UGM-133 Trident II

Origins and development

In the early 1960s, United States assessments held that Soviet progress in anti-ballistic missile (ABM) defenses, anti-submarine warfare (ASW), and missile guidance threatened American chances of surviving a first nuclear strike and responding effectively.^[3] On 1 November 1966, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara initiated the STRAT-X study to evaluate future strategic deterrent alternatives for the military branches.^[3][4] STRAT-X examined approximately 125 missile concepts, including silo-based and mobile intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), the B-1 bomber, surface ship systems, and undersea options.^[3][4] The evaluation calculated system procurement costs including basing infrastructure and weighed them against the projected number of surviving warheads following a Soviet first strike.^[4] The naval proposal, termed the Undersea Long-range Missile System (ULMS), emerged as the most survivable option.^[3][4]

The original ULMS design envisioned a submarine displacing 8,240 metric tons with a speed capped below 25 knots to reduce acoustic signatures, carrying 24 missiles horizontally in external canisters outside the pressure hull.^[3] These canisters were intended to be released across varying depths and speeds, with delayed ignition preventing counter-detection of the submarine's launch location.^[3] In July 1968, the Special Projects Office was reorganized into the Strategic Systems Project Office (SSPO) under Rear Admiral Levering Smith, who abandoned the horizontal launch concept in favor of conventional vertical launch tubes.^[3] The SSPO gradually lost influence over the ULMS program, and following efforts by Admiral Hyman Rickover, the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations established a separate ULMS submarine project office under Rear Admiral Harvey E. Lyon, leaving missile development under Smith's SSPO.^[3]

On 14 September 1971, Deputy Secretary of Defense David Packard approved Decision Coordinating Paper No. 67, setting up a two-phase procurement program.^[5] Phase one involved developing an extended-range missile within the physical envelope of the existing Poseidon C-3 missile, designated EXPO (Expanded Poseidon) or Trident I C-4, intended for both existing submarines and a new class of submarines.^[3][4][5] Phase two, ULMS II, called for a substantially larger missile with greater throw-weight and range to equip the new Ohio-class submarines.^[5][6] In May 1972, the program adopted the name Trident, designating the larger missile Trident II D5.^[5] Three initial design configurations were explored: an elongated C-4 variant with a 1.8-meter (71-inch) diameter; a hybrid featuring a 2.1-meter (84-inch) first stage with C-4 upper stages; and a baseline missile measuring 2.1 meters across all stages. A work plan approved in 1974 called for work to begin that year and for the missile to enter service in 1985..

During the mid-1970s, the Department of Defense examined whether the Trident II missile could be unified with the United States Air Force MX Peacekeeper ICBM program to curtail costs.^[5] Both services conducted joint engineering studies to determine whether an 83-inch diameter missile airframe could serve both sea-based and silo-based roles. Funding reductions by Congress in 1978, which allocated only $5 million of a requested $15 million for commonality research, slowed the effort.^[5] By December 1978 and December 1979, respective studies concluded that structural compromises would degrade missile performance and yield savings of approximately $300 million, which did not justify the loss of specialized operational capabilities.^[5] The services agreed to pursue separate weapon systems, allowing the Navy to proceed with an independent Trident II architecture.^[5]

In March 1980, Secretary of Defense Harold Brown sought expanded research appropriations to enhance SLBM targeting accuracy. While the House Armed Services Committee opposed funding, the Senate Armed Services Committee recommended $97 million to promote competitive industrial contracts, ultimately resulting in an award of $65 million. On 2 October 1981, President Ronald Reagan directed full modernization of United States strategic offensive forces, specifying an initial operating capability date of December 1989 for a high-accuracy Trident II D5 system.^[7] In December 1982, Deputy Secretary of Defense Frank Carlucci advised Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger to fund a new reentry vehicle, designated Mk 5, with a greater yield than the Mk 4. The development contract for the Trident II was issued in October 1983, and on 28 December 1983 the Deputy Secretary of Defense authorized full-scale engineering development. Another account dates the authorization of full-scale development and production to 28 October 1983..^[7][8]

Improved Accuracy Programme

During the 1960s, the Special Projects Office resisted requirements to optimize submarine missiles for high-precision counterforce strikes, arguing that fleet ballistic missiles functioned as an assured-destruction countervalue deterrent.^[9][10] In 1972, Chief of Naval Operations Elmo Zumwalt requested precision improvements, which Rear Admiral Levering Smith estimated would require $1.5 billion in specialized research.^[9] In 1973, Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger demanded formal options for upgrading SLBM accuracy to match the flexible targeting doctrines later articulated in National Security Decision Memorandum 242 (NSDM 242), which permitted controlled strikes against military targets.^[9] Although Schlesinger held that the NSDM 242 targets could be reached with the existing arsenal, he considered better accuracy desirable, and his meetings with Levering Smith led to the Improved Accuracy Programme (IAP), started in 1974, which operated until 1982 with an expenditure of approximately $600 million.^[9]

The IAP analyzed sources of flight error across missile subsystems, launch platforms, and environmental dynamics.^[9] The investigation evaluated three distinct technical paths to achieve high accuracy: satellite navigation downlinks such as GPS; terminal radar or optical guidance on the reentry vehicle; and advanced stellar-inertial navigation.^[9] Satellite receivers were considered vulnerable to jamming or anti-satellite warfare during a general nuclear conflict, while terminal guidance sensors faced technological immaturity and required overland flight testing, which raised political objections regarding public safety.^[9] Consequently, the Navy concentrated resources on upgrading stellar-inertial tracking, digital processing, and launch-ship navigation.^[9][11]

To isolate and measure error components, the IAP established specialized test infrastructure. The Velocity and Position Reference System (VPRS) utilized seabed transponder networks to provide reference benchmarks for submarine speed and position at the moment of launch.^[9] Downrange tracking was conducted via SATRACK, a satellite-based system utilizing early Navstar GPS satellites and ground radar stations to record Doppler shift data and missile flight profiles from 1978 onward.^[9] Missile and reentry vehicles carried telemetry instrumentation packages to record acceleration, post-boost thruster operations, separation velocities, and atmospheric reentry dynamics.^[9] Final splashdown locations were measured using the underwater acoustic Missile Locating System (MILS) and Sonobuoy-MILS (SMILS).^[9] Analysis determined that initial submarine velocity errors and star-sighting orientation uncertainties accounted for the largest shares of downrange inaccuracy, steering development toward Doppler sonar, geodetic surveys, and the Mk 6 guidance system.^[9][11]

Design and propulsion

The UGM-133A Trident II is a three-stage ballistic missile with tandem rocket stages. It measures 13.41 to 13.57 meters (44 to 44.5 feet) in total length, has a first-stage diameter of 2.11 meters (83 inches), and has a maximum launch mass of 59,078 kilograms (130,244 pounds).^[8][12] The nose section narrows slightly to 2.06 meters (81 inches) and houses the third-stage motor, with the post-boost stage and its warheads arranged around it..^[13][14] To achieve maximum structural efficiency and save weight, the motor cases of the first two stages are wound from carbon-fiber-reinforced epoxy polymer.^[5] The third-stage motor casing was initially constructed of kevlar-epoxy composite, but after 1988 production transitioned to carbon-epoxy composite, which eliminated electrostatic differentials between Kevlar and carbon and reduced weight, thereby increasing missile range.^[5][15]

All three stages employ solid-propellant rocket motors utilizing high-energy composite fuel designated PEG/NG75 or NEPE-75 (Nitrate Ester Plasticized Polyether).^[5][8][16] The formulation comprises 75 percent solids by weight, consisting of cyclotetramethylenetetranitramine (HMX), aluminum fuel powder, and ammonium perchlorate oxidizer, bound in a polyethylene glycol matrix plasticized with nitroglycerin and nitrocellulose.^[5][16] Unlike the Trident I C-4 propellant, it uses polyethylene glycol instead of polyglycol adipate, which raised the solids content from 70 to 75 percent..^[5] To withstand combustion temperatures, each stage utilizes a submerged, movable single nozzle fitted with a one-piece carbon-carbon composite throat insert, which replaced the pyrolytic graphite segments used in the C-4.^[5][15] Pitch and yaw flight control across all three boost stages are executed via hydraulic thrust vector control (TVC) actuators that deflect the nozzles up to 6 to 7 degrees, while roll stabilization is managed by the upper equipment section.^[17]

The first-stage motor, manufactured by Northrop Grumman (originally developed through a joint venture between Hercules Inc. and Morton Thiokol), generates approximately 91,170 kilograms-force (892.4 kilonewtons; 202,600 pounds-force) of thrust and burns for approximately 65 seconds.^[18][19][20] After burnout at an altitude of approximately 20 kilometers, explosive charges in the interstage ring separate the first stage, and the second-stage motor ignites, firing for an additional 65 seconds.^[19][20][21] During second-stage flight, the nose fairing is separated and moved clear of the missile's path by solid-propellant motors..^[17] The third-stage motor, developed by United Technologies, ignites after the second-stage motor shuts down and burns for approximately 40 seconds.^{[5][19][20][21][22][23]}

Mounted inside the nose cap is a deployable telescoping aerospike consisting of seven segments tipped with a circular flat disk.^[17] Stowed within a recess in front of the third-stage motor before launch, the aerospike is propelled forward by a gas-pressure cartridge within 100 milliseconds at an altitude of roughly 600 meters shortly after first-stage ignition.^[17] By creating an outboard detached shockwave that shapes airflow around the blunt nose fairing, the aerospike reduces aerodynamic drag through the lower atmosphere by approximately 50 percent, which yields substantial range gains.^[8][13][17]

Post-boost control system

Following third-stage motor burnout, the equipment section and its integrated Post Boost Control System (PBCS) separate from the spent booster to begin the warhead dispensing sequence.^[21] The PBCS propulsion system, developed by Atlantic Research, consists of four solid-propellant gas generators organized into two stages (Block A and Block B) feeding 16 thruster nozzles with a specific impulse of approximately 236 seconds.^[17] Four upper and four lower nozzles provide translational velocity increments as well as pitch and yaw control, while eight lateral thrusters govern roll orientation.^[17] Gas flows continuously through the manifold, and steering forces are generated by electromechanically modulating and opening or closing individual nozzle throats.^[5]

Unlike the Trident I C-4 sequence where warheads faced rearward, the Trident II platform mounts reentry vehicles facing forward during the boost phase.^[5] Once released from the third-stage motor, the PBCS maneuvers into an orientation that allows the optical stellar sensor to locate a target navigation star.^[5][8] After calculating trajectory corrections, the flight computer re-aims the platform forward, accelerates to the precise velocity vector assigned to the first reentry vehicle, and releases the warhead at an offset angle.^[5][8] To prevent exhaust gases from washing over the separating vehicle and altering its ballistic course, the system initiates a Plume Avoidance Maneuver (PAM).^[5][8][24] If a warhead falls within the line of fire of an active nozzle, that nozzle is shut down while the remaining three thrusters compensate to preserve platform trim until the warhead clears the vehicle.^[5][8][24] This cycle repeats sequentially for each individual warhead until the entire payload is deployed, after which the PBCS conducts an evasive burn to remove itself from the trajectories of the reentry vehicles.^[5][8]

Guidance and navigation

The Trident II uses the MK 6 astro-inertial guidance system, developed by the Charles Stark Draper Laboratory and produced by General Electric, Raytheon, and Hughes Aircraft.^[11] The inertial measurement unit is mounted on a gyrostabilized platform in the rear of the equipment section and incorporates two gaseous-suspension gyroscopes produced by Kearfott, alongside three pendulous integrating gyroscopic accelerometers of the 10-PIGA type.^[11][17] During development, ring laser gyroscopes were considered but rejected due to integration volume constraints and vulnerability to radiation pulses.^[11] The platform is actively temperature-regulated to maintain calibrated accuracy.^[17]

Astro-inertial updating is conducted via a high-sensitivity star tracker camera using charge-coupled device (CCD) sensor arrays.^[11] Following exit from the atmosphere, the camera locks onto an assigned navigational star; discrepancies between the observed line-of-sight and the anticipated position indicate drift in the inertial instruments and velocity errors imparted by submarine motion.^[11][25] The digital guidance computer, featuring 1 megabyte of programmable read-only memory (PROM) and 200 kilobytes of random-access memory (RAM) utilizing radiation-hardened VLSI circuits, calculates corrective trajectory impulses executed by the PBCS.^[11] For test flights, the system can incorporate a Three Axis Instrumentation (TAI) package and GPS receivers to track position without affecting operational missile firmware.^[11]

Submarine platform navigation integrates several distinct systems to minimize initialization errors prior to launch. On Ohio-class submarines, traditional Ship's Inertial Navigation Systems (SINS) were augmented and later replaced by two Electrostatically Supported Gyro Monitors (ESGM), which experience minimal mechanical drift.^[11] Submarine velocity over the seabed is determined using doppler sonar arrays, addressing a critical source of launch trajectory error identified during the IAP.^[11] Local gravitational anomalies that distort accelerometer readings are compensated through geodetic and gravimetric modeling.^[11] Although the Navy evaluated an onboard Gravity Sensor System (GSS) combining a moving-base gradiometer and gravimeter, the project was canceled in July 1988 because satellite mapping by the Geosat spacecraft and dedicated survey vessels such as USNS Sumner had mapped ocean gravity fields with greater accuracy than expected.^[11]

Submarine launch systems

Trident II missiles are housed within the Mk 35 mod 1 launch tube assembly aboard Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines.^[21][26][27] Each launch tube is a vertical steel cylinder measuring 2.4 meters (94 inches) in diameter and 14.8 meters (48.5 feet) in length, welded directly into the hull structure.^[21][26][27] The tube is sealed at the upper deck by a hydraulically actuated hatch engineered to resist ambient diving pressures.^[21][27] Four access hatches allow servicing: one on the first deck level for general missile inspection, two on the second deck providing access to the umbilical connector and equipment section, and one on the fourth deck entering the lower ejection chamber.^[26][27] Interlocking mechanisms prevent unauthorized opening of the hatch covers.^[21]

The missile is ejected using a dry launch method without flooding the tube prior to firing.^[21] A launch liner inside the tube is sealed above the missile by a dome-shaped barrier membrane made of asbestos-reinforced phenolic resin.^[21] To eject the weapon, a solid-propellant gas generator ignites, venting hot combustion gas through an expansion chamber charged with water.^{[21][26][27][28]} To accommodate the large diameter and blunt nose profile of the Trident II, the ejection system varies the quantity of water injected based on submarine depth, preventing excessive cavitation bubbles and mitigating differential hydrodynamic loads across the missile body.^[15] The expanding steam-gas mixture drives the missile upward at an acceleration of approximately 10g, ejecting it from the tube at roughly 50 meters per second (160 feet per second).^[21] Shaped explosive cutting charges shatter the phenolic membrane into sectors, allowing the missile to exit into the water column.^[21]

As the missile clears the hull, seawater rushes into the vacant tube, and the hatch closes automatically.^[21] The submarine's variable ballast system compensates for the rapid loss of missile weight by taking on water into dedicated compensating tanks while gyroscopic stabilizers maintain vessel trim.^[21] The missile travels unguided through the water column. Accelerometers detect the moment the missile breaches the surface, igniting the first-stage motor at an altitude of approximately 10 to 30 meters above the sea surface.^[21] Missiles can be launched from depths up to 30 meters at submarine speeds of approximately 5 knots in sea states up to 6, with firing intervals between successive missiles of 15 to 20 seconds.^[21] While the entire complement can be launched in a single ripple sequence, full-complement launches have never been conducted during flight tests.^[21]

Targeting and launch sequencing are controlled by the Mk 98 fire control system.^[29][30] The system incorporates two central computing mainframes alongside peripheral processors, data distribution buses, and a launch console situated in the submarine's central control room.^[29][30] The Mk 98 can calculate new ballistic trajectories or load precomputed strike assignments transmitted via extremely low frequency (ELF) radio or satellite links, and it can retarget the boat's entire missile inventory simultaneously within 15 minutes.^[21][29][30] To maximize accuracy, each individual submarine maintains custom-computed stellar mapping matrices rather than a fleet-wide generic astronomical database.^[11]

Warheads and payloads

United States Trident II missiles can carry three primary warhead types in multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles: the Mk 5 carrying the W88, the Mk 4 carrying the W76-0, and the Mk 4A carrying the W76-1 or W76-2.^[31][32] The Mk 5 reentry vehicle houses the W88 thermonuclear warhead, which has an explosive yield of 475 kilotons of TNT.^[31][33] Developed by Los Alamos National Laboratory and manufactured by General Electric's Reentry Systems Department, the Mk 5 features a heat shield woven with composite fibers reinforced with metal threading along the symmetry axis, alongside a carbon-carbon nose tip fitted with a metallic core to ensure symmetrical ablation through rain, snow, and dense atmospheric layers.^[5][33] The Trident II was the first Navy missile to deploy a higher-yield warhead than contemporary Air Force ICBMs.^[33] Because production of the W88 was curtailed at approximately 400 units following the closure of the Rocky Flats Plant, the weapon was distributed across only a portion of the submarine fleet.^[34][35]

The alternative payload is the W76 thermonuclear warhead in the Mk 4 reentry vehicle, originally rated at 100 kilotons.^[5][35][36] Between September 2008 and December 2018, the United States executed the W76 Life Extension Program, refurbishing existing stockpiles into the W76-1 configuration housed inside the updated Mk 4A reentry body with an adjusted yield of 90 kilotons.^[36][37][38] This upgrade incorporated the MC4700 arming, fusing, and firing (AF&F) mechanism, known as the super-fuze.^[1] The MC4700 calculates target approach altitude in real time and detonates the warhead within an optimum height-of-burst window even if the reentry trajectory overshoots or undershoots, increasing lethality against hardened silos and underground bunkers.^[1] In 2019, the United States fielded the W76-2 variant, a low-yield adaptation producing 5 to 7 kilotons intended for prompt tactical strike options.^[31][39] Under START constraints, operational missiles deploy on average with four warheads, though the airframe can physically accommodate up to eight Mk 5 or up to twelve to fourteen Mk 4/Mk 4A vehicles.^[31]

During development, the Navy also evaluated the Mk 500 Evader Maneuvering Reentry Vehicle (MaRV) to counter prospective Soviet anti-ballistic missile deployments around Moscow.^[40] The Mk 500 utilized an asymmetric, rounded nose configuration that generated aerodynamic lift during atmospheric reentry.^[40] Roll-rate adjustments and internal center-of-mass shifts directed the vehicle through evasive pull-up and turn maneuvers.^[40] Although the throw-weight of the D5 was sized to carry seven 300-kiloton Mk 500 vehicles, the program was shelved after flight trials because existing MIRV payloads were judged capable of saturating defenses without incurring the weight and accuracy penalties of the early MaRV design.^[22][40] In 2020, the National Nuclear Security Administration requested funding to initiate development of the W93 warhead and the Mk 7 reentry vehicle, representing the first new warhead design program launched since the end of the Cold War.^[41]

In British service, Trident II missiles carry a sovereign warhead designated Holbrook, which has an explosive yield of up to 100 kilotons.^[42][43] Developed at the Atomic Weapons Establishment in Aldermaston with United States technical assistance under the 1958 US–UK Mutual Defence Agreement, Holbrook is housed in Mk 4/Mk 4A reentry assemblies and possesses design commonality with the American W76.^{[42][43][44][45]} British warheads incorporate selective yield options reported at 0.3 kilotons, 5 to 10 kilotons, and 100 kilotons, supporting both sub-strategic and strategic targeting roles.^[43][45] The United Kingdom is developing a successor warhead designated Astraea (A21/Mk 7), utilizing hydrodynamic simulation data gathered at the joint Franco-British EPURE facility in Valduc, France.^[46]

Flight testing and infrastructure

Land-based developmental flight tests were conducted from Launch Complex 46 (LC-46) at the Eastern Range, Cape Canaveral, Florida.^[47][48] The complex included an assembly facility capable of processing two missiles simultaneously, a mobile 20-meter umbilical service tower, and rail transfer links.^[47] Downrange telemetry was gathered by the Flight Test Support System 2 (FTSS-2) station located 150 kilometers south at Jonathan Dickinson State Park, alongside 25 optical theodolite stations equipped with high-speed cinematic tracking cameras capable of resolving objects measuring 30 centimeters at a distance of 13 kilometers.^[47][49] The tracking corridor extended southeast across the Bahamas, Puerto Rico, the coast of Brazil, and the Atlantic toward the Cape of Good Hope (12,000 kilometers) and Antarctica (20,000 kilometers).^[49] Ocean tracking was supported by two specialized instrumentation vessels, USNS Range Sentinel (T-AGM-22) and USNS Redstone (T-AGM-20), as well as modified EC-135 ARIA and EC-18B ARIA aircraft operating from Patrick Air Force Base.^[47]

The research and development flight program commenced on 15 January 1987 with the successful launch of missile D5X-1 from pad LC-46.^[8][50] Between January 1987 and January 1989, 19 pad launches were executed.^[8][50][51] Of these, 15 were fully successful, one was partially successful, two failed, and one was classified as an anomalous no-test.^[8] During the partially successful seventh launch, a valve controlling hot-gas flow stayed closed after it overheated or became contaminated.^[5][8] One account places the valve in the first-stage thrust deflection system, while another places it in the post-boost control system..^[5][8] On the ninth flight (D5X-9), an internal power supply failed 14 seconds into the third-stage burn, causing the flight computer to lose control and prompting self-destruction.^[5][8] The thirteenth flight (D5X-13) suffered a first-stage thrust vector control malfunction at 55 seconds, resulting in range-safety destruct.^[5][8] The fifteenth launch (D5X-15) functioned normally, but severe crosswinds and programmed trajectory dynamics led the range safety officer to command destruction after the missile crossed safety boundary limits.^[5][8]

Submarine flight trials began on 21 March 1989 from USS Tennessee (SSBN-734) in the Atlantic off Cape Canaveral.^[5][48][51] The first underwater launch (PEM-1) failed catastrophically four seconds into flight.^[5][52] Analysis revealed that the water column pulled upward by the emerging missile collapsed into the rocket nozzle before ignition, causing pressure spikes that disabled the nozzle gimbal actuators.^[52][53][54] After a second failure during test PEM-4 on 15 August 1989, engineers reinforced the first-stage nozzle structure and modified launch tube venting parameters, which slightly reduced baseline range but resolved the issue.^[5][53][54] Following these corrections, the missile achieved initial operating capability in March 1990.^[1] The Pacific Strategic Weapons Facility at Bangor achieved operational certification in 2001, allowing Pacific deployments.^[52]

The Trident II demonstrated high reliability in operational testing, logging 134 consecutive successful test launches between 4 December 1989 and 9 June 2010.^{[55][56][57][58][59][60]} Subsequent test series included four sequential launches during test event FCET-53 in 2016 and tests from USS Maine in 2020 and USS Wyoming in 2021.^[61][62] In June 2016, an unarmed test missile fired from HMS Vengeance went off course toward the United States and fell near Florida.^[63] A minor fault in the telemetry range-measuring subsystem led the control system to end the flight early and divert the missile into the ocean..^[63][64] In January 2024, an unarmed test launch from HMS Vanguard off Florida failed when the first-stage boosters failed to ignite after clearing the water, causing the missile to plunge into the sea adjacent to the submarine.^[65][66] The Trident II has made 215 test launches in total.^[67][68] Of the 196 launched from the sea, 191 succeeded..^[67][68]

Industrial base and procurement

Missile assembly and systems integration are managed by Lockheed Martin Space Systems as prime contractor, operating primary production lines in Sunnyvale, California.^[5][69][70] The industrial base comprises more than 1,800 suppliers and specialized sub-tier contractors.^[70] Primary propulsion motors were developed by Hercules Aerospace and Morton Thiokol (now Northrop Grumman) and United Technologies.^[15] Specialized subsystems include Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, General Electric, Raytheon, and Singer-Kearfott for guidance components; Westinghouse Electric for tube launchers; Sperry and Rockwell for shipboard navigation; and Atlantic Research for post-boost gas generators.^[70] Government facilities supporting the program include the Strategic Systems Programs office, Strategic Weapons Facility Atlantic (SWFLANT) and the Trident Refit and Training Facilities at Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay, Georgia, alongside Strategic Weapons Facility Pacific (SWFPAC) at Naval Base Kitsap, Washington.^[53][54][69]

Under the initial contract, Lockheed Martin delivered 425 Trident II missiles to the US Navy between 1989 and 2007, and another 58 to the Royal Navy..^[71][72][73] In 2007, procurement was expanded under the Life Extension Program by an additional 108 to 115 missiles, increasing the total planned inventory to 540 weapons.^[5][74][75] Unit procurement costs vary based on accounting methodology: early flyaway costs were reported at $29.1 to $30.9 million in constant 1987 dollars, while later contract bundles incorporating life extension modifications and spare inventories averaged approximately $70.5 million in 2012 to $139 million per unit.^{[76][77][78][79][80][81][82]}

Operational deployment and treaty limits

In the United States Navy, the Trident II is deployed aboard 14 Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines based at Kings Bay, Georgia, and Bangor, Washington.^{[53][54][83][84]} The first four Ohio-class submarines were converted between December 2003 and February 2008 into cruise-missile submarines (SSGNs), leaving 14 SSBNs carrying the D5.^[84][85] Ohio-class submarines operate under a two-crew rotation (Blue and Gold) maintaining an operational availability factor (OAF) of 0.60, ensuring that an average of eight to ten submarines remain on active ocean patrol at all times.^[86] When returning from patrol, missiles can be offloaded for maintenance at dedicated weapons facilities.^[53][54] Submarine patrol patterns historically relied on three-ship chains covering paired target sets, preserving continuous deterrent coverage.^[23]

The START II treaty sought to limit the number of warheads carried by the Trident II..^[87] While the 1993 START II treaty mandated downloading missile payloads from eight to five warheads, Congressional legislation blocked implementation in 1997.^[87] Under the 2010 New START treaty, deployed strategic warheads were limited to 1,550 and delivery platforms to 700.^[88][89][90] To comply with these ceilings, the United States Navy deactivated four missile tubes on each of the 14 Ohio-class submarines by 2017, permanently reducing each submarine's capacity from 24 to 20 tubes and bringing the total sea-based launcher fleet to 280 active tubes.^[83][91][92] By 2010, Trident II warheads accounted for 1,152 active warheads, representing 52 percent of the operational United States strategic triad and 100 percent of its maritime leg.^[93][94]

The Royal Navy operates its Trident II missiles under the terms of the modified 1963 Polaris Sales Agreement, revised in March 1982 to encompass Trident D5 procurement.^{[95][96][97][98][99]} Under this pact, Britain contributed a five percent surcharge toward research and development costs, remitting $116 million into the Polaris Trust Fund.^[96][98][99] The Royal Navy operates four Vanguard-class submarines: HMS Vanguard, HMS Victorious, HMS Vigilant, and HMS Vengeance, each equipped with 16 missile tubes.^[45][83] Unlike American practices, British submarines operate with a single crew and a lower availability tempo, maintaining one submarine on Continuous At Sea Deterrent (CASD) patrol while others undergo maintenance, training, or workup.^[45] British missiles are drawn from a shared pool, co-mingled with those of the US Navy's Atlantic Ohio-class squadron at Kings Bay, Georgia, and missiles are selected at random for loading onto either nation's submarines.^[100][101] British missiles are maintained jointly with the United States at Kings Bay..^{[64][100][101]}

Operational authority over British Trident missiles resides exclusively with the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, and guidance computations function independently of United States GPS satellites by utilizing onboard stellar-inertial tracking.^[64] Unlike United States nuclear weapons, British sea-based warheads do not incorporate electronic Permissive Action Links (PALs).^[64] Prior to 1998, physical access to aircraft-delivered weapons was controlled by physical key locks; on Vanguard-class submarines, launches can technically be executed by the ship's crew upon authenticating authenticated command orders, making strict naval discipline the primary safeguard against unauthorized firing.^[23][64] In the United States Navy, submarine warheads similarly lack Permissive Action Links, relying instead on multi-operator procedural verifications within the control room following receipt of an Emergency Action Message (EAM) authenticated by the National Command Authority.^[23][102]

Counterforce capabilities and targeting

The combination of the Mk 6 guidance system and the MC4700 fuze provides the Trident II with high counterforce lethality, achieving a circular error probable (CEP) of 90 to 120 meters under stellar-inertial guidance and 90 meters when utilizing GPS tracking aids.^{[1][17][21][103]} This precision enables the missile to engage hardened missile silos and subterranean command centers, targets previously engageable only by land-based ICBMs.^{[2][104][105][106]} Hard target destruction requires generating blast overpressure exceeding 100 atmospheres (roughly 1,500 psi) for reinforced shelters and up to 200 atmospheres for ultra-hardened silos housing heavy ICBMs such as the R-36M2 (SS-18).^[104][105] At a distance equal to 1 CEP (50 percent hit probability), a W76 warhead on the Trident II generates approximately 385 atmospheres of overpressure, while the W88 generates approximately 1,750 atmospheres..^[104][105] At a radius of 1.82 CEP (90 percent hit probability), overpressures reach 70 atmospheres for the W76 and 307 atmospheres for the W88.^[104][105]

Against UR-100N (SS-11/19) silos of type III-G, a single W76 warhead with a 129-meter CEP has a single-shot kill probability (SSPK) of 0.309 and a two-shot kill probability (DSPK) of 0.523.. By contrast, a single 475-kiloton W88 warhead achieving a 129-meter CEP yields an SSPK of 0.744 and a DSPK of 0.934 against the same installation. Against heavily reinforced silos (such as Russian Type III-F and III-G facilities hardened to 12,000 psi), a single W88 achieves an SSPK of 0.608 to 0.687, rising to a DSPK of 0.846 to 0.902 when employing cross-targeting doctrines.^[106] Under the standard 2-on-1 strike tactic, two warheads from different missiles are allocated to each silo, yielding a cumulative target destruction probability of 0.95 with the W88, compared to 0.84 when employing two W76 warheads.^[21]

The missile is also evaluated for interdiction against road-mobile ICBM transporter-erector-launchers (TELs), such as the RT-2PM Topol (SS-25).^[106] According to Defense Intelligence Agency damage criteria, neutralising a TEL requires achieving damage state 11Q9 (transporter overturned and missile shattered).^[106] A 100-kiloton W76 detonated at an optimal airburst altitude of 1,250 meters produces severe blast overpressure across a circular footprint of 26 square kilometers.^[106] If a mobile launcher moves at a transit speed of 20 kilometers per hour following initial satellite detection, an incoming warhead must arrive within 15 minutes of detection to ensure intercept within the damage radius.^[106] Because a single Trident II carries eight warheads, a group of moving launchers can be attacked in a coordinated pattern across an area of about 200 square kilometers.^[106]

The introduction of hard-target kill capabilities on a survivable sea-based platform changed how United States submarine-based forces were perceived.^[107] Traditionally, submarine-launched missiles functioned as an invulnerable second-strike retaliatory deterrent directed against countervalue urban-industrial targets.^[107] The accuracy of the D5, however, created a first-strike counterforce capability against political and military leadership bunkers and silo-based deterrents.^{[2][106][107]} During the late 1970s and 1980s, congressional critics such as Representative Markey first opposed the missile program and then the higher-yield W88 warhead, arguing that the missile's first-strike capability, whatever American intentions, could cause Soviet fears of a preemptive American attack and raise the risk of nuclear war in a severe international crisis.^[107] Advocates, including Seymour Zeiberg, a leading supporter of the missile in the Carter administration, countered that the question of super-hardened targets had been settled by national war strategy in Presidential Directive 59, and that the United States needed a greater ability to strike Soviet targets that would have to be attacked quickly in a crisis.^[107]

Modernization and future programs

In 2002, the United States Navy initiated the D5 Life Extension (D5LE) program to extend the operational life of the Trident II missile system through 2042, matching the hull extension of Ohio-class submarines from 30 to 45 years.^{[5][108][109]} Lockheed Martin was awarded a $789.9 million prime contract to redesign and replace aging guidance components, electronics, and solid-rocket propulsion stages.^[5] Under the Strategic Guidance Applications Program (GAP), the Mk 6 guidance unit was refurbished into the Mk 6LE, integrating modern radiation-hardened processors to avoid reliance on obsolete microelectronics.^[110] Propulsion components were updated under the Strategic Propulsion Applications Program (SPAP), which included testing revised solid propellants such as RDX-NEPE under the Third-Stage Application Program 3 (TSAP-3).^[111] In 2020, Vice Admiral Johnny Wolfe announced initial planning for the D5LE2 (Life Extension 2) program, designed to extend missile availability until 2084 across the full operational life of the new Columbia-class submarines, with first deployment slated for fiscal year 2039.^{[112][113][114]}

Between 2006 and 2008, the Department of Defense pursued the Conventional Trident Modification (CTM) under the Prompt Global Strike (PGS) initiative.^[115][116] The concept proposed replacing nuclear warheads on two missiles per submarine with conventional kinetic penetrators or flechette assemblies carrying tungsten rods, allowing non-nuclear precision strikes against high-value targets globally within one hour of presidential authorization.^{[115][116][117]} Engineering studies indicated that integrating atmospheric GPS updating and flap-steering aerodynamic controls could achieve a circular error probable of approximately 4.5 to 9 meters (15 to 30 feet).^{[117][118][119]} However, Congress repeatedly denied funding requests ($127 million in 2007 and $43 million in 2009).^{[116][120][121]} In refusing, Congress required the Navy first to study, among other questions, the risk that Russian or Chinese early-warning systems could identify a conventional launch as an American nuclear strike and so start a nuclear war, and ways to reduce that risk.^{[115][116][117]} The Navy subsequently redirected research into alternative kinetic boost-glide platforms under the Conventional Prompt Global Strike (CPGS) project.^[116]

Trident II missiles are scheduled to transition onto next-generation ballistic missile submarines in both the United States and the United Kingdom.^[114] In the United States Navy, the Columbia-class submarine will succeed the Ohio class, utilizing a 16-tube missile compartment built around the Common Missile Compartment (CMC) architecture developed jointly with the British Ministry of Defence.^[122] The planned Columbia-class boats District of Columbia, Wisconsin and Groton are listed among the Trident II missile submarines.^[114][123] In the Royal Navy, the Dreadnought-class submarine will replace the Vanguard class, carrying 12 Trident II missiles per boat within four-tube quad-pack assemblies.^[123] These deployments ensure that the Trident II airframe and its D5LE2 derivative will remain the primary sea-based strategic deterrent for both nations into the second half of the twenty-first century.^[112][114]

Comparative characteristics

The Trident II is classed as a fourth-generation submarine-launched ballistic missile.^[124] It is the sixth generation of American submarine-launched missiles, after the Polaris A1, A2 and A3, the Poseidon and the Trident I.^[23] Only the United States, Russia, France and China have built submarine-launched ballistic missiles comparable to the Trident II; the closest, the Russian R-29RMU2 Sineva, has a similar throw weight and maximum range but does not match the Trident II's accuracy.^[105][124] The liquid-fuelled Soviet R-29RM and its Russian derivative, the R-29RMU2 Sineva, carry a 2,800-kilogram payload over ranges of 8,300 and 11,500 kilometers respectively, with circular errors probable of 550 and 250 meters.^[124] While liquid-fueled missiles achieve high mass fractions, their fuel toxicity and handling requirements present operational challenges relative to solid-fueled designs.^[125] The R-39 has a 2,550-kilogram throw weight and a 90-tonne launch weight, while the R-30 Bulava has a lighter throw weight of 1,150 kilograms, a range of 9,300 kilometers and a circular error probable of 120 to 350 meters.^[126]

The French M51 and M51.2 have launch weights of 52 and 56 tonnes, carry six to ten warheads over ranges of 9,000 and 10,000 kilometers, and have a circular error probable of 150 to 200 meters. China's JL-2 carries a 700-kilogram payload over a range of 8,000 kilometers with a circular error probable of 500 meters, while the JL-3 is listed with a range of 9,000 kilometers. The Trident II's circular error probable of 90 to 120 meters, coupled with flexible yield options and hard-target super-fuzes, makes it the only deployed submarine-launched ballistic missile system capable of reliable silo-destruction missions.^[104][105]

References

1. Parsch, Andreas. "UGM-133". Directory of U.S. Military Rockets and Missiles. Retrieved 11 June 2014.
2. Lieber, Keir A.; Press, Daryl G. (Winter 2007). "U.S. Nuclear Primacy and the Future of the Chinese Deterrent". China Security. p. 77.
3. Norman Polmar: Cold War Submarines, The Design and Construction of U.S. and Soviet Submarines. K.J. More. Potomac Books, Inc, 2003, s. 180-190. ISBN 1-57488-530-8.
4. Американские подводные лодки стратегического назначения. 30.06.2008. Архів оригіналу за 29.01.2011. Процитовано 2 травня 2010.
5. Trident II D-5 Fleet Ballistic Missile. fas.org (англійською) . Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011.
6. PARSCH, Andreas. Lockheed UGM-96 Trident I [online]. Rev. 2008-01-18 [cit. 2010-05-31]. Dostupné online. (anglicky)
7. "Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With Reporters on the Announcement of the United States Strategic Weapons Program". National Archives and Records Administration. Archived from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 24 December 2014.
8. Trident II D-5 Fleet Ballistic Missile, FAS.
9. Graham Spinardi: From Polaris to Trident: the development of US Fleet ballistic missile technology. Cambridge [England]: Cambridge University Press, 1994, s. 140-146. ISBN 0-521-41357-5.
10. Getting MAD: Nuclear Mutual Assured Destruction, s. 131.
11. From Polaris to Trident..., s. 154–156.
12. Trident (англ.). astronautix.com. — Описание ракет семейства «Трайдент». Архивировано 29 января 2011 года.
13. схема Trident II D-5 с з габаритними розмірами ракети та ступенів. fas.org (англійською) . Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011.
14. US Missile Systems. Global Security. [dostęp 2009-08-24]. (ang.).
15. From Polaris to Trident..., s. 158–160.
16. "High Energy Rocket Fuels". Retrieved 13 December 2020.
17. Баллистическая ракета подводных лодок «Trident-2». информационная система «Ракетная техника» — сайт Балтийского Государственного Технического Университета. Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011.
18. TRIDENT II D-5 (англійською) . Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011. Процитовано 23 травня 2010.
19. Colonel Timothy M. Laur, Steven L. Llanso. Encyclopedia of modern us military weapons / Edited by Walter J. Boyne. — New York : Berkley Trade, 1998. — P. 468. — 509 p. — ISBN 0-425-16437-3.
20. Colonel Timothy M. Laur, Steven L. Llanso. Encyclopedia of modern us military weapons / Edited by Walter J. Boyne. — New York: Berkley Trade, 1998. — P. 468. — 509 p. — ISBN 0-425-16437-3.
21. В. Красненський, В. Грабів. Ракетний комплекс ПЧАРБ КРАЇН НАТО [Архівовано 22 березня 2012 у Wayback Machine.], «Закордонне військове огляд»
22. Norman Friedman: The Naval Institute Guide to World Naval Weapons Systems, 1997–1998 (Naval Institute Guide to World Naval Weapons Systems). Naval Institute Press, s. 189. ISBN 1-55750-268-4.
23. From Polaris to Trident..., s. 1–3.
24. "Santa Cruz Facility Brochure" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 11 June 2014. Retrieved 23 June 2014.
25. "Trident II D-5 Fleet Ballistic Missile". Retrieved 23 June 2014.
26. Капитан 2 ранга В. Кожевников. Ракетный комплекс «Трайдент» // Зарубежное военное обозрение. — 1991. — Вип. 3. — С. 50.
27. Капитан 2 ранга В. Кожевников. Ракетный комплекс «Трайдент» // Зарубежное военное обозрение. — 1991. — Вып. 3. — С. 50.
28. "FBM Functional Elements". Archived from the original on 11 March 2016. Retrieved 12 December 2017.
29. Капитан 2 ранга В. Кожевников. Ракетный комплекс «Трайдент» // Зарубежное военное обозрение. — 1991. — Вип. 3. — С. 52.
30. Капитан 2 ранга В. Кожевников. Ракетный комплекс «Трайдент» // Зарубежное военное обозрение. — 1991. — Вып. 3. — С. 52.
31. US State Department, New START Dis-aggregate data for 2020. https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/06-25-2020-FACTSHEET-Public-Release-of-Dis-aggregate-Data.pdf. There are 927 warheads deployed on 210 Trident II D5 missiles, or an average of 4.4 warheads per missile. Some missiles are "de-MIRVed" and equipped with a single W76-2 warhead, which depresses the overall average.
32. Kristensen, Hans M.; Korda, Matt (29 квітня 2019). United States nuclear forces, 2019. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 75 (3): 122—134. Bibcode:2019BuAtS..75c.122K. doi:10.1080/00963402.2019.1606503.
33. From Polaris to Trident..., s. 151–154.
34. The W88 Warhead. nuclearweaponarchive.org (англійською) . Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011. Процитовано 4 листопада 2009.
35. The W76 Warhead, Intermediate Yield Strategic SLBM MIRV Warhead. Fedeation of American Scientists. [dostęp 2009-08-27]. (ang.).
36. Work completed on Navy's upgraded nuclear warhead. Defense News. 24 January 2019.
37. Nuclear Weapons Journal. Los Alamos National Laboratory, 2009. [dostęp 2012-06-01]. (ang.).
38. Hans M. Kristensen: Administration Increases Submarine Nuclear Warhead Production Plan. [dostęp 2009-09-28]. (ang.).
39. US Deploys New Low-Yield Nuclear Submarine Warhead. FAS. 29 січня 2020. Процитовано 29 січня 2020.
40. From Polaris to Trident..., s. 134-135.
41. "Inside America's newly revealed nuclear ballistic missile warhead of the future". 24 February 2020. Retrieved 9 March 2020.
42. "Britain confirms new nuclear warhead project after US officials spill the beans". 25 February 2020. Retrieved 8 March 2020.
43. "Britain's Nuclear Weapons; The Current British Arsenal". The Nuclear Weapon Archive. Carey Sublette. 30 April 2001. Retrieved 8 March 2020. The Trident warheads also offer multiple yields - probably 0.3 kt, 5-10 kt and 100 kt - by choosing to fire the unboosted primary, the boosted primary or the entire "physics package".
44. "Britain's Next Nuclear era". Federation of American Scientists. 7 December 2006. Retrieved 8 March 2020.
45. Bruce D. Larkin: Nuclear designs: Great Britain, France, and China in the global governance of nuclear arms. New Brunswick (U.S.A.): Transaction, 1996, s. 33-38. ISBN 1-56000-239-5.
46. "Delivering the UK's Nuclear Deterrent as a National Endeavour" (PDF). Defence Nuclear Enterprise. 25 March 2024. pp. 32–33. ISBN 978-1-5286-4782-3.
47. Капитан 1 ранга В. Черенков. Испытания американских БРПЧ на восточном ракетном полигоне. «Зарубежное военное обозрение» 10'1988. Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011. Процитовано 7 травня 2010.
48. Richard Halloran: Navy Trident 2 Missile Explodes In Its First Underwater Test Firing. New York Times, 22 marca 1989. [dostęp 2009-10-06]. (ang.).
49. Современные баллистические ракеты. Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011. Процитовано 7 травня 2010.
50. Перечень всех пусков ракеты Трайдент 2. planet4589.org (англійською) . Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011. [Архівовано 2011-06-08 у Wayback Machine.]
51. "Trident D-5". www.astronautix.com. Archived from the original on 4 August 2016. Retrieved 29 March 2018.
52. Pope, Brian (April 1989). "Trident II Missile Fails First Trial at Sea". Arms Control Today. 19 (3). Arms Control Association: 27. JSTOR 23623966.
53. Полковник С. Колесников. ПЧАРБ ВМС США. warships.ru. Журнал «Зарубежное военное обозрение» № 10 за 1997 год. Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011.
54. Полковник С. Колесников. ПЛАРБ ВМС США . warships.ru. Журнал «Зарубежное военное обозрение» № 10 за 1997 год. Архивировано из оригинала 18 июня 2011 года.
55. Lockheed Martin-Built Trident II D5 Missile Achieves Record 129 Successful Test Flights In A Row Over 20 Years. lockheedmartin.com (англійською) . Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011. [Архівовано 2011-10-20 у Wayback Machine.]
56. МБР Trident II D5 побила собственный рекорд. rnd.cnews.ru. 22.06.10. Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011. Процитовано 24 червня 2010.
57. Lockheed Martin-Built Trident II D5 Missile Achieves New Record of 134 Successful Test Flights In A Row. lockheedmartin.com (англійською) . Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011. [Архівовано 2010-06-25 у Wayback Machine.]
58. Lockheed Martin-Built Trident II D5 Missile Achieves Record 129 Successful Test Flights In A Row Over 20 Years (англ.). lockheedmartin.com. — Пресс-релиз фирмы «Локхид Мартин». Архивировано 29 января 2011 года.
59. МБР Trident II D5 побила собственный рекорд . rnd.cnews.ru (22 июня 2010). Дата обращения: 24 июня 2010. Архивировано 14 ноября 2013 года.
60. Lockheed Martin-Built Trident II D5 Missile Achieves New Record of 134 Successful Test Flights In A Row (англ.). lockheedmartin.com. — Пресс-релиз фирмы «Локхид Мартин». Архивировано 29 января 2011 года.
61. Козацький Саня (19 вересня 2021). США випробували дві балістичних ракети Trident II. Український мілітарний портал. Архів оригіналу за 19 вересня 2021. Процитовано 22 вересня 2021.
62. George Allison (20 лютого 2017). Latest Trident missile test flights successful. UK Defence Journal. Архів оригіналу за 24 лютого 2017. Процитовано 23 лютого 2017.
63. Издание Sunday Times
64. George Allison (22 січня 2017). How serious was the Trident missile test failure?. UK Defence Journal UK Defence Journal. Архів оригіналу за 2 лютого 2017. Процитовано 30 січня 2017.
65. "British Trident missile test launch fails for second time". UK Defence Journal. 21 February 2024. Retrieved 21 February 2024.
66. У Великій Британії провели невдалий випробувальний пуск ракети Trident. Мілітарний. Архів оригіналу за 21 вересня 2024. Процитовано 21 вересня 2024.
67. The UK’s Trident launch failure: a cause for concern?. IISS. Процитовано 20 вересня 2024.
68. "Table of Trident II launches". Retrieved 8 April 2025.
69. "Contracts for October 1, 2020". U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE. Archived from the original on 16 September 2021. Retrieved 19 January 2021.
70. Andrew Rosenthal: Trident 2 Failures Laid to Early Success. New York Times, 18 sierpnia 1989. [dostęp 2009-10-31]. (ang.).
71. Bob Aldridge. U.S. TRIDENT SUBMARINE & MISSILE SYSTEM: THE ULTIMATE FIRST-STRIKE WEAPON (pdf). plrc.org (англійською) . с. стр. 28. Архів (PDF) оригіналу за 29 січня 2011. Процитовано 22 травня 2010.
72. Trident II D-5 Fleet Ballistic Missile. Recent Developments. globalsecurity.org (англійською) . Архів оригіналу за 8 листопада 2012.
73. Trident II D-5 Fleet Ballistic Missile. Recent Developments (англ.). globalsecurity.org. — Текущие программы производства и модернизации «Трайдент-2». Архивировано 8 ноября 2012 года.
74. US Navy Orders Trident II D5 Life Extension Missile Deliveries Through 2017. Deagel.com. [dostęp 2009-09-29]. (ang.).
75. "Trident D5". Missiles of the World. missilethreat.com. Diarsipkan dari asli tanggal 2011-01-29. Diakses tanggal 2012-11-23.
76. Trident Il Missiles: Capability, Costs, and Alternatives (PDF) (Report). Congressional Budget Office. July 1986. p. 31. Retrieved 22 November 2025. To provide the Trident II missiles required for flight tests and deployment on 20 submarines, the Administration currently plans to procure 844 missiles over 13 years. The cost in fiscal year 1987—for ongoing research and development and procurement of the first 21 missiles—would be $3.1 billion, of which $1.6 billion is for research and development. The cost in fiscal year 1987 dollars over the first five years of the program, during which 291 missiles would be procured, would be $13.4 billion. During that period, research and development of the missile would be completed at a cost of $3.4 billion. Finally, the total cost of development and procurement of the missile (fiscal years 1987 through 1999) would be about $26.1 billion (see Table 4).
77. The US Navy -- Fact File: Trident II (D5) Missile. www.navy.mil. Процитовано 25 вересня 2022.
78. Trident II D-5 Fleet Ballistic Missile. Specifications. globalsecurity.org (англійською) . Архів оригіналу за 8 листопада 2012.
79. Trident II D-5 Fleet Ballistic Missile. Specifications (англ.). globalsecurity.org. — Характеристики ракеты «Трайдент-2». Архивировано 8 ноября 2012 года.
80. TRIDENT SUBMARINE MISSILE SYSTEM (англ.). solarnavigator.net (28 июня 2006). — Анализ и перспективы развития ракетной системы «Трайдент» в ВМС Великобритании. Архивировано 29 января 2011 года.
81. Robert S. Norris, Hans M. Kristensen. U.S. nuclear forces, 2009. — Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, March/April 2009. — Iss. Volume 65, Number 2. — P. 59—69. — ISSN 0096-3402.
82. Analysis of the Fiscal Year 2012 Pentagon Spending Request | COSTOFWAR.COM . Дата обращения: 3 марта 2012. Архивировано 18 июня 2012 года.
83. "Reduce the Number of Ballistic Missile Submarines". Congressional Budget Office.
84. United States Nuclear Forces. Federation of American Scientists. [dostęp 2009-09-28]. (ang.).
85. Four SSGNs, No Waiting. Strategy Page. [dostęp 2009-09-28].
86. U.S. Strategic Submarine Patrols Continue at Near Cold War Tempo. fas.org (англійською) . Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011. [Архівовано 2011-01-09 у Wayback Machine.]
87. А. С. Дьяков. Российско-американские отношения в области сокращения наступательных вооружений: современное состояние и перспектива // Центр по изучения проблем по разоружения, энергетики и экологии при МФТИ. — 2001. — С. 14, 20.
88. Дмитрий Медведев и Барак Обама встретятся в Праге для подписания нового договора о сокращении и ограничении стратегических наступательных вооружений (російською) . 26 марта 2010. Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011. Процитовано 27 березня 2010.
89. Ядерные арсеналы России и США сократятся на 25% (російською) . 26 марта 2010. Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011. Процитовано 27 березня 2010.
90. Ядерные арсеналы России и США сократятся на 25% (рус.) (26 марта 2010). Дата обращения: 27 марта 2010. Архивировано из оригинала 29 марта 2010 года.
91. New Data Shows Detail About Final Phase of US New START Treaty Reductions. FAS (англ.). Процитовано 28 липня 2026.
92. Fleet Ballistic Missile Submarines - SSBN. America's NAVY (англ.). Процитовано 28 липня 2026.
93. Robert S. Norris, Hans M. Kristensen. (2010). U.S. nuclear forces, 2010. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (журнал) (англ.). Educational Foundation for Nuclear Science, Inc. 66 (3): 58. ISSN 0096-3402. Архів оригіналу за 4 червня 2011. Процитовано 24 липня 2012.
94. Robert S. Norris, Hans M. Kristensen. U.S. nuclear forces, 2010 (англ.) // Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists : журнал. — Educational Foundation for Nuclear Science, Inc., 2010. — Vol. 66, iss. 3. — P. 58. — ISSN 0096-3402. Архивировано 4 июня 2011 года.
95. "THE UNITED KINGDOM TRIDENT PROGRAMME". 2 April 2013.
96. Ministry of Defence and Property Services Agency: Control and Management of the Trident Programme. — National Audit Office (United Kingdom). — С. Part 4. — ISBN 0102027889.
97. Запрос в рамках программы FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST (pdf). nuclearfiles.org (англійською) . Архів (PDF) оригіналу за 29 січня 2011. [Архівовано 2011-02-06 у Wayback Machine.]
98. Ministry of Defence and Property Services Agency: Control and Management of the Trident Programme. — National Audit Office (United Kingdom), 29 июня 1987. — С. Part 4. — ISBN 0102027889.
99. Jenifer Mackby, Paul Cornish: U.S. – UK Nuclear Cooperation After 50 Years. Waszyngton: CSIS Center for Strategic & International Studies, Chatham House, 2008. ISBN 978-0-89206-530-1.
100. "Freedom of information request about the UK nuclear deterrent" (PDF). Ministry of Defence. 19 July 2005. Archived from the original (PDF) on 30 October 2016. Retrieved 25 January 2017.
101. "How serious was the Trident missile test failure?". UK Defence Journal. 22 January 2017. Retrieved 24 January 2017.
102. From Polaris to Trident..., s. 198, pkt 5.
103. Cold War Submarines, The Design and Construction..., s. 190-194.
104. Укрощение ядра. Глава 2.2. Основные этапы развития морских стратегических комплексов. 2003 г, «Красный Октябрь», г. Саранск. Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011. Процитовано 22 апреля 2010. [Архівовано 2011-07-19 у Wayback Machine.]
105. Укрощение ядра. Глава 2.2. Основные этапы развития морских стратегических комплексов . 2003 г, «Красный Октябрь», г. Саранск. Дата обращения: 22 апреля 2010. Архивировано из оригинала 19 июля 2011 года.
106. Attacking Russia’s Nuclear Forces. [w:] The U.S. Nuclear War Plan A Time for Change [on-line]. s. 41. [dostęp 2009-10-04]. [zarchiwizowane z tego adresu (2001-11-16)]. (ang.).
107. From Polaris to Trident..., s. 160–163.
108. "U.S. Nuclear Modernization Programs". Arms Control Association. August 2016. Retrieved 6 September 2016.
109. Zeznanie adm. Jamesa O. Ellisa Juniora – szefa U.S. Strategic Command przed senacką podkomisją sił zbrojnych. Federation of American Scientists, 25 marca 2004. [dostęp 2009-09-28]. [zarchiwizowane z tego adresu (2009-09-20)]. (ang.).
110. Back to the Future with Trident Life Extension. Undersea Warfare, 2012. [dostęp 2019-01-29]. (ang.).
111. Lockheed Martin and ATK Test New Propulsion Technologies for Navy Strategic Missiles. Deagel.com. [dostęp 2009-09-28]. (ang.).
112. Burgess, Richard R. (8 листопада 2018). Next Sub-Launched Ballistic Missile 'Won't Be Completely New'. Seapower (амер.). Процитовано 22 травня 2020.
113. Burgess, Richard R. (10 червня 2021). Navy's SSP Admiral: New Missile Planned for Introduction on 9th Columbia SSBN. Seapower. Процитовано 9 листопада 2022.
114. GROHMANN, Jan. Jaderné střely Trident II D5 LE2 pro americké ponorky Columbia a britské Dreadnought [online]. Armadninoviny.cz, rev. 2025-02-07 [cit. 2025-02-09]. Dostupné online.
115. Conventional TRIDENT Modification (CTM). globalsecurity.org (англійською) . Архів оригіналу за 4 травня 2012.
116. Conventional TRIDENT Modification (CTM) (англ.). globalsecurity.org. — Описание программы СТМ. Архивировано 4 мая 2012 года.
117. Pentagon Seeks Nonnuclear Tip for Sub Missiles. New York Times, 29 maja 2006. [dostęp 2009-10-22]. (ang.).
118. Noah Shachtman. (январь 2007). Hypersonic Cruise Missile: America's New Global Strike Weapon. Статья на сайте журнала Popular Mechanics о гиперзвуковой ракете Х-51 (англійською) . Архів оригіналу за 20 серпня 2011. [Архівовано 2011-08-05 у Wayback Machine.]
119. Noah Shachtman. Hypersonic Cruise Missile: America's New Global Strike Weapon (англ.). Статья на сайте журнала Popular Mechanics о гиперзвуковой ракете Х-51 (январь 2007). — сравнение Х-51 и «Трайдент-2». Архивировано 20 августа 2011 года.
120. Walter Pincus. (16 августа 2008 года). Non-Nuclear Warhead Urged for Trident Missile. Washington Post (англійською) . Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011.
121. Wade Boese. (21 мая 2009). U.S. Navy Plans August Test for Conventional Trident-Related Technology. globalsecuritynewswire.org (англійською) . Архів оригіналу за 29 січня 2011.
122. CRS Report for Congress: U.S. Strategic Nuclear Forces: Background, Developments, and Issues. Congressional Research Service, 14 lipca 2009. [dostęp 2009-10-01]. (ang.).
123. "SECNAV Del Toro Names Future Columbia-class Submarine SSBN-828". US Navy Press Office (Press release). 13 January 2025.
124. gazeta.ru, Россия сильна своей «Синевой», 24 июля 2007 (рус.). Дата обращения: 2 мая 2010. Архивировано 19 января 2012 года.
125. Stan Zimmerman: Submarine Technology for the 21st Century. Stan Zimmerman & Trafford Publishing, s. 154-155. ISBN 1-55212-330-8.
126. Карпов, Александр (19 марта 2019). Основа триады: какими возможностями обладают новейшие российские подлодки проекта «Борей». russian.rt.com. RT.