It’s difficult to put this sufficiently simply; but here goes.
If your idea of leasing, say, a car is buying it outright at catalogue price then accepting that you might not get the same car back after it’s been serviced (a service routine that you pay for); I’d change your leasing company. A car is a bad example really as it’s actually used and suffers varying amounts of wear and tear. A 2D5 sat in its launch tube doesn’t really deteriorate any differently in a British boat than it does in an American one.
Pontius Navigator
22nd January 2010 19:08
Originally Posted by D O Guerrero
(Post 5461083)
Blue Steel - It may have had a good INS (but then again is high accuracy that important in a nuclear weapon?), but it was completely vulnerable to SAMs even during the 1960s. The V-bomber had to get within something like 150nm of the target. I'd hardly call that stand-off!
Firstly Blue Steel did not have a good IN; it had an early generation IN and errors IRO 3000 yards in training were not unusual. In defence it could be argued that flying the parent aircraft using the missile guidance system to simulate the attack was not entierly realistic as the real profile would have taken 2 minutes against 9 for the bomber (low level).
Secondly accuracy is actually very important to get the weapon effects on the DPI. Certainly an airburst Blue Steel would have a huge damage area but for impact against a hardened or semi-hardened target 400 yards would be towards the limit of acceptable accuracy.
Finally, as for the 150 miles; during the Blue Steel period there were still large tracts of undefended air space, especially at low level. Blue Steel's demise was due to the missiles' vulnerability to SAM and not, per se, the carriers.
D O Guerrero
22nd January 2010 22:44
Jacko said it!
petit plateau
23rd January 2010 11:29
One can terminate a lease agreement. An ownership agreement cannot be terminated. Rather a big difference.
And we have operational control over Trident with no second guessing by anyone else. That's pretty important as well.
minigundiplomat
23rd January 2010 13:03
Dannatt has hinted at many things over the last few years. It's normally to stimulate debate, or to progress an agenda. No prizes for guessing which this 'softening up' exercise is in aid of.
Dysonsphere
24th January 2010 00:08
A little thought here as the US maintain the missiles I wonder if they install their own interlocks to prevent launch on a UK on its own. just a thought.
Blacksheep
25th January 2010 09:45
If we don't own particular serials then it looks closer to a lease than to ownership, to me.
It looks exactly like the "direct exchange" form of the common Supply Chain Management contract to me, where the operator retains ownership of their stock but parts are rotated through repair or overhaul by means of direct exchange.
