Sea Ceptor - CAMM Sea Wolf replacement

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,795
Reaction score
1,518
I don't see why not, after all a cell doesn't need a silo even just holes cut into the decks with mounting brackets and the correct wiring.
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,795
Reaction score
1,518
Presumably there has been virtually modeling of scenarios and the loss of a few Aster-30 is viewed as an unacceptable risk?

Or this was the cheaper option. It also has the benefit of simplifying logistics, as only one type of CAMM canisters has to be stocked.
It because of why it's cheaper.
No need for Sylver or Mk41, and all the attendant costs associated with vls silo arrays.
 

timmymagic

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
123
Reaction score
246
Presumably there has been virtually modeling of scenarios and the loss of a few Aster-30 is viewed as an unacceptable risk?

It appears that there is a very real chance that the RN will re-life its Aster 15's into Aster 30's...doubling the number of long range SAM's in the stockpile. Huge development if they do this, and it looks like they're going to.
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,977
Reaction score
2,560
Presumably there has been virtually modeling of scenarios and the loss of a few Aster-30 is viewed as an unacceptable risk?

It appears that there is a very real chance that the RN will re-life its Aster 15's into Aster 30's...doubling the number of long range SAM's in the stockpile. Huge development if they do this, and it looks like they're going to.

They're definitely eliminating ASTER-15. Remanufacturing them into -30 would make far too much sense...
 

isayyo2

Lurker alert
Joined
Nov 24, 2011
Messages
547
Reaction score
747
Presumably there has been virtually modeling of scenarios and the loss of a few Aster-30 is viewed as an unacceptable risk?

It appears that there is a very real chance that the RN will re-life its Aster 15's into Aster 30's...doubling the number of long range SAM's in the stockpile. Huge development if they do this, and it looks like they're going to.

They're definitely eliminating ASTER-15. Remanufacturing them into -30 would make far too much sense...
Could it really be as simple as adding the booster and changing software?
 

DWG

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
1,504
Reaction score
1,716
Makes sense, but I'm presuming that's the space reserved for possible 16 Mk 41/TLAM cells they're going into, ruling that out as a future option. I suppose it could be done as quadpacked ExLS, which would only take six cells, leaving space for 10 cells available (though 8 would be more likely).

It's also the nearest I've seen to a confirmation that Type 45 does actually use Aster 15 (at least for now), explicit references to it seem rarer than hens teeth.
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,977
Reaction score
2,560
Makes sense, but I'm presuming that's the space reserved for possible 16 Mk 41/TLAM cells they're going into, ruling that out as a future option. I suppose it could be done as quadpacked ExLS, which would only take six cells, leaving space for 10 cells available (though 8 would be more likely).

It's also the nearest I've seen to a confirmation that Type 45 does actually use Aster 15 (at least for now), explicit references to it seem rarer than hens teeth.

Yes, this seems likely to foreclose the option of adding Mk 41 launchers to the T45. Then again, I think the addition of Mk 41 on the T26 did that already. That clearly signalled that the T26 rather than T45 is seen as the main strike platform going forward.

As for the nature of the new launchers, I think it's clear that they are the same "mushroom" launchers as the T23 and T26. And I think we've established that those are too short for CAMM-ER.

We also have official confirmation of Aster-15 in the MoD post up thread.


Currently, the Type 45 destroyers use a combination of short-range Aster 15 and long-range Aster 30 anti-air missiles to engage and destroy enemy threats. To facilitate the introduction of CAMM, a new 24-missile CAMM silo will be added in front of the current 48-missile Aster 30 silos,
 

timmymagic

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
123
Reaction score
246
Is it? Does the end cap dictate.the length of the cell?

It also kind of ignores the fact that in any of the installations proposed you could extend the cell vertically very easily...all you need is some steel...
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,977
Reaction score
2,560
Is it? Does the end cap dictate.the length of the cell?

It also kind of ignores the fact that in any of the installations proposed you could extend the cell vertically very easily...all you need is some steel...

Steel ... and a new test and certification campaign to make sure that adding a few inches of tube doesn't change any launch dynamics ... and a separate inventory of Sea Ceptor missiles just for the T45s.

If they were adding CAMM-ER, why wouldn't they have said so? It's going to be the same Sea Ceptor/CAMM as in the T26 and T31, mainly to cover the PDMS role.
 

DWG

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
1,504
Reaction score
1,716
and a separate inventory of Sea Ceptor missiles just for the T45s.

There are hints the Army is getting CAMM-ER, a tweet from a senior officer saying 40km air defence is on its way (see page 2 of the thread), so that would be both versions in service and we've pooled missiles between services before.
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,795
Reaction score
1,518
Is it? Does the end cap dictate.the length of the cell?

It also kind of ignores the fact that in any of the installations proposed you could extend the cell vertically very easily...all you need is some steel...

Steel ... and a new test and certification campaign to make sure that adding a few inches of tube doesn't change any launch dynamics ... and a separate inventory of Sea Ceptor missiles just for the T45s.

If they were adding CAMM-ER, why wouldn't they have said so? It's going to be the same Sea Ceptor/CAMM as in the T26 and T31, mainly to cover the PDMS role.
You know......you can read too much into a general principle statement. As I had access and knowledge and the clearances to reveal anything.
I would not make that claim.

And the general principle here is yhT just because you see a mushroom dome like Sea Ceptor, doesn't mean what lurks beneath it is anything or only a CAMM/Ceptor missile.
 

Hood

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,682
Reaction score
3,240
The performance of Sea Ceptor would seem to indicate a like-for-like Aster 15 replacement (~5km less range (if 25km is the real max range), Mach 0.5 slower and presumably a smaller warhead too - overall CAMM is 211kg lighter!).
CAMM-ER would offer an additional 15km (or more) range over Aster 15 but is still slower. So not sure there would be that much advantage using CAMM ER instead of Sea Ceptor.

Presumably using Sea Ceptor for closer targets would also free Sampson channels for Aster 30 to allow both to be used simultaneously?

Wikipedia states the cannister is 2.75 x 2.75 x 400.4cm, but the MBDA brochures linked don't confirm this, only the physical dimensions of the actual CAMM and CAMM-ER.
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,977
Reaction score
2,560
Is it? Does the end cap dictate.the length of the cell?

It also kind of ignores the fact that in any of the installations proposed you could extend the cell vertically very easily...all you need is some steel...

Steel ... and a new test and certification campaign to make sure that adding a few inches of tube doesn't change any launch dynamics ... and a separate inventory of Sea Ceptor missiles just for the T45s.

If they were adding CAMM-ER, why wouldn't they have said so? It's going to be the same Sea Ceptor/CAMM as in the T26 and T31, mainly to cover the PDMS role.
You know......you can read too much into a general principle statement. As I had access and knowledge and the clearances to reveal anything.
I would not make that claim.

And the general principle here is yhT just because you see a mushroom dome like Sea Ceptor, doesn't mean what lurks beneath it is anything or only a CAMM/Ceptor missile.

Fair.

And I realized that there already is a tested CAMM ER launcher, as part of Albatros NG. And it turns out to be, as suggested, functionally identical to the six-cell module for Sea Ceptor, just a bit longer/deeper. So mea culpa on that.

 

timmymagic

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
123
Reaction score
246
Fair.

And I realized that there already is a tested CAMM ER launcher, as part of Albatros NG. And it turns out to be, as suggested, functionally identical to the six-cell module for Sea Ceptor, just a bit longer/deeper. So mea culpa on that.


With the RN and Army operating a shared stockpile, if the Commander of 7 AD is correct, the Army is going to get some CAMM-ER. I can't imagine the Navy seeing part of the stockpile that is available to them decrease not deciding to have a look, at the very least, at CAMM-ER. The benefits are just too great to be ignored. Particularly on T26 and T31. Effectively it doubles the range at which they can engage.
 

timmymagic

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
123
Reaction score
246
Presumably using Sea Ceptor for closer targets would also free Sampson channels for Aster 30 to allow both to be used simultaneously?

Sea Ceptor won't be using Sampson channels. It's guidance is from a seperate 2-way datalink, used exclusively for Sea Ceptor, the target location provided through this by the CMS gets the missile close enough to go active.
 

timmymagic

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
123
Reaction score
246
Wikipedia states the cannister is 2.75 x 2.75 x 400.4cm, but the MBDA brochures linked don't confirm this, only the physical dimensions of the actual CAMM and CAMM-ER.
Have a look at the cross-sectional pics, they're exactly the same, except for length. MBDA have also been asked directly at trade shows and have confirmed this.
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,795
Reaction score
1,518
CAMM-ER is cold launched I see. Cheaper than hot launch.

As to integration. Ceptor integration with Patriot is already proven. Being true digital and software based. Obviously so.
 
Last edited:

DWG

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
1,504
Reaction score
1,716
And I realized that there already is a tested CAMM ER launcher, as part of Albatros NG. And it turns out to be, as suggested, functionally identical to the six-cell module for Sea Ceptor, just a bit longer/deeper. So mea culpa on that.


Pity they don't give the dimensions on the new six cell MLS, it would be interesting to compare sizewise with Mk 41. But it looks small enough that there may be little advantage left for ExLS with quadpacked CAMM if you don't otherwise have Mk 41 aboard.

ETA: Comparing pics, if the mushroom caps have retained the same size, then it looks like they've increased the missiles/area by over 50% compared with the Type 23 installation. It's at least 50% because they've effectively slotted a third missile between each pair, and it could be more because that circular flange at the head of each tube appears significantly smaller in comparison to the mushroom cap in the new installation - in fact it's almost the same size. It also looks like they've abandoned slanting the missiles outboard, possibly because of greater confidence in the system, and likely because with a modular unit that's 3 by 2 you don't know if it'll be long side outboard or short side.
 
Last edited:

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,795
Reaction score
1,518
Presumably using Sea Ceptor for closer targets would also free Sampson channels for Aster 30 to allow both to be used simultaneously?

Sea Ceptor won't be using Sampson channels. It's guidance is from a seperate 2-way datalink, used exclusively for Sea Ceptor, the target location provided through this by the CMS gets the missile close enough to go active.
But it will be using PAAMS target data via it's own datalink and that data will come from radars.
 

timmymagic

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
123
Reaction score
246
But it will be using PAAMS target data via it's own datalink and that data will come from radars.

The radar can track over 2000 targets. With active seeker missiles you don't need the same fidelity, you just need to get them to within 3km and the active seeker will take over.
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,795
Reaction score
1,518
More likely to be 2048 ;)

Yes indeed the beauty of ARH SAMs is there's no TIR giving the target a powerful warning signal as it illuminates it.
 

AN/AWW-14(V)

ACCESS: Granted
Senior Member
Joined
May 18, 2019
Messages
476
Reaction score
968
Image-4-MBDA%E2%80%99s-Common-Anti-air-Modular-Missile-CAMM.jpg


According to information published by the British Ministry of Defense on November 18, 2021, Poland and the United Kingdom will collaborate to develop NAREW, Poland’s future Ground-Based Air Defence System with the delivery of CAMM (Common Anti-air Modular Missile) air defense missile system to Poland.

A landmark agreement has been reached between the British Defence Secretary Ben Wallace and Polish Defence Minister Mariusz Błaszczak to cooperate on Poland’s future air defense system. A first for the UK-Poland relationship, the Statement of Intent will see the two countries share pioneering technology to develop NAREW, Poland’s future Ground-Based Air Defence System, which is anticipated to have a multi-billion-pound budget.

 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,795
Reaction score
1,518
The banner says "first order for production of CAMM and Brimstone missiles components in Poland"

On the matter of getting a missile in range of it's ARH seeker. It needs be born in mind the less time/effort needed to actually aquire the target once in range of the seeker reduces the risk of failure.
 

Similar threads

Top