Nowhere did I say we need 3000/year my comment was simply to illustrate how far we’ve fallen. Also as the article I attached shows we are a decade away (if no delays) from getting to 30/year meanwhile latest estimates are China deployed warheads could go from 500-1500 in that same timeframe.
And the most recent pictures of Littlest Kim have him weighing a good 80lbs more than in those pics.
Neither you nor I nor anyone can claim "we are fine" with respect to the availability, reliability, and functionality of the US nuclear weapons stockpile. We are in totally uncharted territory - decades without manufacture, serious development, or testing of nuclear weapons. Hundreds of billions have been spent by DoE on ostensible "reliability" programs consisting largely of computer simulations that purport to demonstrate the continued functionality of the decades-old weapons in the stockpile. Virtually all the old men who were deeply involved in the nuclear weapons industry decades ago are unanimous in declaring that nuclear weapons are extremely complicated and behave in often unpredictable ways, making testing absolutely vital not only for new weapons development but for insuring the present arsenal is indeed functional. I'm not necessarily advocating for resumed testing - though I certainly wouldn't oppose it - but the fact is with the bureaucratic coup that closed Rocky Flats and the lack of focus and investment in the nuclear retaliatory capabilities of this nation going on over 30 years now, assessments declaring "we are just fine," etc., are pollyanish in the extreme.
I think that's misunderstanding where and how you need to use other ships to give space for an SSBN to operate.
And give it a year or so for sea trials to wrap up, so they should have a working deterrent in 2026.
Easily. Sea trials, shoot all the torpedo tubes, shoot the missile systems, shock trials, etc. Come back in to shipyard to fix everything, a second set of sea trials to make sure that all the worked systems are fixed, and then deployment.
