Andy Boyd

It's out there! Released today, 14 September! Now available from Pen & Sword at discounted price of £28.

My review of Gav Don's splendid book recounting the last year in the life of HM Submarine Triumph, tragically lost in the Mediterranean in January 1942. naval-review.com/book-reviews/o…

Fascinating piece.

Good thread. But worth emphasising 23kt speed was still higher than all foreign pre 1940 battleships save two IJN Nagatos.

Leaving aside whether RUSI author has expertise to support this claim, he overlooks that Trident offers multiple sophisticated targeting options not available when the limited city busting 'Moscow criterion' underpinned UK nuclear strategy in the 1970s. For more history:

#InTheSpotlight 📖 Popular with customers this week: 📖 Arms for Russia & The Naval War in the Arctic, 1941-1945 by @ajcboyd 'Boyd has produced yet another definitive account that helps reshape perceptions.' ~@WarshipsIFR 🔗 buff.ly/gTBQJvK

@AspectsHistory @philmcraig @WmCollinsBooks Already matched 'in scale and ambition' and this is shorter!!

#BookReview @philmcraig reviews Battle of the Arctic By Hugh Sebag-Montefiore "Unlikely ever to be matched in scale and ambition." aspectsofhistory.com/book_reviews/b… Read Battle of the Arctic amazon.co.uk/Battle-Arctic-… @WmCollinsBooks #ww2 #royalnavy #historybooks

1. UK does not'lease' Trident missiles. It owns a stock within a common pool. 'Dependency' exists but conceptually no different to that with other US origin weapons e.g. F35 and Trident protected by congressional treaty. 2. Citing Suez here as a 'watershed' is flawed history.

strike (Hiroshima size) on a key military facility within a Western city be 'sub strategic' or 'strategic'. What would a suitable response be to the huge civilian casualties?/3

War days fell in the 'tactical' or 'sub strategic' bracket. Even in Cold War the idea of avoiding inevitable escalation once 'tactical use' began was arguably remote. Maintaining such a distinction now, given recent Russian behaviour and threats, seems fanciful. Would a 20kt/2

Key point not addressed in the paper is whether terms 'strategic' and 'sub strategic' remain valid or useful. Is sub strategic defined by target type or yield? On latter, most modern MIRV warheads allocated to strategic delivery (e.g. in UK SSBNs) have a yield which in Cold/1

@shashj would allow 2 boats at sea two thirds of the time rendering value of a fifth boat marginal. In reality the two boat target for Polaris boats in the Cold War did not normally exceed a quarter of the time although there was potential to surge in a crisis. For more:

@shashj A fifth boat is unaffordable and probably uncrewable in present circumstances. Furthermore the claim that 5 boats would provide 2 permanently at sea dates from Polaris calculations in the early 1960s, was overoptimistic then, and certainly so now. Naval Staff judged 4 boats/1

Important paper. Highly recommended. For more on the evolution of UK SSBN policy from the 1962 Nassau agreement through to the end of the Cold War:

Don't miss this special offer - only £13.59! pen-and-sword.co.uk/British-Naval-…

Allport provides by far the best analysis of the bombing war I have read. Outstanding.

Are such festivals becoming a cosy shop window for celebrities, podcast chums and elite publisher promoted commercial hits while devoid of much serious historical content? Popularisation at expense of dumbing down? If people enjoy, fine, but more honesty about the product?

To describe the 🇬🇧–🇨🇳 relationship in this manner may sound tempting, but it would require both to have good intentions at heart. It is also tempting to think that China is different because the US has changed, but one must recognise that China is the same as always, and its ambitions have not changed. What it wants from the UK should be kept in mind: 📍Allowed to monitor and control the diaspora in the UK 📍Keep the British market open and reduce existing barriers (allow investments in critical infra) 📍Maintain access to its science and innovation activities and education 📍Maintain access to buy and acquire technologies 📍Take China’s interests into account in international relations, the WTO, the UN, possibly the Arctic, etc., and promote open trade, and not least China’s vision of global governance 📍And I believe that, in the long run, China wants unlimited access to the financial markets and will use it to expand RMB Internationalisation and finally take over and replace London’s financial expertise 📍And of course, it wants to split the special relationship with the US Does this sound like a recipe for a balanced relationship?

@LawDavF Excellent piece. Essential reading.

And in the second part Richard discusses the challenges of working out what is going on in the Kremlin (and what Putin knows), as well as China and Iran (£/free trial), samf.substack.com/p/putin-is-not…

Our two part interview with Richard Moore, former head of MI6, produced a lot of fascinating and candid observations. The first part looked at how MI6 works and fits in with rest of government (£/free trial), samf.substack.com/p/how-mi6-works

@PeterW4tw Thank you!

@ajcboyd The background & wider context in your book is enlightening and informative. Amazing amount of research and factual information

To understand the real story of convoy PQ 17, much better to read this: