Starstreak HVM

Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Starstreak HVM

Post by shark bait »

Image

Starstreak is a British short range Man-portable air-defense system (MANPADS) manufactured by Thales Air Defence (formerly Shorts Missile Systems), in Belfast. It is also known as Starstreak HVM (High Velocity Missile). After launch, the missile accelerates to more than Mach 4,making it the fastest short-range surface-to-air missile in the world.[5] It then launches three laser beam riding submunitions, increasing the likelihood of a successful hit on the target. Starstreak has been in service with the British Army since 1997. In 2012 Thales rebranded the system under the ForceSHIELD banner.

Three stages;
  • 1. Ejects the missile from the tube, lanyard attached, 10hz spin
  • 2. Lanyard pulls a pin out, which ignites the second stage accelerating the missile to mach 3+ in a couple of secconds, 35hz spin.
  • 3. Three separate darts are released and glide 6+km to the target at high speed. This is the only stage that is guided. Laser guidance is provided by the launcher.
@LandSharkUK

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by marktigger »

tracking the target would be a major issue and TBH a blast fragmentation like javelin had might be a better option against a missile. I think LMM has gone back to an explosive warhead.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by shark bait »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:If yes, is StarStreak SAM capable to shoot down ASMs, better than (canonical) 76mm super-rapid? (question-4a)
Then how compared to 76 mm DART ? (question-4b)
Interesting question, its indented for use against low flying aircraft such as helicopters and UAV's, even light vehicles. They even trialed it launching from an Apache years ago.

I doubt its ever been used in the missile defence role because the minimum distance is close to the range of antitank weapons after detection time. That wouldn't be the problem in the maritime domain though, and with time delayed darts it stands a better chance of making a hit.

Can any one confirm if its every been tried?
@LandSharkUK

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

There was a SeaStreak idea, but remained to be just a concept.
Actually I see it frequently in 1990s, it was on the Horizon Frigates image for a while.

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/i ... pic=6477.0

I have no idea, if there was any trial against ASM (-like) targets.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by marktigger »

the darts hitting a small vessel at Mach3 would be interesting but I suspect they'd punch straight through.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by marktigger »

from wikipedia the warhead goes back to Blowpipe its Blast Fragmentation/shaped charge so Impact and proximity fuse settings. wonder will it still be RDX/TNT

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by mr.fred »

marktigger wrote:from wikipedia the warhead goes back to Blowpipe its Blast Fragmentation/shaped charge so Impact and proximity fuse settings. wonder will it still be RDX/TNT
What, Starstreak? No, it's three darts with a small internal charge in each which breaks the dart up after it hits the target. It's designed to work on aircraft so it would probably function on most boats, but since there is far more dead space in a boat than an aircraft, there will be minimal chance of doing any damage.
That would seem to be one of the reasons LMM (using similar guidance and launcher) uses a unitary warhead rather than submunitions.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

I do not quite follow what you all mean by "fragmenting warhead", but in official Thales brochure, it is written as...

The STARStreak hittiles are designed to defeat both heavily armoured and light skin aerial targets. On penetrating the targets the hittiles will inflict high levels of kinetic energy damage and each hittile also has a fragmenting warhead which detonates inside the target to maximise lethality.

I read; it do not have Proximity fuze, but has fragmenting warhead = powder.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by marktigger »

mr.fred wrote:
marktigger wrote:from wikipedia the warhead goes back to Blowpipe its Blast Fragmentation/shaped charge so Impact and proximity fuse settings. wonder will it still be RDX/TNT
What, Starstreak? No, it's three darts with a small internal charge in each which breaks the dart up after it hits the target. It's designed to work on aircraft so it would probably function on most boats, but since there is far more dead space in a boat than an aircraft, there will be minimal chance of doing any damage.
That would seem to be one of the reasons LMM (using similar guidance and launcher) uses a unitary warhead rather than submunitions.
I was talking about LMM. At least they have recognised that the darts was a dead end and blast fragmentation was'nt flexible enough. Javelin s15 was the way ahead after all

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by Ron5 »

I think Mark had it straight when he said a Starstreak system would have a hard time tracking a missile target. The missile would have to be continuously illuminated by the targeting laser. Very hard to do. Especially from a ship.

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by mr.fred »

The
marktigger wrote:I was talking about LMM. At least they have recognised that the darts was a dead end and blast fragmentation was'nt flexible enough. Javelin s15 was the way ahead after all
I don't think it implies anything of the sort. HVM is a surface to air missile with some surface to surface capability (which is somewhat more than most SAMs have) and the hittile darts are appropriate to that.
The LMM is a surface to surface and air to surface missile which, I'll grant you, is better served by a unitary, HE warhead.

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by mr.fred »

Ron5 wrote:I think Mark had it straight when he said a Starstreak system would have a hard time tracking a missile target. The missile would have to be continuously illuminated by the targeting laser. Very hard to do. Especially from a ship.
It doesn't work like that. The laser doesn't illuminate anything (at least functionally), it just follows the aiming mark and the darts try and stay in the middle of it.
If you can keep the aiming mark on the missile the darts will make their way down the beam to the target. They can't all be dead-centre so there is some dispersion going on which will compensate, to a degree, for aiming errors.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by marktigger »

funny the sales blurb and stuff comming out of Thales indicate LMM will be surface to air to.

On a flat stationary surface Mr Fred I agree but on a platform that is moving in 3 dimensions its a bit more tricky. unless your laser is fully stabilised but you could loose line of sight due to pitching of the platform.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by shark bait »

marktigger wrote:funny the sales blurb and stuff comming out of Thales indicate LMM will be surface to air to.
It's a modular thing, multiple seakers and warheads are envisaged, but I don't think the version the navy are getting will be much good in the surface to air role.

Kind of redundant in that role, I doubt it could ever be as effective as starstreak
@LandSharkUK

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by marktigger »

blast Fragmentation is ggod in SAM and a shaped charge against a Hind or Frogfoot might ruin its day somewhat. Blowpipe had the impact fuze mode for the shaped charge and proximity for Blast Fragmentation and the proximity triggered 3m from the target out to 3K

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by mr.fred »

If the laser isn't stabilised on either HVM or LMM then you'll probably miss, particularly if you're shooting at longer distances.
In the anti-air mode the HVM has the advantage that it's a lot quicker, so the fact that it's a beam rider doesn't hurt it as much. The LMM is going to end up taking a long route to the target and may well miss. The advantage of the simplicity of the beam rider is also a drawback, particularly if the target is fast and the missile is slow, because the missile isn't smart enough to cut the corner. That said, it might be possible to make the guidance system that smart.

A shaped charge would upset a Hind or Frogfoot but not as much as one or more tungsten darts which break up after impact. With a shaped charge that is also blast/frag, most of the warhead mass isn't in the jet. With the dart, it's all in the penetrator.

LMM would probably do a number on an air target, if you can hit it. The same can also be said about most ASM and SSM. For example the Russian Vikhr (another beam rider) is effective against low and slow aircraft and I would imagine that the LMM is similar. By contrast to the LMM the speed of the HVM means it's also effective against fast and fleeting targets. Hitting the attack helicopter before he has fired is the intent for HVM.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by shark bait »

Those drawbacks are acceptable in this case though. If the target is fast then it isn't really the target for starstreak.

Starstreak is for the low and slow, and very effective in that I believe.

For the higher performance targets the army will soon have CAMM which should give them a capable layered defence.
@LandSharkUK

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by mr.fred »

It depends on what you mean by "fast" and "slow".

Regardless, however fast or slow the aerial target set for HVM is, the aerial target set for LMM will be considerably slower and it will need to be in sight for a long, long time for the missile to reach it. HVM, by dint of being much, much faster than LMM, doesn't need as much of a window for engagement.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by shark bait »

yes, detection to maximum range in under 10 seconds.

StarStreak is much more effective than LLM could be, we really don't need it for surface to air.
For surface to surface a dual StarStreak + LLM could be effective against light targets.
@LandSharkUK

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by mr.fred »

It's nice to have the capability to have both on one launcher.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

mr.fred wrote:It's nice to have the capability to have both on one launcher.
Can SeaHawk sigma carry StarStreak? Basically it will be, but I have no info so far saying it.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by Ron5 »

mr.fred wrote:
Ron5 wrote:I think Mark had it straight when he said a Starstreak system would have a hard time tracking a missile target. The missile would have to be continuously illuminated by the targeting laser. Very hard to do. Especially from a ship.
It doesn't work like that. The laser doesn't illuminate anything (at least functionally), it just follows the aiming mark and the darts try and stay in the middle of it.
If you can keep the aiming mark on the missile the darts will make their way down the beam to the target. They can't all be dead-centre so there is some dispersion going on which will compensate, to a degree, for aiming errors.
I think it works exactly like that. I fully understand the that Starstreak does not home on the reflected laser beam but I do understand that both beam riders and SAL require the target to have a laser beam on it for the whole time of the engagement. A very non trivial task for a laser on a ship at sea.

After spending umpty hundreds of millions over a couple of decades, the USN killer laser at sea on USS Ponce is still only claimed too be able to track slow moving UAV's and boats for the necessary fractions of a second time to blow them up. And that's in the calm waters and clear air of the Persian Gulf. The chances of a Starstreak operator tracking an anti-ship missile for the entire engagement on a murky afternoon in the North Sea seem to me to be less than zero.

Apologies in advance if I misunderstood your comment.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Is'nt it the same for SeaWolf? Why SeaWolf can kill ASM?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by Lord Jim »

Starstreak is actually one of the fastest MANPADS and can engage targets moving at high speeds, and one of the few that can engage crossing targets. It is also immune to nearly all countermeasures. What the UK needs to do is upgrade its existing launchers to the THOR standard that can fore not just HVM and LMM but also ATGWs and Precision Guided Rockets.

Tony Williams
Member
Posts: 288
Joined: 06 May 2015, 06:50
Contact:

Re: Starstreak HVM

Post by Tony Williams »

mr.fred wrote:The advantage of the simplicity of the beam rider is also a drawback, particularly if the target is fast and the missile is slow, because the missile isn't smart enough to cut the corner. That said, it might be possible to make the guidance system that smart.
I vaguely recall a radio beam rider from decades ago in which the FCS aimed the beam well ahead of the target so that the missile's trajectory crossed the target's at the right moment. It is actually simpler to achieve this with a command guidance system like beam riding than with any homing system I know of.

Post Reply