Could the RAF resume the nuclear deterrent as a cheaper alternative to Trident?

[Willard Whyte]

So assuming they've managed to be able to mass-produce the trick turbofan that is the key to it and assuming they can access GLONASS or equivalent for targeting they can launch from say 1000km stand-off. Bunch of LR interceptors (back to Tonka F3 and/or F14+AIM54) please and weapons free on the bombers.

More to the point, 2000+km at 400kts gives you the best part of three hours flight time to either intercept the inbounds (not easy@300ft but do-able) and more importantly relocate the leadership (those that you really want to deter).

Deterrence is about certainty, the certainty that you can't stop a significant proportion of what will be coming your way (personally) if you don't behave yourself. For a variety of reasons, a cruise-based deterrent can never give you that at an affordable scale.

My dear chap, nowhere did I suggest that a cruise missile is an effective deterrent. Indeed I don't believe it is, due to its 'interceptibility'.

I was merely replying to the doubt, seemingly expressed, that they could build & field one.

The fact that they can, or is something that they are working towards, is something that should be taken note of. I would be unsurprised if Russias hands aren't fiddling away, moving things along; the fact that such a weapon would pose something of a threat to them is nothing compared with the consternation it would cause to the West.

[Pontius Navigator]

A problem with the ultimate deterrent is the sub-global strike.

Unfriendly nation nukes friendly base. What do you do?

[langleybaston]

Exactly.

Name an area where the Tornado GR is superior to the Buccaneer.....

Oil consumption perhaps?

[ORAC]

Current existence and manufacturers support.

Who, exactly, would you suggest is willing to ramp up and produce a "cheap" Buccaneer with practically zero profit margin, no R&D spin-off and no export sales?

BWoS wouldn't touch it - perhaps there are a few OAPs who worked at Blackburn still alive and compos mentis? Build a factory, train a staff, build 3-4 sqns of cheap aircraft - then shut it all down again - deep joy........

[malcrf]

Current existence and manufacturers support.

Who, exactly, would you suggest is willing to ramp up and produce a "cheap" Buccaneer with practically zero profit margin, no R&D spin-off and no export sales?

BWoS wouldn't touch it - perhaps there are a few OAPs who worked at Blackburn still alive and compos mentis? Build a factory, train a staff, build 3-4 sqns of cheap aircraft - then shut it all down again - deep joy........

Why would the profit margin be zero? Price minus cost = profit, so if MoD pays a little more than the cost of production then, hey presto, profit.

And if we (as a nation) can make the Tiffy, surely we can build an updated Buccaneer? If not, maybe Saab would remind us of the manufacturing skills required? I don't think there's a law that says they have to be made in Blackburn.....................

[Heathrow Harry]

wecan we can - but the trick is in the word "updated"...

you'll want a glass cockpit sir? modern missiles?? a proper nav system??? decnt comms and interoperability???? a defence suppression package????

Why sir - that's £ 20 Bn..................... and ten years testing

[alfred_the_great]

Don't forget the safety paperwork either. Ole' tuc won't let you move without safety paperwork.

[Pontius Navigator]

Atg, you mean a guarantee that girders won't break under 15g.

[alfred_the_great]

pass - but I'm sure there's a safety case somewhere that'll tell you.

[Pontius Navigator]

atg, remember in this day and age it is easier, safer and cheaper to say NO than stick your neck out and say YES.