MoD won't commit to Astute schedule

HAVE YOUR SAY

They will probably sell it anyway. or divert the rest of them to Saudi Arabia
alan

(re-submitted, amended)

DON'T BUILD ASTUTES SLOWER- BUILD 'MORE'!!

Why delay the currently projected build-programme for (4) Astutes- substantially less than the (8) Labour committed to in 2001)- when instead, govt committments to the construction of the needed (12) or more Astutes over the next 10-years would ensure that there is consistent submarine work at the Barrow yard- up to and during the commencement of the (Vanguard replacement) new-Trident-system submarine programme??

Who knows, maybe if this approach were taken, BVT/Vosper/BAE and other UK naval-engineering & construction companies could leverage their increased business and resulting (if done right) experience into foreign contracts for non-nuclear submarines/vessels...

If France and Germany can get away with heavily subsidizing their ship-building firms, and, obtain contracts world-wide for non-nuclear submarines, the UK ought to at least put in place policies/spending programmes so that it can compete...

Roderick V. Louis,
Vancouver, BC, Canada,
ceo@patientempowermentsociety.com
Roderick V. Louis - ceo@patientempowermentsociety.com

1 TRILLION POUNDS CAN BE FOUND TO RESCUE THE UK's INSOLVENT BANKS BUT THE UK ALLEGEDLY 'CAN'T AFFORD TO DEFEND ITSELF'- BUNK!!!"

Whatever the state of US-Russian relations, the United Kingdom is likely to be back-stopping the US as it has done, productively, for decades following WW II...

In pondering how the UK ought to be approaching Russia in coming decades & in deliberating the possible future size/equipping of the UK's Armed Forces, UK politicians & bureaucrats would do well looking back in history- particularly to the pre-WW II period...

It was only, barely, 6 years between 1933 when Hitler and his Nazi party gained control of then Germany's governmental structures and 1939 when the world was plunged headlong into WW II...

Because there is a comparative calm upon the world today in terms of dangerously oppositional relationships between the world's present great powers is not reliable-logic or trustable-evidence that today's situation could not change overnight:

1) Russia is reactivating two of its retired Typhoon SSBNs:

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsub/articles/20090703.aspx

2) Russia Might Complete Bulava Flight Tests in 2009:

http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20090618_6389.php

3) Russia Set to Build New Nuclear-Armed Submarine:

http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20090626_8028.php

4) Russia to build eight nuclear submarines:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/3124166/Russia-t...

5) President Medvedev visited Sevmash, inspected "Yury Dolgoruky":

http://www.barentsobserver.com/president-medvedev-visited-sevmash-inspec...

6) State-of-the-art nuclear submarines to the Russian Navy:

http://www.barentsobserver.com/index.php?id=4608935

7) Russia to lay down 2nd Graney class nuclear sub in July:

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20090625/155349485.html

"...Under the Russian State Arms Procurement Program for 2007-2015, the Navy will receive several dozen surface ships and submarines, including five Project 955 Borey nuclear-powered strategic ballistic missile submarines equipped with new Bulava ballistic missiles, two Project 885 Yasen nuclear-powered multipurpose submarines, six Project 677 Lada diesel-electric submarines, three Project 22350 frigates and five Project 20380 corvettes."

A United Kingdom with an adaquate-sized Astute class submarine fleet (IE- (16) or more- not just (4) as is currently planned) & a new generation Trident missile & nuclear submarine fleet/delivery system- even if never used in war- is still a better off country than one which, in effect, decides to disrobe itself on-the-world-stage and invite the savage beasts of the international foreign-policy jungle to afternoon tea...

If anything, planning proposals for the next generation of UK Trident are too modest: the proposed new nuclear missile carrying submarines are significantly undersized and would carry far too few Trident missiles...

The UK ought to be developing both its missile system and new-model ICBM carrying nuclear submarines jointly with the United States, which also is in planning stages to replace its present Trident missile/nuclear submarine system...

The US's new Trident-missile carrying submarines will each be able to be armed with double the number of Trident-missiles the UK's proposed new Trident submarines will... in their current form...

Roderick V. Louis,
Vancouver, BC, Canada,
ceo@patientempowermentsociety.com
Roderick V. Louis - Vancouver, BC, Canada,