Trident

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

bit like ‘blue streak’ the British missile that the UK spent £300 million


on … the spec outlined a 30 minute launch time


despite the fact we knew we would only have a four minute warning .

Lions led by Donkeys……….

The "four minute warning" was based on launch/flight time calculations of a pre-fuelled missile. The 30 minute launch time of Blue Streak included refuelling, so the systems retaliatory strike capability was based on knowing that the enemy was at a high state of readiness. It was massively vulnerable to a surprise attack.

The UK's first strike and retaliatory capability was held by the V-Bomber force with 'Blue Steel' from '63 to '70 until Polaris took over.

 

[Gremlin]

Which is an investment...

But not one which requires an additional £50billion - because they have already bought them. The submarines are being replaced because the existing ones are reaching the end of their design life but the missiles come from a common stock used by both the UK and US. And if they don't work then they take it up with Lockheed Martin.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

But not one which requires an additional £50billion - because they have already bought them. The submarines are being replaced because the existing ones are reaching the end of their design life but the missiles come from a common stock used by both the UK and US. And if they don't work then they take it up with Lockheed Martin.

All depends if they are being used within their design specification. Contractors are very good at exploiting loopholes in our military procurement system.

 

[mosssideblue]

All depends if they are being used within their design specification. Contractors are very good at exploiting loopholes in our military procurement system.

Of course they are used within the very tight environmental and safety regulations, there should be no doubts about that.

The PSA clearly sets out the rules the UK must abide by

 

[Metal Biker]

But not one which requires an additional £50billion - because they have already bought them. The submarines are being replaced because the existing ones are reaching the end of their design life but the missiles come from a common stock used by both the UK and US. And if they don't work then they take it up with Lockheed Martin.

It. Was. A. Joke.

 

[The blue phantom]

You need to know the environment that the missiles are required to be kept in to understand that damp inside the missile was not a cause of the missile misfiring.

Shapps will know that, so not sure what he is saying

Tbf mate Shapps doesn't even know his own name.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Of course they are used within the very tight environmental and safety regulations, there should be no doubts about that.

The PSA clearly sets out the rules the UK must abide by

If it's damp that has caused an issue, then perhaps not.

 

[mosssideblue]

If it's damp that has caused an issue, then perhaps not.

The missile left the submarine, so tje submarine did its job. The missiles are kept cosy, warm and dry at all times and would not launch if out of spec, so I very much doubt dampness was the issue. More likely an electronic failure in the rocket motor ignition sequence

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

The missile left the submarine, so tje submarine did its job. The missiles are kept cosy, warm and dry at all times and would not launch if out of spec, so I very much doubt dampness was the issue. More likely an electronic failure in the rocket motor ignition sequence

Just taking what Shapp said at face value, which I appreciate is folly on my part.

I expect you are probably right reference ignition of the main rocket motor, although I don't know if the missile has a completely separate eject phase followed by a boost phase or whether it's combined, or if the eject stage is a function of the submarine itself.

 

[mosssideblue]

Just taking what Shapp said at face value, which I appreciate is folly on my part.

I expect you are probably right reference ignition of the main rocket motor, although I don't know if the missile has a completely separate eject phase followed by a boost phase or whether it's combined, or if the eject stage is a function of the submarine itself.

I'm going to add, for ignition of the rocket motor, certain parameters of missile travel have to occur first.

If the eject force doesn't enable those parameters, the missile will fail to ignite when (and where) it should.

There are a couple of reasons why that may occur