Exocet Missile Developments

GTX

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
15 April 2006
Messages
7,507
Reaction score
10,206
Website
beyondthesprues.com
I couldn't find an existing thread dedicated to the Exocet missile, so here goes.

To start with, does anyone have more information on the supposed Iraqi modified Exocet to use a TV/ELECTRO-OPTICAL seeker:

D6XEklcXoAAuYty
 
In 1966 the UK decides it needed a surface to surface missile to replace Buccaneer aircraft as its main weapon against enemy .ships.
Three categories of weapon are envisaged. Initially the AS12 is bought for the Wasp and then Sea Skua for the Lynx.
A medium range weapon for fitting to ships takes longer. The decision to purchase Exocet in its MM38 boxed launcher version is not announced until 1970. The first platforms HMS Norfolk (County) and HMS Cleopatra (Leander) are not in service until 1975. But by 1982 4 Countys 8 Leanders 6 T21 and 4T22 are in service. By the end of the Cold War, new T22s and the T23 are getting Harpoon instead. No RN Exocets were used in action.
The long range missile was initially supposed to be the Otomat, then the UK Martel derived Sea Eagle but Harpoon is bought for subs and later for frigates.
 
Bit of a resurrection...

Does anyone recall seeing a pic of the UK's Excalibur Exocet system on Gibraltar. I seem to recall seeing a very grainy pic of it an age ago...
 
timmymagic said:
Bit of a resurrection...

Does anyone recall seeing a pic of the UK's Excalibur Exocet system on Gibraltar. I seem to recall seeing a very grainy pic of it an age ago...
Click to expand...
Many years ago (when I worked at RNAD Gosport) I was driving into work past ASWE and noticed a pair of Exocet launchers facing South over Portsmouth. Later that day I mentioned seeing them to the Exocet Stock Controller. He exploded, saying that they were supposed to be covered by a tarpaulin as they were being used for a secret trial. I told him that they were; it was just that the wind was pressing the sheets against the MM38 containers which had a very recognisable shape! When I went home that evening, plastic sheeting had been affixed to the security fence so the launchers could not be seen....

SRJ.
 
SeaslugMk2 said:
timmymagic said:
Bit of a resurrection...

Does anyone recall seeing a pic of the UK's Excalibur Exocet system on Gibraltar. I seem to recall seeing a very grainy pic of it an age ago...
Click to expand...
Many years ago (when I worked at RNAD Gosport) I was driving into work past ASWE and noticed a pair of Exocet launchers facing South over Portsmouth. Later that day I mentioned seeing them to the Exocet Stock Controller. He exploded, saying that they were supposed to be covered by a tarpaulin as they were being used for a secret trial. I told him that they were; it was just that the wind was pressing the sheets against the MM38 containers which had a very recognisable shape! When I went home that evening, plastic sheeting had been affixed to the security fence so the launchers could not be seen....

SRJ.
Click to expand...
Presumably that was pre 85? As it was deployed to Gib from then. The pic I saw was a trailer mounted MM38 container system, not that far removed from the Argentinian lash up used to hit Glamorgan.
 
I'm going to hazard a guess that they were somewhat similar to those shown below:

Image 8-4-21 at 3.28 am.jpeg

Noting however that those shown are actually an Argentine 'lash up' from the Falklands war. Possibly therefore something like this but fixed mount on ground.
 
timmymagic said:
SeaslugMk2 said:
timmymagic said:
Bit of a resurrection...

Does anyone recall seeing a pic of the UK's Excalibur Exocet system on Gibraltar. I seem to recall seeing a very grainy pic of it an age ago...
Click to expand...
Many years ago (when I worked at RNAD Gosport) I was driving into work past ASWE and noticed a pair of Exocet launchers facing South over Portsmouth. Later that day I mentioned seeing them to the Exocet Stock Controller. He exploded, saying that they were supposed to be covered by a tarpaulin as they were being used for a secret trial. I told him that they were; it was just that the wind was pressing the sheets against the MM38 containers which had a very recognisable shape! When I went home that evening, plastic sheeting had been affixed to the security fence so the launchers could not be seen....

SRJ.
Click to expand...
Presumably that was pre 85? As it was deployed to Gib from then. The pic I saw was a trailer mounted MM38 container system, not that far removed from the Argentinian lash up used to hit Glamorgan.
Click to expand...
Yes, I was on Seaslug from 1980 to 1986 and it would have been around the middle of that time.

SRJ.
 
GTX said:
I'm going to hazard a guess that they were somewhat similar to those shown below:

View attachment 654567

Noting however that those shown are actually an Argentine 'lash up' from the Falklands war. Possibly therefore something like this but fixed mount on ground.
Click to expand...
As far as I'm aware the Excalibur system was a trailer mounted MM38 system as well, not fixed. I believe the intention was for it to be kept in the tunnels and brought out when required. No idea on towing vehicles or seperate control vehicles. Believe targeting information was provided by fixed radars on Gib rather than a mobile radar set up (although on that I could be wrong, but I've never seen pics or details of associated kit). Also I've no idea how many were made, suspect at least 2-3 sets, each consisting of 2x MM38 launchers. Can't imagine the requirement for Gib would have needed more than 4-6 missiles. The RN did have plenty of MM38 launchers and missiles at the time though.

What's really surprising is the lack of photos in the years since...there must have been at least 8 RN personnel deployed there over 11 years in 1-2 year deployments. Would have thought one of them would have taken a pic and posted it online, along with the many thousands of other personnel who have cycled through Gib and potentially seen it.

Or was it developed, then parked up in a tunnel at Gib in case the balloon went up? Personnel to use it being deployed as and when necessary?

Mind you there aren't that many pics of laser dazzler systems or Exactor out there either...
 
Last edited:
timmymagic said:

What's really surprising is the lack of photos in the years since...there must have been at least 8 RN personnel deployed there over 11 years in 1-2 year deployments. Would have thought one of them would have taken a pic and posted it online, along with the many thousands of other personnel who have cycled through Gib and potentially seen it.


Not if they're following the rules.;)
Click to expand...
 
GTX said:
timmymagic said:

What's really surprising is the lack of photos in the years since...there must have been at least 8 RN personnel deployed there over 11 years in 1-2 year deployments. Would have thought one of them would have taken a pic and posted it online, along with the many thousands of other personnel who have cycled through Gib and potentially seen it.


Not if they're following the rules.;)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Indeed...certainly regarding Exactor....

I do wonder if it Excalibur was parked up from 1990 onwards, its not as if there was any real threat to Gib from 89 onwards.
 
NoBarrelRolls said:
About the Exocet mounting mentioned by @GTX, the Argentinian navy called "ITB", which in Spanish means "Instalación de tiro berreta". "Berreta" is an argentine expression that refers to something very cheap and of low quality. I guess you can translated as "Cheap firing installation".

Here is a very cool article about the genesis of the "ITB" (the article is in Spanish):
https://gacetamarinera.com.ar/especiales/la-ingeniosa-instalacion-de-tiro-berreta-en-malvinas/
Click to expand...
Exactly
NoBarrelRolls
You translated right
 
NoBarrelRolls said:
About the Exocet mounting mentioned by @GTX, the Argentinian navy called "ITB", which in Spanish means "Instalación de tiro berreta". "Berreta" is an argentine expression that refers to something very cheap and of low quality. I guess you can translated as "Cheap firing installation".

Here is a very cool article about the genesis of the "ITB" (the article is in Spanish):
https://gacetamarinera.com.ar/especiales/la-ingeniosa-instalacion-de-tiro-berreta-en-malvinas/
Click to expand...
Thank you NoBarrelRolls, I found this very interesting and it reiterates 'never underestimate your enemy!!'

Regards
Pioneer
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
timmymagic said:
A pic of Excalibur just got posted on Twitter by someone I follow...I won't post it here except as a twitter post as it was posted by another user that they know. It's from the VT brochure for Excalibur, trailer mounted with Type 1006 Radar as well.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1388111617477517325
View: https://twitter.com/EngageStrategy1/status/1388111617477517325
Click to expand...

You have to say that it wouldn't have killed VT to put it on a truck, and jazz it up a little bit (for demo purposes)...they may have actually got some international sales with it...
 
Why is there no Exocet delivery to Ukraine? The missiles comes into Naval, coastal and aerial (helo and aircraft) delivery mode. It would seem as a perfect addition to French arms delivery there, with a tremendous catchy effect on the media attention to dilute a bit the shameful rethoric around the present gov (actually the previous one!) seemingly dragging his feet.

View: https://youtu.be/sXrhk4zqFEM
 
I am sure that the oil&gas embargo by the EU will force a change in narratives. With the surge in prices, Europeans are going to ask for more effectiveness in ending the conflict. It wouldn't make sense to tame the flow of weapon while Europe economy is the easiest casualty for most to identify with.

It has been a conflict where energy was the grand strategic bargain. Not soldiers or civilians lives. More Russian ships sunk won't alter the equation much today. It would also dig a wedge deeper inside Russian confidence toward their elite.
 
TomcatViP said:
More Russian ships sunk won't alter the equation much today.
Click to expand...

It would have an effect as the Black Sea fleet would no longer be able to blockade Ukrainian ports meaning that Ukraine can start exporting grain which a number of foreign countries are dependent on and they could also stop the Russian theft of grain too not to mention it means more money for Ukraine to spend on weapons.
 
@NMaude : this exactly what I had in mind. The won't alter is related to the offensive language of the Russian regime, their threat and potentially aggressive posture toward NATO countries.

Think also that given the geography, interdicting the area around Crimea would force Russia to move more supplies along the band of territory their are holding, putting them at risk doing so and rebalancing their advantages in hardware and troops on which they are counting for the new phase in this conflict.
 
Last edited:
TomcatViP said:
Think also that given the geography, interdicting the area around the Crimea would force Russia to move more supplies along the band of territory their are holding
Click to expand...

If Ukraine can successfully neutralise the Black Sea fleet (More likely now since Denmark appears to have given to them a land-launched Harpoon missile system for the Ukrainian army to operate) then that means they can probably use what naval assets they have to destroy the illegally constructed bridge connecting Crimea to Russia. Destroying it would cut off a major avenue of logistics support for the Russian army there.
 
I don't see how you figure that could work. With Crimea, Donbas and all of the coastline in between under Russian control, the waters east of Sevastopol are pretty much outside Ukrainian AShM coverage. Here the Black Sea Fleet can operate with impunity, and will totally outmatch the small patrol boats Ukraine retains at this point, nevermind Russian air power. And the missile threat works both ways: Russian Bal and Bastion complexes arrayed in the above Russian-held areas are going to make mincemeat of Ukrainian vessels.

With Kerch bridge currently 220km from the closest Ukrainian-controlled territory (near Tokmak) and still 130km from the closest points pre-Feb.24, the options are severely limited. Unless the Azov Sea coast is re-taken, a jury-rigged land-attack Neptune (which would have to successfully traverse dozens of kilometres of land bristling with Russian air defences) is pretty much the only way. Even if the coastline came back under Ukrainian control, a Tochka-U strike (if Ukraine has any left by now) is tenuous without pushing into Crimea, and at that point an air strike would probably be a better bet anyway.

EDIT: I will say though that I find it curious no attempt (either by Tochka or Su-24M) was made while the opportunity still existed in the opening days. Who cares about Millerovo AB if you could sever that supply link instead?
 
Last edited:
A bridge is about the easiest target to attack with any sort of cruise missile: known location, known weak points. A salvo of half a dozen missiles well timed and with intelligently chosen waypoints should be enough.
Heck, even old-fashioned ballistic missiles should be able to do the job.
 
If I understand the title of this thread correctly, it's about the development of the Excocet missile, not
its use in service and definitely not about its possible or not possible delivery to which country whatever.
So, please stay to the topic !
 
Now that a turbojet version of the Exocet is in production I wonder if any thought has been given to a ramjet powered version?
 
NMaude said:
Now that a turbojet version of the Exocet is in production I wonder if any thought has been given to a ramjet powered version?
Click to expand...

That supposedly a "new" missile. There was "ANS" or "Anti Navaire Supersonique" program. But that program seems forgotten.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom