So, in that vein:
A fair point but I would imagine 50% greater chance of detection than Astute is still pretty small. Would be weighed against something like 500% more firepower and much like their bomber siblings would not be deployed in shallow waters or too close to hostile shores.Scimitar54 wrote:Not if your conventional SSN type Dreadnought ends up being 50% more likely to be detected. We just need more conventional SSN, not more SLBM tubes.
To some extent I'm seeing these as underwater motherships, not so much conventional SSNs.
The ability to convert a potential Dreanought derived SSGN to a bomber would be aimed at increasing the number of platforms, and the capability to have two operational in different oceans, rather than trying to turn the Moscow suburbs into super shiny glass. Might also permit a reflection down to three SSBN, with the redundancy of having a viable stand in class.Defiance wrote:If 12 Trident isn't enough to put someone off you'd probably end up needing orders of magnitude more rather than multiples
I agree that twelve is plenty and frankly eight MIRVs is probably enough for any strategic rather than terror purposes (at least for the foreseeable future of ABM defence). Think of the SLBM tubes more as underwater stanflex modules, rather than purely missile silos, capable of launching USVs for underwater surveillance, maybe single use UAVs and other tasks that increases the distance between the sub and any threat.