UK Defence Forum

Great stuff but why not do the silo upgrade simultaneously?

Dahedd wrote: ↑15 Apr 2022, 09:06 Great stuff but why not do the silo upgrade simultaneously?

Different projects, different contractors, different lead times?

It also might not be ready to be integrated in the Type 45.

It will be interesting to see who finishes the PIP first on Dragon and Daring

Competition is a wonderful thing ! . Who builds best, fastest & cheapest gets the next contract ? .……. Whay a revolutionary” idea, perhaps it could be used (re-used) for Warship construction.

I hope they don't add in a souvenir shop down there, like the one in HMS Victory....

"Britain is set to become the first European nation to operate a 'Maritime Ballistic Missile Defence' capability that can detect and destroy anti-ship ballistic missiles. An initial contract worth £300m has been signed with MBDA. The upgraded defence system, using the ASTER 30 Block 1 missile previously used only in French and Italian land systems, will help UK forces combat the increasing threats posed by anti-ship ballistic missiles at sea by developing the missile into a maritime variant.

According to the Ministry of Defence here, the UK is set to become the first European nation to operate a Maritime Ballistic Missile Defence capability that can detect and destroy Anti-Ship Ballistic Missiles as it commits to a significant upgrade of Britain’s fleet of Type 45 destroyers."

https://des.mod.uk/type-45-destroyers-r ... t-upgrade/

Good news hopefully this doesn't require another dry docking. (or at least get the work done at the same time as CAAM is added)

which will include converting existing missiles to the ASTER 30 Block 1 standard, as well as updates to the SAMPSON multi-function radar (MFR) and Sea Viper command and control missile system, under the full Sea Viper Evolution programme.

Hopefully this includes all of our Aster 15 missiles as well. (converting them to a Aster 30 missile)

My only question is when will this be operational,mid 2030s another 10yrs time ?

Is my understanding correct, the £300 million contract placed with MBDA, not BAE, is for updating the BAE Sampson radar BAE C2?

Its a repeat announcement of the signing of the 9th July 2021 contract for the Aster 30 Blk 1NT missiles July 2021 with OCCAR (Organization Conjointe de Coopération en matière d’ARmement)/ Eurosam, the Franco-Italian consortium manufactuer of Asters and SAMP/Ts, the UK half life upgrading of the Aster 30s will be carried out at the Defense Munitions, Gosport.

PS The Aster 30 max range quoted against BMDs 35 km, presume Block 1NT might marginally improve on the range.

Is it Block 1NT or just Block 1? as the article doesn't mention NT.

Edit: Just Block 1

From Navy Lookout

https://www.navylookout.com/royal-navy- ... apability/

Existing UK stocks of Aster missiles will be upgraded to Block 1 standard at the Munition Maintenance Installation Facility at Gosport. This involves new guidance software and electronics to enable the interception of ballistic missiles and a new dual AAW/BMD warhead to enhance the probability of Kill (pK) upon intercept.

Seems like a good balance between upgrading the missiles and getting them into service.

Jdam wrote: ↑24 May 2022, 17:28 NT or just Block 1? as the article doesn't mention NT.

Edit: Just Block 1

From Navy Lookout

Can we (?) put this together (as sensor-shooter) with the US FMS new radar contract?

I know the Navy Lookout article was discussed yesterday. But the Royal Navy article below mentioned that Sea Ceptor would "significantly bolster" it ability to defend against "fast moving craft"

To me that sounds as if RN not serious about Martlett if using Sea Ceptor for that task.

https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-l ... -sea-viper

I think its the way forward, a lot of weapons are going to be dual use. No longer will one missile be just for aircraft or anti ship, alot of going to be able to do both. (or try to do both)

Martlet is still going to be important for Wildcat's.

wargame_insomniac wrote: ↑25 May 2022, 18:46
To me that sounds as if RN not serious about Martlett

When were they ever serious about Martlett? One trial was carried out on HMS Sutherland where they strapped a prototype Wildcat launcher to the side of one of the DS30 mounts.

This was then hyped up on this forum and other comment sites as it being confirmed that is was production ready and to be fitted to all RN vessels including the top secret up gunned 200m long Samson fitted River Batch 5 OPVs.

There is only going to be ONE of those 200m River Batch 5 OPVs (The National Flagship) !

wargame_insomniac wrote: ↑25 May 2022, 18:46 I know the Navy Lookout article was discussed yesterday. But the Royal Navy article below mentioned that Sea Ceptor would "significantly bolster" it ability to defend against "fast moving craft"

Great news. Are there any "official" confirmation before this, it has always been a "future possibility".

To me that sounds as if RN not serious about Martlett if using Sea Ceptor for that task.

Not sure. At first glance, I also though the same as you do. But, the two missiles are completely different class. CAMM is much more comparable to Sea Venom. And Wildcat has LMM and Sea Venom, which means CAMM and LMM is not a direct rival.

PS Actually, I was looking for a possibility of canister launched (and extended range with rather large booster) Sea Venom, as a near future addition option to T31 and T26. No overlap with FC/ASW in capability, while good target identification and 2-way datalink-based man-in-the-loop option (critycal for gray-zone ROE) will be provided.

CAMM is anti-surface mode can, potentially, have very long range (because it does not need high manuevability in its terminal phase), say, up to 40-50 km, but other issues, like data link and IFF, may define the range.

ArmChairCivvy wrote: ↑24 May 2022, 18:02

Jdam wrote: ↑24 May 2022, 17:28 NT or just Block 1? as the article doesn't mention NT.

Edit: Just Block 1

From Navy Lookout

Can we (?) put this together (as sensor-shooter) with the US FMS new radar contract?

What FMS contract was this? The one for the new land installation?

ETH wrote: ↑27 May 2022, 14:34

ArmChairCivvy wrote: ↑24 May 2022, 18:02

Jdam wrote: ↑24 May 2022, 17:28 NT or just Block 1? as the article doesn't mention NT.

Edit: Just Block 1

From Navy Lookout

Can we (?) put this together (as sensor-shooter) with the US FMS new radar contract?

What FMS contract was this? The one for the new land installation?

Yes... and as always, not quite yet a contract

I suppose it would be technically possible but do we really want to waste T45s having them bobbing around at sea on station.
Aren't there six Arleigh Burkes stationed at Rota on BMD duties to keep two on patrol.

Type 45s patrolling the coast to defend the mainland is pure fantasy. Even with Block 1/1NT it's only terminal defence with a *ground range* of around 10km. So unless you put one in the Thames it won't be much use. Same goes for sea skimmer defence, except this time it's radar horizon as the limiting factor.

Ignoring the fact any scenario where the UK needs to be defended from BMs is grounds for nuclear deterrent anyways...

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british ... ask-force/

In that article there is a link to:

https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-l ... the-baltic

"Defender leads the US Navy’s USS Porter and USNS W.McLean, Sweden’s HSwMS Nykoping and HSwMS Helsingborg, plus Lithuania’s LNS Dzūkas and Finland’s FNS Uusimaa in her CTF 64 role. "