Rearming the UK: What equipment? and how much?
- Thread starter uk 75
- Start date
This seems to be basically Gabriel V, already adopted by Finland.
IAI and Thales Join Forces to Offer SEA SERPENT Anti-Ship Missile to the Royal Navy - Naval News
IAI and Thales have joined forces to offer SEA SERPENT as a compelling solution to equip the Royal Navy’s Type 23 frigates with an anti-ship and anti-surface missile
www.navalnews.com
Finnish Navy Lifts Veil on its Future Anti-Ship Missile: The Gabriel V - Naval News
The Finnish Navy (Merivoimat) unveiled some details about its future anti-ship missile: The Gabriel V. The information is limited but since details on Gabriel V were pretty much non-existent to date, it is a good start and worth a mention here.
www.navalnews.com
Johnny Mercer sacked by text message after row over Northern Ireland veterans
Veteran's Minister fired from Government after accusing Boris Johnson of lacking 'moral strength' to protect ex-soldiers from prosecution
www.telegraph.co.uk
Britain buys more Chinook helicopters from Boeing in £1.4bn deal
Cash-strapped Ministry of Defence looks to delay delivery of new helicopters to help balance budget pressures
www.telegraph.co.uk
BAE launches UK Navy’s fifth Astute-class attack submarine
BAE Systems has launched the UK Royal Navy’s fifth Astute-class nuclear submarine Anson at its Barrow-in-Furness site in Cumbria.
www.naval-technology.com
Siberia
ACCESS: Confidential
These images seem to be from MDBA intended for a Polish audience, hence the use of Zubr, Rosomak, and Boxer. Blurb I've seen mentioned the idea of an extended range missile with radio-frequency/semi-active laser or electro-optic/infrared guidance with parts potentially coming from Brimstone, Spear, CAMM etc.
That's my understanding too. Though I think British Army has some interest in this.
aonestudio
I really should change my personal text
General Dynamics Land Systems demonstrates AJAX-Brimstone ‘Overwatch’ variant - General Dynamics UK
General Dynamics Land Systems–UK today unveiled a further variant of its best-in-class AJAX Family of Vehicles (FoV). The Brimstone Anti-tank Guided Weapon ‘Overwatch’ variant, demonstrated in collaboration with MBDA, could operate in […]
generaldynamics.uk.com
General Dynamics unveils Brimstone-equipped Ajax variant - Army Technology
General Dynamics has unveiled a Brimstone missile-equipped variant of its Ajax vehicle developed in collaboration with MBDA.
www.army-technology.com
A new team will compete for Britain’s next Ajax variant
General Dynamics UK has joined forces with European missile maker MBDA to position itself for an upcoming British Army requirement to field an “Overwatch” anti-armor vehicle to support the army’s heavy and deep recce strike brigade combat teams.
www.defensenews.com
Via the SNAFU blog:
www.army-technology.com
UK outlines future anti-armour requirements - Army Technology
The UK’s Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl) has unveiled the requirements for its future Battle Group Organic Anti-Armour (BGOAA) project, which aims to provide the British Army with a suite of anti-armour capabilities from around the 2030s.
www.army-technology.com
And Singapore as well apparently
I posted about it a while ago in an unrelated thread, and the potential uses/implications. It would be a gamechanger in so many ways (although some of the uses I came up with were before it came out that it was a slightly higher diameter than CAMM, that might not matter much though..)
It was a model and CGI shown at DVD 2018. Images in the MBDA Tweet below. The missile shown looks like CAMM but is actually a wider diameter. CAMM/ASRAAM is 166mm, this missile is the same diameter as Brimstone/Spear at 178mm (so no expensive repackaging of the seeker head). The images that MBDA published had a Dual Mode Brimstone seeker head on one missile, and another missile had a E/O seeker head......the other image is a green painted Meteor...they didn't talk about that apparently...
View: https://twitter.com/byMBDA/status/1042453708011921408
Nicholas Drummond got some good images of the models when he was there, and spoke to MBDA about performance. They said at least 40km range. But I think thats massively understating it. MBDA have said to Janes that CAMM can reach 60km (would need a very co-operative target by that range though..) so if the wider body meant a larger motor, possibly a slower, longer burning one as well, there is no reason that a ground launched missile couldn't reach 60km, and possibly 80km...
View: https://twitter.com/nicholadrummond/status/1136331001557331969
Further details in EDR Magazine
MBDA Future Land Indirect Fires - EDR Magazine
By David Oliver MBDA exhibited new concepts for Army precision effects at the Defence Vehicle Dynamics (DVD) exhibition at Millbrook
www.edrmagazine.eu
Last edited:
British military aircraft must hit net-zero carbon target by 2040, says Air Force chief
“That will require additional investment. It will require me diverting investment from equipment and platforms into infrastructure and into how we operate,” says Air Chief Marshal Mike Wigston.
www.defensenews.com
[Groans]
Wonderful. Just what was needed at the perfect time. Great job! 
What in the hell has gotten into them? They're the bloody military for God's sake! I'm all for saving the planet, but not at the cost of defence.
I also assume the RAF will either produce its own fuel, or get a company to do it.
What in the hell has gotten into them? They're the bloody military for God's sake! I'm all for saving the planet, but not at the cost of defence.
I also assume the RAF will either produce its own fuel, or get a company to do it.
So if we take a look over at Tempest Weapon development options two particular missiles stick outI posted about it a while ago in an unrelated thread, and the potential uses/implications. It would be a gamechanger in so many ways (although some of the uses I came up with were before it came out that it was a slightly higher diameter than CAMM, that might not matter much though..)
It was a model and CGI shown at DVD 2018. Images in the MBDA Tweet below. The missile shown looks like CAMM but is actually a wider diameter. CAMM/ASRAAM is 166mm, this missile is the same diameter as Brimstone/Spear at 178mm (so no expensive repackaging of the seeker head). The images that MBDA published had a Dual Mode Brimstone seeker head on one missile, and another missile had a E/O seeker head......the other image is a green painted Meteor...they didn't talk about that apparently...
View: https://twitter.com/byMBDA/status/1042453708011921408
Nicholas Drummond got some good images of the models when he was there, and spoke to MBDA about performance. They said at least 40km range. But I think thats massively understating it. MBDA have said to Janes that CAMM can reach 60km (would need a very co-operative target by that range though..) so if the wider body meant a larger motor, possibly a slower, longer burning one as well, there is no reason that a ground launched missile couldn't reach 60km, and possibly 80km...
View: https://twitter.com/nicholadrummond/status/1136331001557331969
Further details in EDR Magazine
MBDA Future Land Indirect Fires - EDR Magazine
By David Oliver MBDA exhibited new concepts for Army precision effects at the Defence Vehicle Dynamics (DVD) exhibition at Millbrook
One is a pair of scaled down ASRAAMs, supposedly taking advantage of new technologies to increase internal weapons carriage.
The other is described as a "Large bore ASRAAM" with what looks like a ARH seeker instead of an IR one.
Now it struck me then that a larger bore version of CAMM has a much greater flexibility of internal components and performance.
And that takes us back to this Brimstone-like but longer missile.
Because Team Complex Weapons, is all about such commonality and cross platform technologies to achieve synergies savings.
And then we have the Green Meteor.....either a SAM option or perhaps a surface launched Anti-Radar-Missile? Though another option might be a faster strike system. Since a ramjet missile could sustain Mach 2+ speeds at low level.
Couple of points:
The larger bore ASRAAM lookalike that MBDA showed alongside the Tempest mockup was apparently Dual Mode (RF and IR guided), the smaller missiles were IR only but designed to maximise internal carriage numbers.
RAF and MBDA have already talked about Meteor (at DSEi 2019, possibly in its AESA equipped JNAAM version) having ARM capability. MBDA also showed a Meteor-alike in its Twister concept for dealing with manoevering hypersonic missiles.
For me the most interesting missile was the micro missile for self defence of aircraft against enemy missiles. There was also a ground attack variant... Potential for use as a new MANPAD, or as part for a Naval CIWS system as well...
Well if it's dual mode, presumably that's even better giving flexibility.
Couple of points:
The larger bore ASRAAM lookalike that MBDA showed alongside the Tempest mockup was apparently Dual Mode (RF and IR guided), the smaller missiles were IR only but designed to maximise internal carriage numbers.
RAF and MBDA have already talked about Meteor (at DSEi 2019, possibly in its AESA equipped JNAAM version) having ARM capability. MBDA also showed a Meteor-alike in its Twister concept for dealing with manoevering hypersonic missiles.
For me the most interesting missile was the micro missile for self defence of aircraft against enemy missiles. There was also a ground attack variant... Potential for use as a new MANPAD, or as part for a Naval CIWS system as well...
I did raise this whole Tempest Weapons on this site, and got precious little response.
But you are right to think the micromissile is of interest....shades of the older VSRAAM from years ago.
Something that could rolled out on platforms other than Tempest or Typhoon. Thing's like AEWACS, Tankers etc....
Frankly if they can make such a micromissile VL soft launch, this could provide a new MANPADS as well.
RAF lost £600,000 missile system in jet test blunder
FOI request also revealed that in the same financial year the Royal Navy lost sonar equipment worth £792,000
www.telegraph.co.uk
Any chance of a summary for those who can't get past the paywall?RAF lost £600,000 missile system in jet test blunder
FOI request also revealed that in the same financial year the Royal Navy lost sonar equipment worth £792,000
Any chance of a summary for those who can't get past the paywall?RAF lost £600,000 missile system in jet test blunder
FOI request also revealed that in the same financial year the Royal Navy lost sonar equipment worth £792,000
A high-tech missile system that cost more than £600,000 was destroyed after plunging from a Typhoon jet during a test, the RAF has admitted.
When engineers ran a test from a motionless £110 million Typhoon jet plane, the fighter's missile guiding unit, a Litening III Reconnaissance Pod, dropped off the bottom of the plane and was damaged beyond repair.
It was accounted for in the 2019/2020 financial year, but the Ministry of Defence declined to reveal the date of the incident.
"In an organisation as large and complex as the MoD such incidents can occur, but we do not take matters lightly, and thoroughly investigate all losses," a spokesman said.
A freedom of information request also revealed that in the same financial year the Royal Navy lost sonar equipment worth £792,000. Officials said the sonar system, known as a flank array, had been trailing behind a submarine when it was lost at sea.
The disclosures came after it was revealed that the MoD wrote off £450 million in the 2019/2020 financial year in contract wrangles, lost equipment and ditched projects.
Harry Fone, of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: "With the tax burden at a 70-year high, defence chiefs can't afford to waste a single penny. Ministers must fall into line and get a grip on public sector procurement."
The MoD said: "We are committed to delivering value for money and ensuring lessons are learnt to minimise future incidents."
Hopefully the sonar was just plain lost and not acquired by someone else.........
Any chance of a summary for those who can't get past the paywall?RAF lost £600,000 missile system in jet test blunder
FOI request also revealed that in the same financial year the Royal Navy lost sonar equipment worth £792,000
A freedom of information request also revealed that in the same financial year the Royal Navy lost sonar equipment worth £792,000. Officials said the sonar system, known as a flank array, had been trailing behind a submarine when it was lost at sea.
Hopefully the sonar was just plain lost and not acquired by someone else.........
Cheers PMN1!
I think flank arrays are not supposed to detach from the hull at all, so some kind of mechanical failure/impact may have been involved.
Any chance of a summary for those who can't get past the paywall?RAF lost £600,000 missile system in jet test blunder
FOI request also revealed that in the same financial year the Royal Navy lost sonar equipment worth £792,000
A freedom of information request also revealed that in the same financial year the Royal Navy lost sonar equipment worth £792,000. Officials said the sonar system, known as a flank array, had been trailing behind a submarine when it was lost at sea.
Hopefully the sonar was just plain lost and not acquired by someone else.........
Cheers PMN1!
I think flank arrays are not supposed to detach from the hull at all, so some kind of mechanical failure/impact may have been involved.
I feel like there must be an error somewhere -- flank arrays are bolted (or otherwise mounted) to the hull; they really can't "trail behind a submarine."
Towed arrays, on the other hand, are meant to stream behind the sub and are sometimes (rarely) lost in accidents. It's honestly a cost of doing business for modern subs.
I'd want to see the actual text of the response to see whether the MoD or the newspaper screwed this up. My money is on the newspaper, since they also seem to think a targeting pod is a "missile system" and that falling off the pylon of a stationary aircraft is the same as "plunging." (Also, man, I don't want to be the last troop who inspected the mounting on that pod. That's a grade-A f-up right there.)
Last edited:
dannydale
ACCESS: Top Secret
Yeah, it's the Telegraph. They're not much better than the Daily Fail.
I wonder how many millions of pounds worth of crockery UK households drop every year?
About £50bn worth of banknotes are currently lost, maybe we should have mandatory inspections of sofa cushions?
This is non-news, accidents happen.
Saying that, it doesn't inspire you with confidence that Litening pods are sturdy, its only a 2-3ft drop I guess from the ventral point?
About £50bn worth of banknotes are currently lost, maybe we should have mandatory inspections of sofa cushions?
This is non-news, accidents happen.
Saying that, it doesn't inspire you with confidence that Litening pods are sturdy, its only a 2-3ft drop I guess from the ventral point?
A Tentative Fleet Plan
I really should change my personal text
The term Net-Zero Carbon is meaningless. It doesn't mean that they'll do away with gas turbines in combat aircraft, it means they'll try to compensate for the aircraft's carbon emissions (using some very optimistic calculations) by planting a forest or using carbon capture.British military aircraft must hit net-zero carbon target by 2040, says Air Force chief
“That will require additional investment. It will require me diverting investment from equipment and platforms into infrastructure and into how we operate,” says Air Chief Marshal Mike Wigston.
[Groans]
It will be a towed array, as they are clipped on around the corner from Faslane before a sub leaves on patrol. A Flank array would cause alot more damage and would cost a whole lot more than £750,000...
As for the Litening III it sounds like someone hit the emergency detach button in the cockpit. It's a bit of a loss as we don't have too many of them (no-one does) but its also pretty cheap at £600,000....they're a lot more than that normally...suspect some accrual accounting has been involved to get that price down..
Any chance of a summary for those who can't get past the paywall?RAF lost £600,000 missile system in jet test blunder
FOI request also revealed that in the same financial year the Royal Navy lost sonar equipment worth £792,000
A freedom of information request also revealed that in the same financial year the Royal Navy lost sonar equipment worth £792,000. Officials said the sonar system, known as a flank array, had been trailing behind a submarine when it was lost at sea.
Hopefully the sonar was just plain lost and not acquired by someone else.........
Cheers PMN1!
I think flank arrays are not supposed to detach from the hull at all, so some kind of mechanical failure/impact may have been involved.
I feel like there must be an error somewhere -- flank arrays are bolted (or otherwise mounted) to the hull; they really can't "trail behind a submarine."
Towed arrays, on the other hand, are meant to stream behind the sub and are sometimes (rarely) lost in accidents. It's honestly a cost of doing business for modern subs.
I'd want to see the actual text of the response to see whether the MoD or the newspaper screwed this up. My money is on the newspaper, since they also seem to think a targeting pod is a "missile system" and that falling off the pylon of a stationary aircraft is the same as "plunging." (Also, man, I don't want to be the last troop who inspected the mounting on that pod. That's a grade-A f-up right there.)
With experience on fast jets, I'm kind of doubting the truth on the pod - its mounted about 60-80 cm above the ground, so even if it 'dropped' off, while parked, it wouldnt be a write off.
Now not correctly mounting it, and have it 'drop-off' at 90 mph on the runway - would be a write off...I dont think anyone would dare to have lost it airborne, and claimed it just dropped off..... or would they.......
Take your pick.
And yes at least 2 people will have checked that pod on fitting it, and the groundcrew on the day, and the aircrew on the day.......so at least 5 people.....
Reminds me of the day we stuck a wingtip into the hangar wall, the hangar wall won... I was on the OTHER wingtip, I still got a b***cking from our grumpy old WO.
kaiserd
I really should change my personal text
Your wingtip was just too far away from the other wall....Any chance of a summary for those who can't get past the paywall?RAF lost £600,000 missile system in jet test blunder
FOI request also revealed that in the same financial year the Royal Navy lost sonar equipment worth £792,000
A freedom of information request also revealed that in the same financial year the Royal Navy lost sonar equipment worth £792,000. Officials said the sonar system, known as a flank array, had been trailing behind a submarine when it was lost at sea.
Hopefully the sonar was just plain lost and not acquired by someone else.........
Cheers PMN1!
I think flank arrays are not supposed to detach from the hull at all, so some kind of mechanical failure/impact may have been involved.
I feel like there must be an error somewhere -- flank arrays are bolted (or otherwise mounted) to the hull; they really can't "trail behind a submarine."
Towed arrays, on the other hand, are meant to stream behind the sub and are sometimes (rarely) lost in accidents. It's honestly a cost of doing business for modern subs.
I'd want to see the actual text of the response to see whether the MoD or the newspaper screwed this up. My money is on the newspaper, since they also seem to think a targeting pod is a "missile system" and that falling off the pylon of a stationary aircraft is the same as "plunging." (Also, man, I don't want to be the last troop who inspected the mounting on that pod. That's a grade-A f-up right there.)
With experience on fast jets, I'm kind of doubting the truth on the pod - its mounted about 60-80 cm above the ground, so even if it 'dropped' off, while parked, it wouldnt be a write off.
Now not correctly mounting it, and have it 'drop-off' at 90 mph on the runway - would be a write off...I dont think anyone would dare to have lost it airborne, and claimed it just dropped off..... or would they.......
Take your pick.
And yes at least 2 people will have checked that pod on fitting it, and the groundcrew on the day, and the aircrew on the day.......so at least 5 people.....
Reminds me of the day we stuck a wingtip into the hangar wall, the hangar wall won... I was on the OTHER wingtip, I still got a b***cking from our grumpy old WO.
British Royal Air Force invests in space capabilities
The head of the Royal Air Force discusses the Ministry of Defence's goals in space.www.c4isrnet.com
On the other end of the spectrum, F-35 pilots can now pootle about on these.
Of course if all our fighter pilots fall off going over potholes or get run down by tractors then we might have an air defence problem.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/news...-with-a-fleet-of-15mph-e-scooters/ar-BB1gMdJH
Of course if all our fighter pilots fall off going over potholes or get run down by tractors then we might have an air defence problem.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/news...-with-a-fleet-of-15mph-e-scooters/ar-BB1gMdJH
I hope those non governmental hackers in russia cant get into them
Rheinmetall delivers combat robots to Britain, tank defenses to Hungary
Germany’s Rheinmetall has announced two new deals for high-tech weaponry, featuring ground robots and active protection systems.
www.defensenews.com
Interestingly the Mission Master system was reportedly the foundation for General Carter's 'FCS redux' plan to replace the British Army's tanks. One has to wonder, especially with the way the Challenger II upgrade program has been now gutted ('Challenger 3' indeed, hah!) whether this procurement is part of an attempt to revive that plan by the back door.
Fresh thinking on ‘close battles’ sealed British Warrior vehicle’s demise
"Were we going to pour very scarce, precious new money into a platform that was going to be nearly 50 years old by the time we were fielding it?"
www.defensenews.com
I am more than a bit dubious of this explanation. Sounds more like a case of trying to justify it after the fact.
Ministers attacked over failure to ensure British shipyards build Navy ships
The Government has rowed back pledges to support UK shipbuilding
www.telegraph.co.uk
From three days ago:
www.defensenews.com
Britain launches $2.3B logistics ship competition — again
Britain has relaunched a competition to build three logistic ships to support the deployments of Royal Navy aircraft carriers and other surface ships.
www.defensenews.com
They'd need to get their shoes on - Fort Victoria is the only ship in the RFA fleet capable of provisioning the QE Carriers at sea, so any problems with the Fort and Carrier Strike is severely limited.From three days ago:
Britain launches $2.3B logistics ship competition — again
Britain has relaunched a competition to build three logistic ships to support the deployments of Royal Navy aircraft carriers and other surface ships.
Similar threads
-
Alternate 80s Britain: How would the services cope?- Started by uk 75
- Replies: 3
-
-
MBDA Future Cruise / Anti-Ship Weapon (FC / ASW)- Started by Triton
- Replies: 175
-
