• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

BAC PT 428

uk 75

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,752
Reaction score
1,325
Have just been reading through the excellent Monograph online about the US Mauler missile at the Missile Site in the US. Apparently the UK gave up its own equivalent of Mauler, a system called BAC PT 428, and then had to adopt the simpler Rapier when Mauler was cancelled. As far as I can gather from piecing together sources PT 428 looked like the later Roland system, but with four instead of two tube launchers on a mobile vehicle with a fire control radar. Any old BAC hands know any more?

UK 75
 

Thorvic

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
620
Reaction score
67
Kelly Bushings said:
PT.428 is covered in BSP4.

KB

Any details on when its now scheduled to be published ?

Ralph

There is a small mention in either John Forbats Vickers Secret Missile projects or his TSR2 Navigation & Attack system.

Cheers

Geoff
 

uk 75

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,752
Reaction score
1,325
Geoff
Thanks for the steers. I saw the book you mention and it has come interesting missile stuff. TB@s book should be worth the wait.
Ralph
 

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
760
Reaction score
100
Would the system have had anti missile capability?
 

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
760
Reaction score
100
Anyone have an estimate on how much space and weight the radars and computers that PT428 would have taken up compared to the radars and computers for the Sea Wolf systems on the first Type 22 Frigates?
 

RP1

I see the truth in it.
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
453
Reaction score
117
Website
rp-one.net
Anyone have an estimate on how much space and weight the radars and computers that PT428 would have taken up compared to the radars and computers for the Sea Wolf systems on the first Type 22 Frigates?


Since PT428 wasn't mounted on multiple trucks, "less". Full-on GWS-25 occupies a lot of space, but I suspect PT428 would not have the computers for fully-automatic engagements (not many "pop-up" anti-ship missiles on land).


RP1
 

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
760
Reaction score
100
RP1 said:
Anyone have an estimate on how much space and weight the radars and computers that PT428 would have taken up compared to the radars and computers for the Sea Wolf systems on the first Type 22 Frigates?


but I suspect PT428 would not have the computers for fully-automatic engagements (not many "pop-up" anti-ship missiles on land).


RP1

Sneaky devils those Soviets...tunnelling in....

I was wondering if there was the chance of a joint service missile....I don't think the timing is right but.....
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,126
Reaction score
799
Considering one of the criticisms of PT.428 was in computing capacity, met BTW by the time of cancellation, I'd say handling 'pop up' threats out to something like 20nm or less was very much part of the system.
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,126
Reaction score
799
PMN1 said:
Anyone have an estimate on how much space and weight the radars and computers that PT428 would have taken up compared to the radars and computers for the Sea Wolf systems on the first Type 22 Frigates?

If it fits on the back of a Bedford RL truck, then it's no more than 3 tons.
 
Top