U.S. To Develop New Nuclear-Armed Submarine-Launched Cruise Missile

Donate

U.S. To Develop New Nuclear-Armed Submarine-Launched Cruise Missile

Tomahawk missile launched from a submarine. Click to see full-size image

The US Department of Defense plans to include a record for a program for the development of a new nuclear-armed, submarine-launched cruise missile in its Fiscal Year 2021 budget request, according to Defense News, citing an unnamed senior US defense official.

The goal is to deploy it within 7 to 10 years.

The source said that the Pentagon would launch an analysis of alternatives process for the cruise missile, which was first announced during the rollout of the Nuclear Posture Review.

“We requested $5 million in FY20, which Congress gave us. There’s nothing in the ‘21 budget because we’ll just continue to use the $5 million to do the AOA,” the official explained. “But in FY22, I hope that you’ll see a budget request that will begin the program of record for the sea-launched cruise missile.”

“You put these on submarines, the Russians won’t know where they are,” the official added. “They’ll hate it. They’ll absolutely hate it.”

The Nuclear Posture Review said that the US would seek two nuclear capabilities, including a low-yield warhead for the submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM), and a sea-launched nuclear-capable cruise missile (SLCM).

The low-yield warhead for the SLBM is known as W76-2 and was deployed for the first time in late 2019.

The official said the department is still sorting how much money the program might cost, but it could be similar to the Long Range Standoff weapon, a new air-launched cruise missile. That weapon is projected to cost the Defense Department about $8 billion to $9 billion and a similar amount for the National Nuclear Security Administration, which is charged with developing the warhead.

So, the program would cost between $16 and 18 billion.

“Do you put it on a surface ship? Do you put it on a submarine? Do you use a new missile or an existing missile? How far does it have to travel? We’re looking at all of this. And then you also have to look at the concept of operations. How you want them to operate? Do you store the weapons on the sub all the time, or do you bring them into port and bring them in a crisis?” the official said.

If the missile is developed and delivered, the US Navy’s nuclear-armed fleet would go from 12 to 20 or even 30 vessels, surface or undwater, which would be “huge” in countering Russia and China.

The official emphasized that the weapon doesn’t need to be a brand-new design, saying: “It doesn’t have [to] be a big deal” to design and procure.

“The SLCM [submarine-launched cruise missile] doesn’t have to be a big deal. Could be the same warhead. We’re going to look into that,” the official added.

A conventional Tomahawk weapon has a rough range of 1,250–2,500 kilometers, and the range on the new SLCM would likely be longer, as a nuclear warhead weighs less than a conventional payload.

This missile would also be banned under the INF Treaty, if it were not dismantled on the initiative of the US.

But it could potentially be expensive, and not that needed, as there are some critics.

“A new SLCM would be a costly hedge on a hedge,” said Kingston Reif of the Arms Control Association. “The United States is already planning to invest scores of billions of dollars in the B-21 [bomber], LRSO and F-35A [fighter jet] to address the [area-access/area denial] challenge. The Navy is unlikely to be pleased with the additional operational and financial burdens that would come with re-nuclearizing the surface or attack submarine fleet.”

Additionally, “arming attack submarines with nuclear SLCMs would also reduce the number of conventional Tomahawk SLCMs each submarine could carry,” Reif said.

The US Congress needs to approve the plan before any program is initiated.

“I don’t know if Congress is going to make a big deal about it or not because there’s really no money involved” in fiscal 2021, the unnamed official said. “But it is a new weapon system, and unlike the W76-2, where you’re replacing a large warhead for a small warhead, here you’re actually introducing more deployed capabilities. But again, it’s 7-10 years.”

The SLCM could be used as a bargaining chip in arms control negotiations with Russia, since with the INF gone and New START moving in the same direction, arms control treaties need to be concluded.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Donate

  • Jake321

    So the little shirtless man on the tiny pony wanted an arms race he can’t afford? Looks like he will get it and a ticket to meet his old Soviet butt buddies in the dustbin of history.

    • Concrete Mike

      Right, keep.playing with cruise missiles.

      China and Russia have hypersonic weaponry, something us is still dreaming about.

      The “arms” race is done, USA lost while it was busy playing with jabhat al nusrah.

      • Jake321

        LOL…the last time ANY country tried an arms race with the US it collapsed, if you missed it. The residual Russia tries it again and the brake up of what’s left of the Russian Empire will continue. And if you also missed it, genius, modern nuclear arms races are not meant to use what they waste their money on but to look bigger and badder and try to keep a deterrent edge. A new one today will simply be way above the economic capacity of Putin’s RF. The dustbin of history awaits him and the RF if he continues on his Greater Russia Follies.

        • Concrete Mike

          The only follie is the propagandized garbage coming out ofnyour mouth.

          Your existence as a disinfo agent must be pitiful.

          • Jake321

            Nahhhhhh…I like it just fine here in my top floor condo in Sunny California, Igor. Too bad losers like you could never afford it here except with the other dregs on the street.

        • Lone Ranger

          You shouldn’t get your history lessons from corn flakes boxes, adolf…
          U.S. is broke, busted and disgusted…

          • Jake321

            LOL…and that’s why our interests rates are near zero? Time for you to take Econ and Finance 101, junior.

          • Lone Ranger

            Indeed, you should.
            Without free money propping up the debt bubble you are toast.

        • JIMI JAMES

          No such thing,russia has soundly defeated usa in cia/arms race,see ye low iq lethargic only ride tricycle without aseat,demented slow cia/bot,Russia has the speed usa never can have,thank christ for strategic balance,speed is everything do you not realise that fact selow thinketh cia/bot?get over it,you lost cataclymic!

          • Jake321

            Damn, your reading from an old Soviet Russian puff piece from just before your Russian Soviet Empire went into the dustbin of history. But look on the bright side. Putz Putin the Poisoner is taking you down to be with them. YEH!!!

    • Xoli Xoli

      Jake that little shirtless man were a KGB Lieutenant colonel until he resigned in 1991.

      • Jake321

        Yes he was and there will be all those other Soviet goons to keep him company in that dustbin.

        • Concrete Mike

          Poor little boy still stuck in the cold war.

          How about you go suck skme Trotsky dick.
          After 80 years still butt hurt!!

          Hahaha

        • Lone Ranger

          Salty tears detected ;)

      • JIMI JAMES

        You liar not all men play basket ball fkwit,besides putin could snap both ye wrists anytime anyday,anywhere,my oh my how you jealous facist kweers have it in for heterosexuals

        Me thinks there’s much more to putin than any pencil necked do nothing lazy bot(period)

        • Jake321

          There sure is! Tens of billions of dollars worth of stolen Russian assets…and counting.

        • Xoli Xoli

          I hope you survive this winter in Idlipistan.

        • Xoli Xoli

          I dont workk for Putin like you bloody sick fuck.

    • Jesus

      A souped up version of a subsonic Tomahawk with a nuclear warhead. We know how well the Tomahawks performed in Syria against EW and SHORAD defenses

      • Jake321

        Yes we do. Way more than enough got through to wipe out much of Syria if they had nuclear warheads. Try to concentrate on reality, sport.

        • Jesus

          And what would have happened to US and its forces in ME?

          • Jake321

            Celebrating their overwhelming victory I would guess.

          • Jesus

            Nuked with impunity for using nuclear weapons against Russian forces. Guess again with more realistic perspective.

        • Lone Ranger

          Disney called, they want you back…

        • JIMI JAMES

          Russia is good and ready for your demented fist strike nuclear,satanic sick fks!
          Either way your future has been roasted to the tune of 24 trillion and still counting
          down the road to eternal self destruction in your own wake,ye petty slow weak fk!

          • Jake321

            Great. The more ready Russia gets, the sooner it goes bankrupt. Do note that two-thirds of the US debt is owed to itself and Americans, NOT to foreigners. So it is a redistributive issue and not a one if solvency. Sorry if that is too complex for your Vodka pickled brain.

      • Kananda

        they were excellent

      • AM Hants

        60, one got stuck. 36 went AWOL. 23 landed, impotent and left so much damage, Syria was using the stricken airport within hours.

        Round 2, following White Helmet false flag. They took out a building, Syria planned to demolish, for a cheaper price.

        How much did that exercise cost the average US tax payer.

        UK wanted to join in Round 2, but, a Russian electro-diesel submarine and frigate, cornered the UK Astute class submarine, leaving her unable to unload her arsenal. France tried to help the US, but, didn’t they also have problems, not getting the results they demanded?

        AS memories come flooding back.

    • observerBG

      Maybe 5 year olds like you did not notice it, but under current law US military spending is to continue to decrease up to 2030 due to lack of money. Additional massive cuts will need to implemented to stabilise the ever growing debt. US is already bankrupt, loser. Discretionary spending is to drop too over time. This is why it is going crazy and started bullying its own allies to “pay it money” for “protection”. There is no money, loser.

      • Jake321

        You mistake Moron Trump’s antics for reality, Igor. And as usual you lie. Unfortunately, US military spending is projected to increase NOT decrease. If you could read English above the level of a 5 year old, you might have seen that in US Budget projections. As an aside, a country like the US with inflation and interest rates near zero is far far from bankrupt. Take Econ and Finance 101 and do try to get the simplest things correct.

        • observerBG

          US military and civilian spending is projected to decrease as percentage of GDP to all time lows, dumbo. Start studying, look at CBO budget estimates, etc. What an idiot.

          • Jake321

            LOL…you are she an that be wrong so you change your argument. Anyway, here it is:

          • observerBG

            Man, what an ignorant child you are. You did not take into account inflation. :)

            US military and civilian spending is to grow the same as inflation (as per CBO) and not toghether with GDP. These are inflated dollars. Therefore it would not grow at all, which leads also to its decline to all time lows as share of GDP.

            In other words – in the rest of the world – spending will increase in real terms, as % spending of gdp stays the same. In the US, it would not. It is as if the US is not growing, while the rest of the world is growing.

            Moreover: US GDP growth is to be 1,7 %, world GDP growth – 3 %, China GDP growth – 5 %. That is – world is growing faster than the US.

            And in 2034 debt will rich huge proportions according to CBO, which will require further cuts. :)

    • Lone Ranger

      Actually they can afford it.
      They don’t have a debt of $23trillion.
      U.S. is behind 20+years and that won’t change anytime soon.
      Keep crying ;)

      • Jake321

        The only crying around here is from the Russian Trolls crying unto their Vodka bottles because they couldn’t make the big bucks using their English skills working with US international corporations or with tech companies in California. But you keep pushing Russia into a new arms race so they go bankrupt sooner.

        • Lone Ranger

          Time to insert your Tampax adolf, you are bleeding all over the place ;)

    • JIMI JAMES

      Hey incest bot,Russia infact are the ones who can build endlessly,see russia can do,gold backed

      usa todays can’t do,because they replaced heterosexuals for lethargic overegrown kweers see.

      The problem with limped tiny doggie brainz,can’t accept heterosexuals do it better than todays begotten phaedophile,incest wannabe tyrants,besides the world is gratefull to cccps victory!
      Learn to digest truth seens in the end,death has no easy answers for they who wish to know!

      • Jake321

        The US has more than four times the gold reserves of Russia. But you are ahead in terms of binging yourself to an early grave. Maybe you’re already there since you seem to think the CCCP is around where you are.

  • Louis IX

    “They’ll hate it. They’ll absolutely hate it.”
    Thanks for confirming US Department of Defense is motivated by hatred.

    • Jake321

      LOL…You think anyone’s Department of Defense is motivated by love for the enemy?

  • Boycott-Saudi!!!

    Why can’t morons like these in Defense Department get arrested, seriously…. Stop playing nuke war. We want peace.

    • Jake321

      Well, try it yourself if you can get away from your Vodka ration bottle, Igor. Of course you you want peace…on your terms. So, I guess the US won’t accept your kind offer.

      • Lone Ranger

        U.S. is an Empire about to go down, you won’t be missed.
        Operation Paperclip was a failure all the Nazis turned the U.S. into the Reich 2.0.
        Make no mistake your days are numbered, terrorists supporter scum.

        • Jake321

          Everyone’s days are numbered, kid, if you haven’t learned that yet. But the US sure has a lot more left of them than the failing residual Russian Empire under Czar Putin the First and Last.

          • Lone Ranger

            I dont think so adolf ;)
            Nazis also thought they would have a 1000 Reich….

      • JIMI JAMES

        Usas cia/ fekn p00ftarz,adore lgbtq + phaedophiles more than pragmatic free trades

        in the end makes no rats arse of a difference,usa is cursed in abonimnation last 33yrs,

        Russia defense stocks up,sure russia can emp sorry pathedic incest asses to broke!
        Nothing any can do about it,you have been completely outclassed by the truth,oh well.

        • Jake321

          LOL…my post made you hit your Vodka ration bottle that hard, Ivan?

    • Kananda

      then you can begin with putin. that asshole developed hypersonic nukes. :P

      at least on paper. :)

      • JIMI JAMES

        Putin don’t like it up de ass like incest spawn wannabe inferor bred facist rants see,
        on paper has been thorougly tested by the more serious heterosexual russians (period)
        And in the event you think you are justified,think again,all liars are broken,
        There is no future in fascism,it is they cursed,What god wants,god gets,I truth the 9th dan blackbelt of true class over any incest spawn wannabe kweer on the soros take,
        with your gaystapo hato,genociding in europe,never forget yugoslavia fekn p00ftrrz!

      • AM Hants

        Started on paper now in active service.

        Ironically, owing to the Obama double cross of START II, it led to Russia devising the best way to defend themselves from a first strike nuclear defence system that the US, using NATO, planned to place on Russia’s borders. The system is now obsolete, owing to Russian defence planning. They would have been 5 minutes from Moscow, leaving Russia unable to defend herself from a US led nuclear attack.

        What was Russia meant to do? Pretty effective deterrent, those cost effective Russian hyper sonics, are they not?

  • Lone Ranger

    They already have it.
    Tomahawks can be nuke tipped since the 80s.

    • Kananda

      but not launch from submarine

      • Lone Ranger

        Only difference is the warhead.
        You think they don’t have it, think again.

        • Kananda

          i doubt. if they would have, moscow had been protest.

          • Lone Ranger

            Russia has nuke tipped cruise missiles as well.
            U.S. is hopelessly behind, thats why they are telling its new, they have to show up something to save face.

          • JIMI JAMES

            Nothing more insulting whe lieing kweer accuses the better persons then in doing so mearly fkn one anothers leg in ignorance without realising they lost the war,
            worse yet low iq bots,trying in vain to tell real deal workers how to run buisness?

          • Lone Ranger

            Take your meds adolf, you need it…

          • Jake321

            That’s my line, thief…

          • AM Hants

            Newbie Yassan attack submarine, what types of missiles are they equipped for? Is it not standard, precision strike and also hyper sonics?

            US attack submarines use standard missiles. The deterrent, they tweeked with, to mould into an attack, uses precision missiles.

            US only has two types of submarine. The old deterrents, due to be replaced around 10 years time, if come in on time and their attack submarines. Believe only 4 of the old deterrents have been restructured for precision strike missiles.

            Russia, excluding her special mission subs, has around 4 different types. Electro-diesel, or as NATO call them ‘black hole’, as they are untraceable. The UKnew attack sub, renowned for it’s ‘sonar’ system, when on an exercise to take out Syria, following the White Helmet ‘CW’ false flag, got cornered by a Russian electro-diesel submarine and a frigate. Leaving her unable to unleash her arsenal, according to UK Media, including The Times, a rag not known for their love of Russia.

            Other Russian submarines, attack class and precision strike/hypersonic/standard missile attack, plus, the ballistics. Many newbies in all ranges.

            US has just two versions, with around 4 refurbished to carry precision strike missiles. Most US submarines are old and nosy. With the attack subs, slowly being replaced. They might have a few more than Russia’s 60 plus, but, how many in full working order, let alone new?

  • Lone Ranger

    They had to come up with something, since Russia and China caught them with their pants down.
    That’s nothing more than a safe face measure.

    • Jake321

      No nuke weapon is just face saving (it’s NOT “safe face.” You need to work on your English.)

      • Lone Ranger

        At least Im not a crazy nazi like you ;)

  • Lone Ranger

    CIA trolls are crying and raging, that’s all they can do.
    Their beloved rapist cannibal headchoppers are being wiped out.
    Terror state USA…..no more.

  • Jake321

    Guess like the nuke cruise missiles Israel already has on their subs off the cost of Iran.

  • AM Hants

    Russia already has those submarines. By the time the US gets theirs into active service, the next generation Russian version, will already be commissioned and on active duties.

  • AM Hants

    Slightly off topic, but, concerns US. According to Fort Russ, the US had 27,000 PR Officers/propaganda agents on the Government payroll. I wonder how many they have now?

    Why have they privatised 80% of their intelligence requirements, focusing on social media led intelligence? Since Dick Chesney went to work for Halliburton and the Carlyle Group, where all failed politicians end up, including failed UK Prime Ministers.

    How much of the US Defence industry has also been privatised, courtesy the actions of Chesney? Remember, he cut back US military manpower, knowing that it would then be reliant on the privatised military defence industry and mercenaries under his control, via the Halliburton Mercenaries For Hire, branch? Just in time to invade Kosovo and return to Iraq.

    So how many Government funded, via State or tax peyer funded NGOs, like the NED and Open Society Foundation, propaganda 9agents does Washington DC have on their payroll, for the US tax payer to fund?