Why are so many submarines undergoing the SSGN conversion??

Question

SERIOUS ANSWERS ONLY, *PLEASE*. If all I get is a bunch of Bush-bashing, "we should get rid of the military," or something similar, then I'll give you a thumbs down.

As far as I know, the SSGN conversion involves taking a ballistic missile submarine and converting the system to fire non-nuclear missiles. If I'm wrong, please correct me accordingly.

Why is this conversion being done? Is the Navy eliminating it's vessels capable of launching nukes? I understand the need for conventional missiles as well, but does this mean that the country is abandoning it's nuclear weapons at sea?

You can be semi-technical if you want. I have an intermediate understanding of engineering and computer-related terminology and applications.

Answer 1

Two factors. One is the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties signed by the Soviet Union and us. So, ballistic missile submarines are not needed in the quantity they were in the past. Secondly, the cruise missile has proven its worth as a weapon which can be launched against an unsuspecting enemy and hit that enemy at a considerable distance. Third, this war will involve small units going in somewhere, kicking in some doors and shooting people in the head. So, you can expect some of those subs to be further converted to troop-carrying missions.

Answer 2

SALT II downgraded the amount of Submarine Launched Ballistic Missiles both sides were allowed. It didn't just account for land based missles bombers and the like.

So the Ohio being what it is. It is an obvious choice for conversion. They are too young to decommission and still at the top of their underwater game. Conversion to SSGN is a way to have the Navy INCREASE available firepower to project power from offshore and influence the battle on the ground. That is WITHOUT designing and buying brand new equipment to provide what is necessary, they have a tried and true history and it makes more sense to keep and modify what you have. The alternative was decommission and waste taxpayers money well spent.

Answer 3

There are onlly 4 SSBNs being converted to SSGNs. The first 4 subs in the OHIO Class. There are many reasons for the conversion, but the real reason that many people wont elude to is relevancy. Yes there are Start treaty requirements and the boats aren't that old, but they are minor considerations.
WRT Start treaty - it costs money (alot) to keep the subs operating, why not just decommission them if they are no longer needed.
WRT age - many a good submarine has been decommissioned before its time. Look at many of the Los Angeles Class subs that were decomissioned at 20 years into their 30 year life.
Now back to relevancy - With the shift in technology to precision guided conventionally armed weapons - converting the old submarines provides a substantial increase in the US Submarine Force's strike capabilitiy. Many navy's (besides our ans our allies) don't really delve into the anti-submarine capabilities. Therefore, this platform goes relatively unchecked. Strike aircraft are capable of providing a similar capability but at the risk to pilots. Money is tight (anything but war dollars) and any bit of relevancy helps get additional funding.

Answer 4

Only the first 4 Ohio-class SSBNs are being converted so that still leaves 14 SSBNs that will retain the Trident missiles. You have to look at the postives that the SSGNs will provide with its focus being on the War on Terror in that it will be equipped well over 100 TOMAHAWK cruise missiles and then probably even more important is the ability to carry up to over 60 Navy Seals. So don't worry, we still have our nuclear detterence and capability but being able to use some of the Ohio class subs to expand the Silent Service's ablility to carry out its mission.

Answer 5

They are only retrofitting four Ohio class missile subs as SSGN's.

In 1994, the Nuclear Posture Review determined that America should have 14 Trident submarines carrying the newer D-5 Trident missile system.

So four Trident submarines were upgraded from the C-4 Trident missiles to the D-5 Trident missiles.

That left four trident submarines unneeded.

They are being retrofitted to carry 154 Tomahawk missiles , as well as being able to serve as Special Forces capable submarines, carrying 66 special operators.

Answer 6

I gurrantee you the US Navy is getting rid of all balistic missile submarines. If anything, you are being fed false information or the US is trying to make it seem like there going less nuclear; but don't worry, we've got plenty of them, enough to blow the world over 7 times in fact.

Answer 7

I think the question is, how many nuke capable boats do we need with the Soviet Union out of the picture?

The costs to maintain nuclear missiles in a submarine are very high and it is very dangerous work.

Answer 8

Job security baby, Have to keep all of the civilian mechanics and electrition employed @ the Navy Yard!