This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jan/23/how-did-the-trident-test-fail-and-what-did-theresa-may-know

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
How did the Trident test fail and what did Theresa May know? How did the Trident test fail and what did Theresa May know?
(35 minutes later)
What is at issue?What is at issue?
In June last year, the Royal Navy test-fired an unarmed Trident II D5 ballistic missile. The weapons are 13 metres long, weighs 60 tonnes and can carry nuclear warheads with up to eight times the destructive capacity of the bombs that hit Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the second world war. The navy likes to boast about the missile’s accuracy: it can hit a target 4,000 nautical miles away and be accurate to within a few metres. In June last year, the Royal Navy test-fired an unarmed Trident II D5 ballistic missile. The weapon is 13 metres long, weighs 60 tonnes and can carry nuclear warheads with up to eight times the destructive capacity of the bombs that hit Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the second world war. The navy likes to boast about the missile’s accuracy: it can hit a target 4,000 nautical miles away and be accurate to within a few metres.
The problem is that when HMS Vengeance, one of the UK’s four nuclear submarines, test-fired the missile off the coast of Florida, the missile was not out by a few metres, but several thousand miles. It had been targeted at the southern Atlantic off the coast of west Africa. Instead, it was heading in the opposite direction, over the US. The problem is that when HMS Vengeance, one of the UK’s four nuclear submarines, test-fired the missile off the coast of Florida, the missile was not out by a few metres but several thousand miles. It had been targeted at the southern Atlantic off the coast of west Africa. Instead, it was heading in the opposite direction, over the US.
How often do such tests take place?How often do such tests take place?
The Ministry of Defence said the tests were routine. While they are routine for the well-funded US Navy, with each missile costing £17m and the Royal Navy being under much stricter budgetary constraints, it has only test-fired five since 2000.The Ministry of Defence said the tests were routine. While they are routine for the well-funded US Navy, with each missile costing £17m and the Royal Navy being under much stricter budgetary constraints, it has only test-fired five since 2000.
The previous four tests – in 2000, 2005, 2009 and 2012 – were successful, but there was a malfunction last year. According to defence sources, the missile did not veer off in the wrong direction because it was faulty, but because the information relayed to it was faulty. This explanation is not reassuring. The previous four tests – in 2000, 2005, 2009 and 2012 – were successful, but there was a malfunction last year. According to defence sources, the missile did not veer off in the wrong direction because it was faulty but because the information relayed to it was faulty. This explanation is not reassuring.
The missile was not armed with a nuclear warhead but contained a small amount of explosives. It was detonated when the order was given to abort the test.The missile was not armed with a nuclear warhead but contained a small amount of explosives. It was detonated when the order was given to abort the test.
Why was the test failure kept secret?Why was the test failure kept secret?
The four previous successful launches were accompanied by press releases and video. However, the failed test happened just a month before a key Commons vote on whether to go ahead with the next generation of Trident, scheduled to become operational in the 2030s.The four previous successful launches were accompanied by press releases and video. However, the failed test happened just a month before a key Commons vote on whether to go ahead with the next generation of Trident, scheduled to become operational in the 2030s.
Theresa May was briefed about the failure. The question is why the prime minister did not inform MPs. Given the scale of the vote in favour, with many Labour MPs joining the Conservatives, news of the failed test is unlikely to have had a decisive impact on the outcome. The classic dictum of press officers is that a cover-up usually generates more publicity that the original story and that is now the danger for the government. Theresa May was briefed about the test. The question is why the prime minister did not inform MPs. Given the scale of the vote in favour, with many Labour MPs joining the Conservatives, news of the failed test is unlikely to have had a decisive impact on the outcome. The classic dictum of press officers is that a cover-up usually generates more publicity than the original story and that is now the danger for the government.
Did the Russian government know?Did the Russian government know?
The MoD, in response to the Sunday Times scoop about the test failure, said: “We do not provide further details on submarine operations for obvious national security reasons.”The MoD, in response to the Sunday Times scoop about the test failure, said: “We do not provide further details on submarine operations for obvious national security reasons.”
What some MPs will find galling is that while the MoD regards it as a matter of national security, keeping MPs in the dark, Russia almost certainly knew about it, if the experience of previous tests is anything to go by. During the 2012 launch, two Russian spy ships were in the vicinity, monitoring the launch. According to The Silent Deep, a detailed look at the UK’s nuclear submarines by Peter Hennessy and James Jinks, the Russian commander sent a message afterwards: “Bravo November, this is Russian warship. We sincerely congratulate crew of your ship with the successful completion of the ballistic missile Trident II launch exercise.”What some MPs will find galling is that while the MoD regards it as a matter of national security, keeping MPs in the dark, Russia almost certainly knew about it, if the experience of previous tests is anything to go by. During the 2012 launch, two Russian spy ships were in the vicinity, monitoring the launch. According to The Silent Deep, a detailed look at the UK’s nuclear submarines by Peter Hennessy and James Jinks, the Russian commander sent a message afterwards: “Bravo November, this is Russian warship. We sincerely congratulate crew of your ship with the successful completion of the ballistic missile Trident II launch exercise.”
How exactly did the malfunction occur?How exactly did the malfunction occur?
The MoD takes umbrage at the line that the missile “veered off course” because this carries the suggestion that the missile was faulty. Instead, according to defence sources, the problem was with telemetric directional data: faulty information. The MoD takes umbrage at the line that the missile “veered off course” because this carries the suggestion that the missile was faulty. Instead, according to defence sources, the problem was with telemetric directional data, ie faulty information.
The test was part of what the navy call a demonstration and shakedown operation, essentially an MOT, and was the final examination for HMS Vengeance after completing its refit. In fact, HMS Vengeance returned to service in the same month, June last year.The test was part of what the navy call a demonstration and shakedown operation, essentially an MOT, and was the final examination for HMS Vengeance after completing its refit. In fact, HMS Vengeance returned to service in the same month, June last year.
The MoD touted this as a sign that all was well. It said the operation was “designed to certify the submarine and its crew” and they were successfully tested and certified.The MoD touted this as a sign that all was well. It said the operation was “designed to certify the submarine and its crew” and they were successfully tested and certified.
The question MPs need to ask is, how serious was the initial MoT failure? Was it the equivalent of a faulty light bulb or a broken axle or an engine about to explode? They need reassurance that this could not have happened had HMS Vengeance been firing a missile armed with a nuclear warhead. The question MPs need to ask is, how serious was the initial MOT failure? Was it the equivalent of a faulty light bulb or a broken axle or an engine about to explode? They need reassurance that this could not have happened had HMS Vengeance been firing a missile armed with a nuclear warhead.
Paul Ingram, executive director of the British American Information Council, which is based in London and Washington, said telemetric data suggests either a manual inputting problem or a software one rather than a failure on the part of the rocket engine.
“It is a complex system. It is an amazing feat of human engineering but everything has to work or there is catastrophic failure and a catastrophic failure can have catastrophic consequences,” Ingram said.