eight nuclear warheads (but the Navy currently loads each with four or five). With more efficient use of the space on each missile/The Navy could buy fewer missiles...and subs "

The article goes on at length with these suppositions.....the writers are Tom Collins a research director of the "Arms Control Association.Washington" and
Kelsey Davenport a "Herbert Scoville,Peace Fellow"

Reply With Quote

Ship Search by Name : Advanced Search
Random Timeline Entry : 12th January 1977 : HMS Ambuscade : Sailed Hamburg

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Terry`s Propeller Bombers astraltrader Everything Else 164 20-10-2017 21:11
HMS Thorough & T-Class Subs Steve1 Introductions 1 11-03-2011 22:48
Chicom Submarines...... designeraccd Chinese Ships and Crews 3 03-03-2010 19:12
new book on subs herakles Naval Book Forum 4 01-01-2010 12:54
New subs for the RAN herakles Australian Navy and Ships 7 24-02-2009 23:20

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:54.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.