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

MBDA working on Sea Wolf replacement based on ASRAAM

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
740
Reaction score
82
European missile manufacturer MBDA is starting to flesh out its plans for a common family of anti-air weapons, being supported by research funding from the UK Defense Ministry.

The family, known as the Common Anti-Air Modular Missile (CAMM), is aimed at meeting tri-service requirements from around 2018. In the land environment CAMM is intended to provide a successor to the Rapier point-defense missile system, while in the naval context it will provide a follow-on to the Sea Wolf missile.

For air platforms CAMM would effectively provide an upgrade for the Advanced Short-Range Air-to-Air Missile. The presently envisaged CAMM configuration uses an ASRAAM airframe.

The British Defense Ministry is funding study and technology demonstrator work in support of the CAMM concept.
 

Mercurius Cantabrigiensis

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
46
Reaction score
1
The definitive Common Anti-Air Modular Missile may not be ASRAAM based. According to Jane’s Missiles & Rockets, between 2002 and 2005, a series of demonstration firings was conducted using ASRAAM-based hardware to prove the planned soft-launch scheme. The missile retained the existing ASRAAM mounting points, and was fitted into a container-launcher of square cross-section.

The demonstrator rounds were about 3 m long, and retained the 166 mm diameter of the ASRAAM. Total weight was about 100 kg, slightly more than the 87 kg of the ASRAAM. The container-launcher was about 3.25 m long and weighed about 45 kg.

At the DSEI exhibition in London during September, MBDA showed a control section incorporating a series of four twin-nozzle thrusters mounted just aft of the fins fired to steer the round through a post-launch turnover manoeuvre.

Carry trials of a fully-active RF seeker are due to begin in 2008, the magazine reported.

Mercurius Cantabrigiensis
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,008
Reaction score
713
I predicted the development of this years ago, only strengthened when I saw the MBDA trial MICA-VLS. It seemed so damned obvious and clearly I was not alone on that one, cue smug mode!

Interesting to hear its a different missile body, if the same diameter.

RF seeker would seem likely to be of an existing type, perhaps the same as used in MICA and Meteor?
 

bristolfighter

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
CAMM mssile news:

http://www.defense-update.com/products/c/camm.html

and test video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oRmGFVLJ08

It's more ASRAAM than it sounded (see attached pic, via www.defense-update.com), and reminds me of some SRAAM-75/Taildog variants as described in the Buttler/Gibson BSP with 'bonker' jet controls.
 

Attachments

  • camm.jpg
    camm.jpg
    15.4 KB · Views: 712

TinWing

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
888
Reaction score
49
Here is a link to the May 2009 "Warship Technology" article which seems to be the definitive source to date:

http://content.yudu.com/A17o11/WTMay09/resources/31.htm

The graphics seem to indicate folding fins, allowing "quad packing" in a standard MK 41 or Sylver VLS cell, although the very first graphic seems to depict the retrofitting of Type 23 with 10(?) widely spaced quad packed cells. It's unclear if the intended VLS system is some sort of bespoke arrangement based on the current Seawolf VL?

The graphic shows a more standard 4 cell arrangement aboard the BMT Venator concept, as shown in the below Youtube Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m81ede8b9g
 

RP1

I see the truth in it.
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
447
Reaction score
86
Website
rp-one.net
Link to a paper on the Soft Vertical Launch system proposed for CAMM:

http://ftp.rta.nato.int/public//PubFulltext/RTO/MP/RTO-MP-063///MP-063-03.pdf

RP1
 

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
740
Reaction score
82
RP1 said:
Link to a paper on the Soft Vertical Launch system proposed for CAMM:

You forgot the TM after Soft Vertical Launch (TM)...... ;D
 

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
740
Reaction score
82
Has the development of CAMM required any new developments elsewhere, could it have been developed sooner?
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
11,777
Reaction score
1,913
Hmmm. Given the wide range of vessels, big and small, that the system is meant to be deployed on, perhaps something more like the old Hawker Siddeley Dynamics SHIELD would be more effective, both cost and technology wise? Just my opinion.
 

Hobbes

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
863
Reaction score
224
It might be possible to produce a cheaper missile, but there's a pretty linear relationship between cost and capability here. You don't want to refit your warships with 1970s technology.
 

pathology_doc

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
960
Reaction score
172
So this thing is what, a stretched ASRAAM with VLS capability? Sounds logical to have a longer body for a bigger motor and the flip-over jets.

And if it's capable of bolting onto the standard aircraft launch rails, that offers increased air-launch range or energy-manoeuvre capability, and maybe even the ability to flip 180 degrees and attack a target astern... hmm...
 

red admiral

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Messages
616
Reaction score
74
harrier said:
In many ways it's analogous to the Tor SA-15/SA-N-9 missile - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_missile_system - cold VL, local area defence (more than just point defence), but 30 years later!

A fair bit cleverer with onboard active radar guidance and variable data link inputs. General method is for search radar to locate target, missile launches and heads towards target, target position updates are sent to missile via data link until it gets within range to switch on the onboard radar and go for active terminal homing. Clever bit is that the search radar isn't holding track of either missile or target but simply giving position updates whilst carrying on scouring the sky.
 

Hobbes

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
863
Reaction score
224
Interesting. It suggests that it'd be fairly easy to create a longer-range version by adding a booster.
 

JohnR

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
614
Reaction score
98
The latest information on the Type 26 is that they will have twenty four launchers in front of the bridge and ahead of the helo hanger. Will this be twenty four individual missiles or are they twenty four quad packs as show on the Venerator video?

Regards
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,290
Reaction score
1,246
IIRC, the last Type 26 model we saw had 24 missiles each in those two locations, for a total of 48 CAMM. That's a pretty generous loadout -- four times thast would be extremely unlikely.
 

JFC Fuller

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
2,898
Reaction score
807
The CAMM launchers on the current T26 design are all single tube launchers- not larger VLS cells for which there is only space (likely reserved rather than fitted) for 16. An odd feature, in my opinion, is not making the design slightly larger and rearranging things to accommodate an additional 16 VLS cells instead of the 48 CAMM specific launch tubes.
 

Abraham Gubler

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,555
Reaction score
162
JFC Fuller said:
The CAMM launchers on the current T26 design are all single tube launchers- not larger VLS cells for which there is only space (likely reserved rather than fitted) for 16. An odd feature, in my opinion, is not making the design slightly larger and rearranging things to accommodate an additional 16 VLS cells instead of the 48 CAMM specific launch tubes.

The ratio of 48 CAMM to 16 MK 41/48/57 VLS is extremely generous. CAMM is a soft launch missile. So its vertical launchers are just tubes holding the missile making them very simple and light. VLS however can support hot launch missiles with extremely powerful boosters (like SM2). So its launchers have massive 180 degree exhaust vents. This is why CAMM is so attractive because the launcher is extremely lightweight by comparison.
 

JohnR

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
614
Reaction score
98
What is the planned missile load for the modernised T23?

Regards
 

Similar threads

Top