UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Ground Based Air Defence

Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 1661
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Location: England

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby Caribbean » 20 Apr 2018, 16:00

abc123 wrote:can't reach the UK, like Iranian

abc123 wrote:Iran can build ICBMs and hit the UK


In the light of your second remark, would you like to revise your first remark? :think:
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2264
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby abc123 » 20 Apr 2018, 16:54

Caribbean wrote:
abc123 wrote:can't reach the UK, like Iranian

abc123 wrote:Iran can build ICBMs and hit the UK


In the light of your second remark, would you like to revise your first remark? :think:


If and when Iran builds ICBMs, they will have bigger fish to fry and Asters or SM will not help you very much anyway.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 1661
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Location: England

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby Caribbean » 20 Apr 2018, 20:27

abc123 wrote:Asters or SM will not help you very much anyway.

I'm sure that you are an expert in how to use them
Not
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1491
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby The Armchair Soldier » 26 May 2018, 12:56


Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3624
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby Ron5 » 26 May 2018, 15:46

Both masts extended. One with datalink but what's on the other?

indeid
Member
Posts: 270
Joined: 21 May 2015, 20:46

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby indeid » 26 May 2018, 16:23

Ron5 wrote:Both masts extended. One with datalink but what's on the other?


I’d guess the EO/IR sensor.

It’s an optional extra, which no doubt means we won’t be getting it.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3494
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby Lord Jim » 26 May 2018, 21:02

WE actually might do as it allows the launcher to act autonomously if needed. For the cost, which for optics are far less than they used to be, it would be a no brainer.

indeid
Member
Posts: 270
Joined: 21 May 2015, 20:46

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby indeid » 26 May 2018, 21:20

Lord Jim wrote:WE actually might do as it allows the launcher to act autonomously if needed. For the cost, which for optics are far less than they used to be, it would be a no brainer.


I didn't say we shouldn't get it.....

The initial buy is one thing, including the support, maintaining and training will, I fear, be where the bottom line stops adding up. Maybe if the task expands beyond the Falklands to contingency it will become a fairly easy argument to get the cash to add it on.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3494
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby Lord Jim » 27 May 2018, 02:22

I know you were not implying we shouldn't get it, in fact your initial point is one I usually make where the UK doesn't fully equip platforms to save relatively small amounts, but which greatly affects the ability of said platforms to be utilised fully. As I said having the EO capability should be a no brainer, but there are many in the MoD and DE&S who seem to be lacking that particular organ.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3624
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby Ron5 » 27 May 2018, 15:05

So why would they be testing a configuration the customer is not getting?

Little J
Member
Posts: 570
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby Little J » 27 May 2018, 15:36

To sell to others?

indeid
Member
Posts: 270
Joined: 21 May 2015, 20:46

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby indeid » 27 May 2018, 15:49

Ron5 wrote:So why would they be testing a configuration the customer is not getting?


Why not have it there? If it wasn’t used for targeting it’s presence has no effect on a firing System Test, even if it was for acceptance. MBDA could have requested to bolt it on either to gain data for future use, to showcase the capability or even to provide evidence for a MOD option submission.

Live missile tests are going to be rare for this kit, especially opposed to Rapier, so grabbing as much as you can from every serial is vital.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3624
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby Ron5 » 27 May 2018, 17:32

Color me dubious.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10902
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 27 May 2018, 21:11

We are now on a double number of pages (for this topic) as compared to where these quotes come from. Just to give the "game" away I think the EO is an optional extra (for us) as in Europe you would need to be able to counter undetected attack helos, popping up from behind the treetops. To elaborate:

indeid wrote: you need at least the Radar and the Launcher to make it work. The C2 system adding networking and making it an area weapon.

- only this kind of redundancy, built in, makes the system survivable
- and the loss of "esteem" of radar-homing missiles within the world of SEAD is also explained by the same fact: networked radars do frequency hopping and can switch on and off... if you still succeed getting one, the firing unit will be unaffected. And getting

indeid wrote:Also, if it's replacing Rapier isn't that just for the Falklands?

- not many trees there :o Not to mention attack helos hovering in their cover.

indeid wrote:The same Regiment also has the air surveillance battery with the rest of the G-AMB radars.

- so, with an additional order (for more trucks, with canisters carried in the back) we are all set
- train the Reserves already now? Then you meet the requirement as stated below:
ArmChairCivvy wrote: if you think of a bde's sphere of influence being 70 km (for simplicity, a radius) then you might have assets quite dispersed, and in need of defending.


indeid wrote:giving you the local only picture, direct radar to launcher connection and no networking.

+
Ron5 wrote:a slimmed down control can be added to the radar or launcher truck in lieu of the TOC dedicated truck.

The two above provide resilience (you know, these enhanced EW capabilities of the Ruskies, only recently recognised). Cfr.
indeid wrote:The EO mode on Rapier is great as it is passive


So back to the opening topic:
ArmChairCivvy wrote:a launch site would need either a gun-based point defence (which we do not have) or a distributed MANPAD zone around it, not to be taken out by tree top skimming attack helos.

ArmChairCivvy wrote:a remotely operated, lightweight 25mm gun can counter air or ground targets, Boeing said. [I.e. it is there for any surprises "popping up"] and that's why the company has the module as an option on their AFPS


indeid wrote: CAMM it uses high update rate Air Surveillance radars to in effect act as the Fire Control. So there is only one radar instead of two, and since its one level of service you can do wide-area surveillance while guiding the missile to look in its search box.

+
ArmChairCivvy wrote:you can network umpteen CAMM-L trucks to one... if you don't worry about resilience


The inroads active-seeker missiles are making in GBADS explained, add the networked radars (the element "easiest to get to" by the attacker, but not all of them in one go, anyway) and the need to think about the threat from an other class of hostile "assets"... the rotary ones.
- the quote about the training intensity of EO guidance systems is missing - the point must have been made on a different page - but put that together with
A. we can only just afford enough units to get Rapier out of inventory, but we are doing so by building on the capabilities of a radar we would need to have anyway
B. that the focus in the use of both systems is [for now] the Falklands, and
C. the threat of war in Europe -though on a rising trend - is not imminent... so let's get started and do the optional extras & do the related training as the next step

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3494
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby Lord Jim » 28 May 2018, 02:16

As pointed out we are buying the bare minimum of these systems, enough for one small Regiment to allow Rapier to be retired (A mistake but the bean counters will save any money they can). With the deployment down in the Falklands, overkill is you ask me given the current state of the possible threat and that 4 Typhoons are also there, and we will have barely enough to either defend northern UK installations from possible attack or provide cover for key locations of a Brigade level deployment. Local air defence will be down to Starstreak MANPADS, which is very good at engaging targets that suddenly appear, that is what it was designed for, be they helos of fast movers, hence the speed of the missile. In theory with the datalinks and of we were to purchase additional radars, having learnt lesson for the unit in the Falklands, it should be no difficulty in networking these in. We could have done a lot more with Land Ceptor/Sabre, but the money wasn't there but at least something is actually entering service.

Little J
Member
Posts: 570
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby Little J » 28 May 2018, 08:04

So do we think EO will be an UOR, they just don't want to say so at the moment?

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10902
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 28 May 2018, 09:27

Little J wrote:So do we think EO will be an UOR


Likely... and the training will be done in the last minute. Expending all of the inventory of missiles :?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3494
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby Lord Jim » 29 May 2018, 02:24

From experience, many project offices have a wish/to do list on the platforms they look after, with the aim of using UORs to carry these out when the situation arises. It is an unofficial part of the Through Life Management Plan, but if insufficient time is allowed to get the kit in to the hands of the troops then serious problems arise. That was one factor in the build up to GW2 that causes so many problems, with the MoD begging the Government to allow them to get the process moving but being denied on mainly political grounds. It can work and has done in the past but is a gamble.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10902
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 12 Jun 2018, 05:58

Taking stock, more than a moth back the dispersal of the batteries of 16 RA across many countries was noted, the number of batteries that could be kitted out with the newer missiles was speculated on (even all versions of Giraffe were counted together, to get an idea where the missile firing units would effectively max out in number, even though the Giraffes are used for more than just GBAD). So, where are we at?

GBAD strategy is still about giving some level of protection to deployed forces. Layers exist (MANPAD, SP platform, limited area defence) but numbers for other than MANPADs are very low within the layered defences.

However, our bases are wide open to anything more threatening than perimeter intrusions. On the latter account, a plane spotter who was after the F-35s did recently distribute the photo, for the press to dwelve on, of the 5 ft garden-type fence that provides security for the £100+ mln a/c on the tarmac :wtf:

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1964
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby Gabriele » 12 Jun 2018, 09:15

On the latter account, a plane spotter who was after the F-35s did recently distribute the photo, for the press to dwelve on, of the 5 ft garden-type fence that provides security for the £100+ mln a/c on the tarmac


Marham is also without a resident RAF Regiment squadron as well, but they have effectively loaned 15 Sqn in the last several months. Think a permanent move will follow, eventually, just like they recently moved II Sqn to Brize Norton for permanent air mobility security taskings.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10902
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 12 Jun 2018, 09:35

Gabriele wrote:Brize Norton for permanent air mobility security taskings.


Does anyone happen to know of the "specialisms" that the different RAF Rgmnts might have?
- the NRBC role was short lived; hope something was left behind to help maintain base security also against non-kinetic (denial) attacks

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3494
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby Lord Jim » 12 Jun 2018, 15:22

I believe the RAF Regiment has lost most of its specialisations and is now a Light Infantry Base Security force equipped with Land Rovers and a number of Panthers. The Army is tasked with Airfield repairs etc. There might be some EOD sub units though still within the regiment.

downsizer
Member
Posts: 784
Joined: 02 May 2015, 08:03

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby downsizer » 12 Jun 2018, 15:47

RAF Regt don’t do EOD, 5131 BD Sqn do.

II Sqn still has a para capability, but aside from that they are all standard field sqns.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10902
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 12 Jun 2018, 17:03

downsizer wrote:II Sqn still has a para capability, but aside from that they are all standard field sqns.


Thanks, about what I had been "made" to believe.

Lord Jim wrote: The Army is tasked with Airfield repairs

How inefficient would it be, to create a specialised engineering branch within what, already, is a small service?

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1964
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: Ground Based Air Defence

Postby Gabriele » 12 Jun 2018, 18:25

1 and 34 Sqn are light armour, wheeled with Foxhound (and Panther and RWIMIKs).

II Sqn now is in Brize Norton to provide force protection team to air mobility flights, full time. I'm not sure whether their parachute capability will stay, at this point. A squadron is already small, and the air mobility flights happen all the time, so...

15 Sqn has effectively been on Marham guard duty for a while, although also doing other things here and there.

26 Sqn has been merged into 27 as CBRN mission return to the army takes shape. Last i heard, 28 Royal Engineer to be stood up next year to take over the counter CBRN role. At the moment, FALCON Sqn RTR already responds to 22 Royal Engineer in a rather confused command structure, but anyway it seems Engineers will take the lead.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum


Return to “British Army”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests