Deleted member 42179
It has been revealed that a test of trident nuclear missile system last year was off target by "several thousand miles"
This fact was deliberately hidden from the parliament debate on renewing trident.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ident-test-fail-and-what-did-theresa-may-knowIn June last year, the Royal Navy test-fired an unarmed Trident II D5 ballistic missile. The weapon is 13 metres long, weighs 60 tonnes and can carry nuclear warheads with up to eight times the destructive capacity of the bombs that hit Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the second world war. The navy likes to boast about the missile’s accuracy: it can hit a target 4,000 nautical miles away and be accurate to within a few metres.
The problem is that when HMS Vengeance, one of the UK’s four nuclear submarines, test-fired the missile off the coast of Florida, the missile was not out by a few metres but several thousand miles. It had been targeted at the southern Atlantic off the coast of west Africa. Instead, it was heading in the opposite direction, over the US.
I think the most worrying thing in this article for me was this bit:
So can we really trust these expensive and dangerous systemsAccording to defence sources, the missile did not veer off in the wrong direction because it was faulty but because the information relayed to it was faulty. This explanation is not reassuring.
The missile was not armed with a nuclear warhead but contained a small amount of explosives. It was detonated when the order was given to abort the test.
Some analysts say the fact that UK tests are infrequent is not important because the US tests much more frequently and both share the underlying technology.
if they can go so badly wrong in test and miss their target by thousands of miles?
Wouldn't the UK public be better served by putting all those wasted billions into the NHS
rather than into some daft nuclear annihilation revenge program that doesn't even seem to work very well?