What makes you think, now that they have an effective 1-2 design (sub and missile) that they will stop with the one first of class? We didn't. The Russians didn't. It is believed that their second boat-of-class is ready to launch now.
I think the Russian at the end of the Cold War had 200 according to FAS,
No, they didn't... Boomers are SLBMs. Not attack subs, your number implies you are counting their attack subs...and likely their diesel electric attack fleet as well. Under SALT-I , at their zenith, the Soviets had about 67 Nuclear SLBM submarines, i.e., "boomers." We had about 42*.
and we have now 191 nuclear powered subs.
B'zzzt! Way, Way Wrong.
How many Trident submarines are currently deployed? Would you believe 13? And were you aware that the East Coast Trident base in Bangor is to be closed...leaving us only the West Coast base in Kings Bay?
Eighty-seven of which are large platform subs, Ohio, Los Angeles, and Virgina Class.
The number of attack subs is generally relevant, but not in this particular discussion of strategic deterrence. And you are numerically wrong on your assumptions thereto...we only have 50 Los Angeles Class submarines. And the Virginia and Seawolf class (the latter class's production terminated at two ships) are numerically insignificant.
Again...how many currently active Ohio Class submarines with their full load of Tridents, not converted into Tomahawk wagons do we have, h'mmm?
You may want to check here before you venture any further numbers...
Disposal Note: All previous Poseidon-class SSBNs (George Washington Class) have been discarded, except Daniel Webster (ex-SSBN 626) and Sam Rayburn (ex-SSBN 635) survive as immobilized dockside training platforms, with their missile compartments removed.