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

Rearming the UK: What equipment? and how much?

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
1,091
Sea Serpent is a bit of a puzzler....
Some pictures seem to show a missile with air data probe, suggesting it's still very much an in development system.
Yet the real question is what does it actually offer over various Harpoon clones?
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,769
Reaction score
2,093

This seems to be basically Gabriel V, already adopted by Finland.

 

Siberia

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
46
Reaction score
21
I'm rather swayed by the concept of vertical launch Brimstone at the moment. The latest improvements in rocket motor deliver quite an increase in range. Conceptually something like Boxer could carry a fair number of such vertical launch missiles.
Sounds vaguely similar to the old FV102 Striker, albeit with angled rather than vertical launch.
 

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
822
Reaction score
321
I'm rather swayed by the concept of VL Brimstone at the moment. The latest improvements in rocket motor deliver quite an increase in range.
Conceptually something like Boxer could carry a fair number of such VL missiles.
Missiles which are increasing in the spectrum of possible targets they can be employed against.

Does it need to be VL?

2019-09-04-MBDA-showcases-Tank-Destroyer-vehicle-with-PGZ-at-MSPO-2019-©-MBDA-2.jpg

2019-09-04-MBDA-showcases-Tank-Destroyer-vehicle-with-PGZ-at-MSPO-2019-©-MBDA.jpg
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
4,832

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
1,091
Last picture is not Brimstone....might be a Brimstone-like seeker, but the missile body is longer....more like CAMM.....
 

Siberia

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
46
Reaction score
21
Last picture is not Brimstone. Might be a Brimstone-like seeker, but the missile body is longer, more like CAMM.
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.
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
1,091
Last picture is not Brimstone. Might be a Brimstone-like seeker, but the missile body is longer, more like CAMM.
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
Joined
Mar 11, 2018
Messages
351
Reaction score
645

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
4,832
Via the SNAFU blog:
 

timmymagic

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
65
Reaction score
106
Last picture is not Brimstone....might be a Brimstone-like seeker, but the missile body is longer....more like CAMM.....
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

 
Last edited:

Wyvern

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2020
Messages
694
Reaction score
792
Wonderful. Just what was needed at the perfect time. Great job! :rolleyes:

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.
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
1,091
Last picture is not Brimstone....might be a Brimstone-like seeker, but the missile body is longer....more like CAMM.....
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

So if we take a look over at Tempest Weapon development options two particular missiles stick out
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.
 

timmymagic

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
65
Reaction score
106
So if we take a look over at Tempest Weapon development options two particular missiles stick out
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...

fumTI1w.jpg


ZLvJW2E.jpg


e0bhbtz.jpg


U2VmWwV.jpg
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
1,091
So if we take a look over at Tempest Weapon development options two particular missiles stick out
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...

fumTI1w.jpg


ZLvJW2E.jpg


e0bhbtz.jpg


U2VmWwV.jpg
Well if it's dual mode, presumably that's even better giving flexibility.

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.
 

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
822
Reaction score
321
Any chance of a summary for those who can't get past the paywall?

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.........
 

starviking

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
1,165
Reaction score
299
Any chance of a summary for those who can't get past the paywall?


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.
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,769
Reaction score
2,093
Any chance of a summary for those who can't get past the paywall?


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: Secret
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
350
Reaction score
139
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."
Yeah, it's the Telegraph. They're not much better than the Daily Fail.
 

Hood

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,257
Reaction score
2,118
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?
 

A Tentative Fleet Plan

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Apr 9, 2018
Messages
219
Reaction score
393

[Groans]
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.
 

timmymagic

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
65
Reaction score
106
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.

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..
 

Fluff

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 9, 2019
Messages
544
Reaction score
308
Any chance of a summary for those who can't get past the paywall?


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
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
1,111
Reaction score
485
Any chance of a summary for those who can't get past the paywall?


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.
Your wingtip was just too far away from the other wall.... :)
 

Fluff

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 9, 2019
Messages
544
Reaction score
308
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
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
I hope those non governmental hackers in russia cant get into them
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
4,832

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.
 

starviking

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
1,165
Reaction score
299
From three days ago:
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.
 

Similar threads

Top