It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Britain to Spend $1.8 billion this year on nukes

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 05:41 AM
link   
A GBP 1.05 billion ($1.83 billion) package has been finalized to ensure the continuing safe maintenance of the UK's nuclear warheads for the rest of their intended service lives. In light of the UK's ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, which means that the UK does not undertake live nuclear testing, GBP 350M will be spent in each of the next three years to upgrade facilities at the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) sites at Aldermaston and Burghfield to provide continued reliability and safety assurance.

At present, over 80% of the infrastructure at AWE pre-dates 1960 and it is becoming increasingly difficult and expensive to sustain. The package will enable AWE to take forward a program of work aimed at sustaining key skills in the AWE workforce and modernizing some of its core research and manufacturing facilities, including the provision of some extra supporting infrastructure.

Britain's planned investment is required to sustain the existing warhead stockpile in-service, and while there has also been talk of modernizing the nuclear force, the AW actvities are required irrespective of any decisions regarding successor warheads. The July 2004 UK Defence White Paper 'Delivering Security in a Changing World: Future Capabilities' reiterated Government's commitment to maintaining the effectiveness of the nuclear deterrent, including making the necessary investment in facilities at AWE. Local Planning Authorities will apparently be consulted on this work in the normal way.

link

Bad bad news...whom do you suppose will they use it on ?

[edit on 22-7-2005 by Stealth Spy]




posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 05:53 AM
link   
US ready to launch nuke attacks on hostile countries: Rumsfeld

> North Korea to conduct nuke tests this year (nukes smuggled from Pakistan)

>China threatens to nuke USA

> Bush pushes for next generation of nukes

> Moscow Says It Will Use Nukes in Local War

> Pakistan says it will nuke India if necessary

The end of the world is near........



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 05:54 AM
link   
you do realise that the UK has less , deliverable warheads than India does.



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 06:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
you do realise that the UK has less , deliverable warheads than India does.


I seriously doubt that.

It cant be cinfirmed either...no country will disclose how many warheads its got.....but analyst speculation has it that India may have a maximum of 120 nuke warheads...and surely the UK will have far far more than that....maybe even 10 times that number..all stockpiled during the cold war.



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 06:10 AM
link   
Well, the brightside is that UK is making new stuff to better store their nukes. Storing nukes in old and worn-out places is kinda dangerous.

The bad side.....

Looks like this world is still light years away from being self destructive.



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 06:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

Originally posted by Harlequin
you do realise that the UK has less , deliverable warheads than India does.


I seriously doubt that.

It cant be cinfirmed either...no country will disclose how many warheads its got.....but analyst speculation has it that India may have a maximum of 120 nuke warheads...and surely the UK will have far far more than that....maybe even 10 times that number..all stockpiled during the cold war.



rounding out the numbers - the tridents , which are the only uk system , have at maximum , 168 warheads , and its speculation they have less - more like 120 - 130.

WE177 have all been dismantled

Polaris have all been dismantled or reused in trident.



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 06:33 AM
link   
How many nukes do they have BTW...?



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Well we will only be able to fire 64 missles.
We only have 4 launching pads and I dont htink we will have enough time to go back and re-arm.



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 12:42 AM
link   
Well I'm glad to see our friends across the pond are stepping up their nuclear program so that it's relable. That and I'd like to see them modernize their nuclear program. Nothing says "Don't mess with me" like a well armed nuclear arsenal.



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
Well we will only be able to fire 64 missles.
We only have 4 launching pads and I dont htink we will have enough time to go back and re-arm.


Question:

Don't UK have submarines that are able to lanuch nuke?



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 03:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Humster
Question:

Don't UK have submarines that are able to lanuch nuke?

That is the launching pads.
4 nuclear submareines.



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 03:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by Humster
Question:

Don't UK have submarines that are able to lanuch nuke?

That is the launching pads.
4 nuclear submareines.


Uh....how much missiles those nuclear subs can carry?

Whats the megaton of those nukes?



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 04:04 AM
link   
are you sure? i find that strange that you dont think we have nuke bombers??? nuke cruise missles, mini nuke cannons. dont we also have icbm missile silos??



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 04:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Humster

Whats the megaton of those nukes?


100kt

remember , smaller is better now (sympethetic wave effects)


blobby

the uk removed the nuclear heavy bombers during the 1980`s - in fact they had allready been retired , and were only brought back to service for a single mission / single target - look for the `black buck` mission on google.

blue steel was the stand off weapon used by the vulcan and victor bomber


the last freefall weapon - the WE177 was retired and dismantled in 1998



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by blobby
are you sure? i find that strange that you dont think we have nuke bombers??? nuke cruise missles, mini nuke cannons. dont we also have icbm missile silos??

We just have the navy for nuke defence.
They scraped the RAF's bombers and left us with the RN, still good but limited.

www.royal-navy.mod.uk...



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 07:37 PM
link   
The nuclear capable nations of the planet have been threatning to use nukes for DECADES, but no one has the balls to actually deploy any.

Any nukes that ever will be used are small tactical nukes in desperate situations I.E. a WMD launch site which is threatning to attack.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join