Re-arming the UK: What equipment? and how much?

On the less immediately obvious side of things, BAE Systems also launched BlackThorn at Farnborough, which is a family of warheads intended for both drones and interceptors. Available in 40, 70 and 120mm configurations, with blast, enhanced fragmentation and EFP options at all sizes, shaped charge at 70mm and combined shaped charge/frag at 120mm.
 
I saw someone online saying that after the end of the Cold War, British shipyards lost their shipborne weapon systems and had to turn to shipborne weapon suppliers from other countries.What do you think
 
zww11455 said:
I saw someone online saying that after the end of the Cold War, British shipyards lost their shipborne weapon systems and had to turn to shipborne weapon suppliers from other countries.What do you think
Click to expand...
It's wrong in every detail.

At the end of the Cold War foreign weapon systems on UK warships were Exocet - French, Harpoon/Sub Harpoon - US, Bofors 40mm/70 - Swedish and (just squeaking in) Goalkeeper - Dutch and Phalanx - American .

Whereas British systems were Sea Dart, Sea Wolf, 114mm Mk 8, 30mm DS30M Mk I, 20mm Oerlikon** (Swiss by design, but British by manufacture), 20mm GAM-B01(Swiss 20mm KAA on British mounting) plus the L7 GPMG (Belgian design, British manufacture) and Stingray. Turning to subs, Tigerfish and Spearfish. And if you count helicopters, Sea Skua. Plus the Outfit DEC laser dazzler.

And Polaris/Chevaline, with a British re-entry vehicle on a US ICBM booster.

So 5 foreign/12 UK. (Plus Polaris/Chevaline)

Current foreign systems are NSM - Norway, Tomahawk - US, 127mm Mk 45 (US, but British owned), 57mm Mk 110 (US variant of a Swedish design, but British owned), 40mm Mk 4 (Swedish, but UK owned), and Phalanx.

Current British systems are Sea Viper, Sea Ceptor, 114mm Mk 8, 30mm ASCG, 30mm Seahawk (US Mk 44 on British mounting*), 20mm GAM-B01(Swiss 20mm KAA on British mounting), .50 L111 (US design, UK manufacture), plus the L7 GPMG (Belgian design, British manufacture) and Stingray. Turning to subs, Spearfish. And if you count helicopters, Sea Venom and Martlet. Plus Dragonfire.

And Trident II/Holbrook, with UK warheads inside a reworked US re-entry vehicle.

So 6 foreign (3 of which British owned)/13 UK.

In other words very little change, apart from BAE Systems swallowing up a lot of foreign suppliers.

* MSI are also supplying the USN with the 30mm Mk 38 Mod 4 nowadays.

** Not quite sure when we replaced the last of the WW2 era 20x70mm guns with the KAA based GAM-B01s.

*** The 7.62mm miniguns have been replaced by the .50s.
 
Last edited:
DWG said:
On the less immediately obvious side of things, BAE Systems also launched BlackThorn at Farnborough,
Click to expand...
I was wondering about the name this morning, then remembered that blackthorn was the traditional wood from which shillelaghs were made.
 
Infographic on Cambridge Aerospace Skyhammer from their (unstaffed on the public day) stand at Farnborough. Now says that the main seeker option is dual band radar, instead of the previous single radar seeker, dual IR/radar and then the reversed IR/radar that have been shown previously.
We also get dimensions for the launch tube, even though it has never been shown in public.
1785065996472.jpeg
 
Aegrotare said:
Pretty sure the American aircraft in Britain are using the MRTT boom from allied MRTTs.
Click to expand...

Not outside training & familiarisation sorties, no.

US Navy & USMC do use RAF drogues on exercises, though.

WatcherZero said:
Yeah the US was complaining Spain wouldn't refuel their aircraft conducting strikes on Iran.
Click to expand...

Spain can't refuel USAF anyhow, their tankers are drogue-only.
 
Last edited:
Someone in the US military should have told Trump about the drouge-only tankers Spain has before he started complaining about them.:rolleyes:
 
timmymagic said:
Lets just say I'm a little dubious....particularly after a few minutes research on companies house etc...

A new UK tracked armoured vehicle "manufacturer" has appeared....based in (of all places) Harrogate (no address published....and Harrogate not exactly a manufacturing hub, or with any facilities that could be used).

https://armexis.co.uk/home

Allegedly.... they'll be making 2 vehicles...an IFV and APC...and have some CGI of armed UGV as well...

Apparently they've secured a £17.5m contract (not sure from whom, or on what basis) to build 4 vehicles for testing in 2027 in Ukraine....

Spidey sense tingling and all that...
Click to expand...
15 people?
https://visiativ.co.uk/news-resources/start-up-spotlight-armexis/
 
FighterJock said:
Someone in the US military should have told Trump about the drouge-only tankers Spain has before he started complaining about them.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I'm amused that puts Trump in the same bag as Palestine Action, who were convinced RAF drogue-equipped Voyagers were refuelling boom-needing IDF/AF fighters over Gaza.
 
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jul/26/andy-burnham-to-meet-volodymyr-zelenskyy-uk-ukraine

The weapon systems news is a little way in:
"Burnham and Zelenskyy are also due to discuss joint projects including Stone Cloak, an electronic jammer for which the UK has shared the intellectual property, allowing Ukraine to use the system immediately.

Thousands of the jammers, each about the size of a tablet computer, have been sent to Ukraine to be fitted to drones, with the aim of stopping Russian air defence systems from tracking and targeting them.

Ukraine is now able to mass produce the devices itself. After being initially used there, the jammers are due to be fitted to new UK weaponry, including cruise missiles."
 
LightningFan1959 said:
Well, Accuracy International started as a few blokes in a shed who had to be very skillful in misdirection as they spun stuff up.
Click to expand...

These guys appear to have gone by different names in the past (always a good sign)....Wraith Defence I think....they may have even touted the same 'demonstrator' then...

They aim to have 4,000 employees by 2030....

Accuracy International had the worlds finest sniper rifle...
 
Don't know why we never went with the GlobalEye in that case timmymagic if the E-7 is known as the RAF's Ajax and we all know how bad that particular program is going.
 
FighterJock said:
Don't know why we never went with the GlobalEye in that case timmymagic if the E-7 is known as the RAF's Ajax and we all know how bad that particular program is going.
Click to expand...
RAF and MoD lied...they awarded the contract claiming that E-7 was the only AWACS system in production....despite the fact that it hadn't been for 10 years....and the fact that Globaleye was actually in production at the time...
 
That is hugely embarrassing for both the RAF and UK MOD timmymagic, not knowing that the Globaleye was available at the time and going for the E-7 without a competition is madness. :mad:
 
timmymagic said:
RAF and MoD lied...they awarded the contract claiming that E-7 was the only AWACS system in production....despite the fact that it hadn't been for 10 years....and the fact that Globaleye was actually in production at the time...
Click to expand...
They made a lot of assumptions and likely fell for US influence.
 
That is just typical zen, though one thing I do not know is how does the E-7 compare with the Globaleye just to be certain?
 
timmymagic said:
Nitro Chem of Poland looking to set up a facility for TNT in the UK with annual volume of 2,000 tonnes.
Click to expand...
How widespread is TNT use in contemporary fillers? I thought we'd mostly progressed to more exotic formulations with higher Relative Effectiveness.
 
FighterJock said:
That is just typical zen, though one thing I do not know is how does the E-7 compare with the Globaleye just to be certain?
Click to expand...
Compare their arrays, that alone is enough to establish the food chain here...
But it's way more than that inside, as E-7, despite being small, is a full AWACS solution with all corresponding consoles (ELINT, etc).
Global eye is not.

E-7 is understood as a leading capability among modern operational AWACS, including even Chinese ones; especially for modern threats. Could've been even better on a less restrictive airframe, but on 737 contrast is even starker.
 
Last edited:
DWG said:
How widespread is TNT use in contemporary fillers? I thought we'd mostly progressed to more exotic formulations with higher Relative Effectiveness.
Click to expand...

Still used by a lot of countries for artillery as well as bullets and mortars with a 30% TNT, 45% RDX, 21% aluminium 5% wax mix.
The more exotic explosives are filtering through to premium end Artillery shells to allow them to be insensitive now but they are more expensive.

There's a shortage of TNT in the west due to increased munitions production but Russia also seems to be suffering explosive shortages as well. The content of their artillery shells has gone from;
73% Hexogen (59.5% RDX, 39.5% TNT, 1% Wax), 23% aluminium, 4% Wax
at the start of the war to;
80% TNT, 20% aluminium on shells made this year which is a reduction in explosive yield of 30%.
 
DWG said:
How widespread is TNT use in contemporary fillers? I thought we'd mostly progressed to more exotic formulations with higher Relative Effectiveness.
Click to expand...

For the UK its not. We made the move to IM quite successfully over several decades.

But Nitro Chem (who are working with BAE) have mentioned this is also about resilience for them (and Poland) by moving production around Europe (and further from Russia).

But....I'm sure in time of war our capability to produce IM, even with the expansion of Glascoed, will be limited (we really need to return to ROF's if we were serious about that) so any explosive filler will be used.
 
timmymagic said:
But Nitro Chem (who are working with BAE) have mentioned this is also about resilience for them (and Poland) by moving production around Europe (and further from Russia).
Click to expand...
That's a very interesting point! Are we seeing a rebirth of Shadow Factories?
 
Ordnance comes from ordinance.
 
bob225 said:
Just posting the link, i struggle to see the RAF going Boom and Drogue, thats a lot of training to keep up with, i guess it possible,
Click to expand...
The RAF currently has three types equipped for boom refuelling, which have to use allied tankers for IFR. Having some tankers with booms seems like a good idea.

The Australians, Germans, French, etc. don't seem to find it a problem
 
How much would it cost to upgrade the existing Voyager tankers for boom refuelling as an alternative to buying new builds?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom