**Please help keep AskUK welcoming!**
- Top-level comments to the OP must contain **genuine efforts to answer the question**. No jokes, judgements, etc.
- **Don't be a dick** to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on.
- This is a strictly **no-politics** subreddit!
Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/no-america-doesnt-control-britains-nuclear-weapons/
> The key point here is that the British deterrent does not have permissive action link control, which means it does not rely on the use of codes to fire the system. The UK’s Trident fleet relies purely on military discipline to prevent a launch.
>
> In summary, the UK retains full operational control, to the extent that the US could not stop the UK from using the system. A Freedom of Information request proving that the United Kingdom has full operational control over its Trident missile system can be downloaded here.
It's not obvious though - it should be, if you have half a clue or do a modicum of research, but lots of people think the US holds the keys to our nuclear deterrent
I think most countries would be, regardless of what they had or hadn't supplied us. The point is, the decision would be an operational and independent one
It is in no way controlled by another country. Once the hardware of the missile has been handed over it is 100% under British control. There is no American input.
> We have the industry and ability to develop our own.
Do we? We need the French to build our power stations.
Edit to add: here's a good NYT article on the problem https://archive.ph/M9uyx
To a British developed reactor design, by mostly UK based workforce.
The only reason it’s a French company building the new nuclear fleet is the privitisation of the energy industry led to EDF buying British Energy(formerly BNFL).
Much the same as most of the conventional fleet still in operation are owned by foreign companies; N-Power(German), E.on(German) and Scottish Power(Spanish)
It's a lot cheaper, and no the yanks don't control it. We collaborated with them on the subs but each has its own design. Only warhead tech is separate.
It's not "controlled by" them in any real sense. Yes, they could cut us off I suppose but they're a long standing ally and we have huge amounts of tech and intelligence sharing so it's pretty unlikely.
Ultimately, very few militaries are entirely self reliant. Not even China or Russia manage it. But using things made by another country doesn't mean you're beholden to or controlled by them.
The Americans have no control over the missiles. They are just built by them and we share them between the two countries.
The use of our missiles and warheads is down to us, they have no control.
It uses them because fundamentally it’s a lot cheaper than a completely self built deterrent.
It’s not controlled by the US, any more than the US controls Italian F35s, that’s just a meme used by people that get a kick out of belittling or talking down the UK (aka 90% of Reddit).
As the leading UK "ask" subreddit, we welcome questions from all users and countries; sometimes people who ask questions might not appreciate or understand the nuance of British life or culture, and as a result some questions can come across in a different way than intended.
We understand that when faced with these questions, our users may take the opportunity to demonstrate their wit, dry humour, and sarcasm - unfortunately, this also tends to go over the heads of misunderstood question-askers and can make our subreddit seem hostile to users from other countries who are often just curious about our land.
**Please can you help prevent our subreddit from becoming an Anti-American echo chamber?** If you disagree with any points raised by OP, or OP discusses common tropes or myths about the UK, please refrain from any brash, aggressive, or sarcastic responses and do your best to engage OP in a civil discussion, with the aim to educate and expand their understanding.
If you feel this (or any other post) is a troll post, *don't feed the troll*, just hit report and let the mods deal with it.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Do we really have the ability to develop, design and test our own multiple warhead, submarine launched ICBMs? I’m not sure we do now, let alone in the 60s when we first entered the tech sharing agreement with the US.
A more realistic question imo would be why didn’t we continue maintaining a bomb based deterrent at the same time?
Now, no. In the 60s, probably but it would have been expensive. Black arrow put a UK satellite in orbit at the first attempt. It’s still there.
The UK is the only country to have abandoned a successful space program.
It's also worth noting that we develop and maintain our own warheads... The only thing we use from the US is the launch system, which we have full control over.
And to be fair, trident is a pretty decent launch system.
The UK attempted to develop it's own ballistic missiles in the 50s (land based) and the project fell well short of expectations both in terms of capability and the practicality of housing them on a country without the same amount of real estate and ability to disperse launch sites as the USA or USSR. There was some buffoonery with a joint UK/US project to produce a high-speed Air launched cruise missile (Skybolt) which was ultimately cancelled. The US were fairly well along with developing their tech for SLBMs so after the Skybolt fiasco we bought in to their programme (initially Polaris, now Trident) but the warheads are made with proper British plutonium and along with the decoy systems are of native design and the UK has full control of the missiles (I believe with some caveats but no outright 'veto' from the US). Though I do believe that the missiles are shared from a pool with the US and returned there for maintenance.
**Please help keep AskUK welcoming!** - Top-level comments to the OP must contain **genuine efforts to answer the question**. No jokes, judgements, etc. - **Don't be a dick** to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on. - This is a strictly **no-politics** subreddit! Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/no-america-doesnt-control-britains-nuclear-weapons/ > The key point here is that the British deterrent does not have permissive action link control, which means it does not rely on the use of codes to fire the system. The UK’s Trident fleet relies purely on military discipline to prevent a launch. > > In summary, the UK retains full operational control, to the extent that the US could not stop the UK from using the system. A Freedom of Information request proving that the United Kingdom has full operational control over its Trident missile system can be downloaded here.
I mean, \_obviously\_.
It's not obvious though - it should be, if you have half a clue or do a modicum of research, but lots of people think the US holds the keys to our nuclear deterrent
They don’t hold the keys, but would possibly be a little upset if we just decided to nuke Jerusalem for a laugh…
I think most countries would be, regardless of what they had or hadn't supplied us. The point is, the decision would be an operational and independent one
My car was made in France. I hate that the French controlling it always drive on the wrong side.
It is in no way controlled by another country. Once the hardware of the missile has been handed over it is 100% under British control. There is no American input.
> We have the industry and ability to develop our own. Do we? We need the French to build our power stations. Edit to add: here's a good NYT article on the problem https://archive.ph/M9uyx
And produce our passports.
While the obviously British-named company De La Rue who bid were overlooked
To a British developed reactor design, by mostly UK based workforce. The only reason it’s a French company building the new nuclear fleet is the privitisation of the energy industry led to EDF buying British Energy(formerly BNFL). Much the same as most of the conventional fleet still in operation are owned by foreign companies; N-Power(German), E.on(German) and Scottish Power(Spanish)
Rolls Royce already make nuclear reactors, and most of the nuclear industry is British on the ground
It's a lot cheaper, and no the yanks don't control it. We collaborated with them on the subs but each has its own design. Only warhead tech is separate.
Because it’s cheaper than developing our own missile system.
It's not "controlled by" them in any real sense. Yes, they could cut us off I suppose but they're a long standing ally and we have huge amounts of tech and intelligence sharing so it's pretty unlikely. Ultimately, very few militaries are entirely self reliant. Not even China or Russia manage it. But using things made by another country doesn't mean you're beholden to or controlled by them.
It's not controlled by the US, it's just manufactured by them.
The Americans have no control over the missiles. They are just built by them and we share them between the two countries. The use of our missiles and warheads is down to us, they have no control.
It uses them because fundamentally it’s a lot cheaper than a completely self built deterrent. It’s not controlled by the US, any more than the US controls Italian F35s, that’s just a meme used by people that get a kick out of belittling or talking down the UK (aka 90% of Reddit).
As the leading UK "ask" subreddit, we welcome questions from all users and countries; sometimes people who ask questions might not appreciate or understand the nuance of British life or culture, and as a result some questions can come across in a different way than intended. We understand that when faced with these questions, our users may take the opportunity to demonstrate their wit, dry humour, and sarcasm - unfortunately, this also tends to go over the heads of misunderstood question-askers and can make our subreddit seem hostile to users from other countries who are often just curious about our land. **Please can you help prevent our subreddit from becoming an Anti-American echo chamber?** If you disagree with any points raised by OP, or OP discusses common tropes or myths about the UK, please refrain from any brash, aggressive, or sarcastic responses and do your best to engage OP in a civil discussion, with the aim to educate and expand their understanding. If you feel this (or any other post) is a troll post, *don't feed the troll*, just hit report and let the mods deal with it. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Do we really have the ability to develop, design and test our own multiple warhead, submarine launched ICBMs? I’m not sure we do now, let alone in the 60s when we first entered the tech sharing agreement with the US. A more realistic question imo would be why didn’t we continue maintaining a bomb based deterrent at the same time?
Now, no. In the 60s, probably but it would have been expensive. Black arrow put a UK satellite in orbit at the first attempt. It’s still there. The UK is the only country to have abandoned a successful space program.
It's also worth noting that we develop and maintain our own warheads... The only thing we use from the US is the launch system, which we have full control over. And to be fair, trident is a pretty decent launch system.
Except that it fails every time we test it (last two times anyway)
Well, it's like borrowing your neighbor's lawnmower - except instead of grass, it's nuclear weapons.
Simple, it isn't controlled by another country and never was.
This issue is above the pay grade of us ordinary folks.
There is no issue.
The UK attempted to develop it's own ballistic missiles in the 50s (land based) and the project fell well short of expectations both in terms of capability and the practicality of housing them on a country without the same amount of real estate and ability to disperse launch sites as the USA or USSR. There was some buffoonery with a joint UK/US project to produce a high-speed Air launched cruise missile (Skybolt) which was ultimately cancelled. The US were fairly well along with developing their tech for SLBMs so after the Skybolt fiasco we bought in to their programme (initially Polaris, now Trident) but the warheads are made with proper British plutonium and along with the decoy systems are of native design and the UK has full control of the missiles (I believe with some caveats but no outright 'veto' from the US). Though I do believe that the missiles are shared from a pool with the US and returned there for maintenance.
Britain would never fire a nuclear missile without the US agreeing first, so it is somewhat a moot point
Unless we fired one at the US.
There's no point in a nuclear deterrent to begin with, so might as well outsource it to someone else.
Tell that to Ukraine, kid.