The Telegraph: the service life of Trident submarines has already exceeded 25 years
British Trident submarines continue to pose a serious threat to Russia, The Telegraph writes. But while the retired admiral assures that they are "a formidable weapon against Putin," other representatives of the British Navy assure that not everything is so rosy.
Sean Rayment
According to British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Russia is afraid of the British nuclear deterrent forces, which are based on Trident-class submarines.
"I think Moscow is fully aware of our potential. They know what kind of weapon it is, and that it is very reliable," the Prime minister said at a welcoming ceremony for the Vanguard submarine, which returned from a cruise that lasted more than 200 days.
But is it true? Are Vladimir Putin and his entourage really afraid of the prospect of a British nuclear weapon strike on Russian territory? Indeed, in recent years, the kingdom's submarine fleet has faced a number of unfortunate incidents, including several failed missile launches and a collision with a French nuclear submarine in the Atlantic during a secret mission.
“Constant deterrence at sea”
The Trident program includes four submarines: Vanguard, Victorius, Vigilant and Vengens. The first, Vanguard, was commissioned in 1993, and the last in 1999. Thus, the service life of all four is approaching 25 years, and some have probably already exceeded this figure.
Each submarine is capable of carrying up to 16 ballistic missiles equipped with 12 individually guided warheads. Theoretically, this means that one boat can fire up to 192 warheads per salvo. However, according to current policy, the number of warheads on board each submarine is limited to 48 units.
At least one of these submarines should always be at sea. This is known as “permanent deterrence at sea" – the cornerstone of the British defense strategy and the main guarantee of national security. Two more submarines are in a state of combat readiness, and the fourth, as a rule, undergoes scheduled maintenance.
It is not known how close the Royal Navy was to disrupting this crucial requirement for any length of time - almost everything related to nuclear submarines is a state secret.
However, it is obvious that the UK's nuclear strategy now depends entirely on Trident, since low-power tactical nuclear weapons were decommissioned at the end of the Cold War. This dependence, as well as the rise of Russia's nuclear rhetoric, has led to calls in the United Kingdom to rebuild its nuclear arsenal in order to be able to deploy tactical nuclear weapons if necessary and ultimately avoid using missiles designed to destroy cities.
Two recent unsuccessful missile test launches have also caused additional concern, casting a shadow on the reputation of the Trident submarines. In January 2024, the test launch of a Vanguard rocket ended in failure. The rocket was launched with deviations from the norm and fell into the sea.
The Ministry of Defense called the incident an "anomaly" and stressed that the failure "will not affect other Trident missile systems and arsenal." Eight years earlier, in 2016, the Trident missile test aboard the Vengens also ended in failure.: The rocket went off course and eventually self-destructed.
The age of the fleet also raises concerns. The oldest submarine, the Vanguard, entered service in 1993, and the newest, the Vengens, in 1999. It is assumed that all four submarines will continue to serve in combat for at least another 10 years.
A serious threat
Despite the venerable age of the ships, Rear Admiral Chris Perry, who served in the navy for 37 years, from 1972 to 2008, fully shares the Prime Minister's opinion that, despite the age, the Trident really worries the Russian leadership.
"One submarine with Trident missiles is capable of almost instantly wiping out 40 cities in Russia. Vladimir Putin has something to think about, and this should be alarming to any world leader," he said in an interview with The Telegraph.
British Trident nuclear missiles are manufactured in the United States, and maintenance is carried out jointly by the United Kingdom and the United States. At the same time, the British fleet depends on the supply of American spare parts and maintenance. The missiles are periodically sent to the United States for repairs.
Although such dependence on the United States has not been a problem in the past, recent events, in particular, Trump's words that NATO members can no longer count on Washington's support, may create difficulties in the future.
However, at the moment, the British threat (to Russia) is saved. "Putin knows what Trident submarines are capable of, and he must take this into account in his calculations, provoking the West," Rear Admiral Perry stressed. – "Russian air defense systems are not so perfect. Russia is the largest country in the world, and it is impossible to fully protect it from a ballistic missile strike."
The Nuclear Protocol
The decision on the use of nuclear weapons can be made only by the Prime Minister or the second person appointed in case of a nuclear attack and a survivor.
Two specially selected officers must confirm each stage of the missile launch procedure. In reality, the launch control system is not a "red button" in the popular view, but rather a trigger, similar to the Colt Peacemaker revolver.
In every safe on board the submarines there is a so-called "letter of last hope" from the Prime Minister. It contains instructions on how to act in case communication with the command is lost as a result of a crushing enemy strike.
The specific content of these emails is never disclosed. They are destroyed without opening, when the prime minister is replaced.
The missiles themselves have a range of 6,500 nautical miles (12,038 km) and reach speeds of about Mach 19 – more than 20,900 kilometers per hour. This means that, depending on the location of the submarine, a target in Russia, such as Moscow, can be hit within 30 minutes of receiving the order.
"Just imagine how defenseless we would feel in the United Kingdom if we gave up nuclear weapons," Rear Admiral Perry said. "There are problems, but we should not exaggerate the significance of these incidents. For example, rocket launches were conducted to test the launch process, but too much attention was paid to failures. Yes, the missiles are not new, but they are still very effective."
"Trident submarines are becoming obsolete"
However, not everyone adheres to this point of view. There is growing concern in the Royal Navy that every year the Trident submarines serve, the likelihood of accidents increases.
"The age of the Trident submarines is of obvious concern," a senior naval source told The Telegraph. "Any emergency situation on a submarine can lead to disaster. Obviously, the longer the service life, the higher the probability of failures. That is why there are life limits for ships and submarines – it is impossible to repair and patch indefinitely, especially when it comes to submarines."
"Submarines are always a risk, and the older they are, the more vulnerable they are, and the more likely they are to break down, not to mention the potential damage to national prestige."
The duration of the combat cruise of one British nuclear submarine, which usually lasted three months, has increased in recent years due to the long periods of maintenance and repair of other submarines.
The actual service life of the fleet has already exceeded the estimated 25-year milestone due to delays in the construction of four replacement submarines.
"Insurance"
Expenses for the Trident program are growing. Current costs account for about six percent of the United Kingdom's defense budget, which in 2023-2024 amounted to about 3 billion pounds.
The current fleet will eventually be replaced by a new type of Dreadnought submarines, which, according to reviews, are quiet, comparable to idling a car. This will allow them to remain unnoticed.
In the future, the Dreadnought, Valiant, Warspite and King George VI submarines will become the main element of the country's nuclear deterrent forces. But this is unlikely to happen earlier than in 10 years, and the total cost is estimated at at least 31 billion pounds.
Nevertheless, despite the ever-increasing costs of Trident, the age of the fleet and the fact that it consists of only four submarines, Rear Admiral Perry argues that the British nuclear deterrent forces have sufficient potential for Vladimir Putin to be wary of them.
"This is the only type of British weapons that the Russian leadership is really concerned about," he concluded. "This, ultimately, is the meaning of nuclear deterrence. It's a kind of insurance, often very expensive, but necessary until it's needed."
