No, I didn't. And I wouldn't believe it anyway.Lord Jim wrote:But didn't you hear, the RN has decided that naval gunnery can more than make up for the lack of AShM.
RN anti-ship missiles
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
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…
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…
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
It is also the first working day after 29 MarchLord Jim wrote:Oh well April 1st is still a few weeks off.
... so that all companies that have made contingency plans and moved sizeable parts of their operations will be told "JUST KIDDING"
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
Has anything been heard regarding the interim replacement for the Harpoon for the Royal Navy? We could do with something being brought into service sooner rather than latter surely?
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
Given the current Gulf situation when does Sea Venom become operational with Wildcats?
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5624
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5624
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
Still think RBS 15 Mk-3 would be a good stop gap as this could give both T-45 and T-31 a anti ship and land attack capability out to 300kmLord Jim wrote:Has anything been heard regarding the interim replacement for the Harpoon for the Royal Navy? We could do with something being brought into service sooner rather than latter surely?
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
HAs anyone seen any info on a possible ship launched version of the Sea Venom, like we did for the Sea Skua?
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
Thales on Track with FASGW(L) / LMM / Martlet Program for Royal Navy’s Wildcat Helicopters
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... licopters/Thales recently conducted firing trials at Royal Artillery Air Defence Range at Manorbier as part of the Integration testing phase of the Future Anti Surface Guided Weapon (Light), (FASGW(L) programme.
The FASGW(L) programme includes testing of all parts of the weapon system including the Lightweight Multirole Missile (LMM), the launcher system and all key equipment of the Wildcat helicopter.
The LMM, which the Royal Navy will call Martlet when it enters service in 2020, will provide an enhanced level of protection for both service personnel in the Royal Navy and vital assets at sea, such as the Queen Elizabeth Carrier.
The trials consisted of 6 LMMs being fired from the Thales designed Launcher system at a small boat target at sea at a distance of 4.5kms. All missiles were test rounds with no warhead, but were fitted with telemetry software enabling data to be gathered to analyse the launcher, the guidance system and missile performance.
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
Can't find a great deal of info on that, but they do seem to suggest they have that option. Under 'maritime superiortiy' download sea venom data sheet, see very last sentence.Lord Jim wrote:HAs anyone seen any info on a possible ship launched version of the Sea Venom, like we did for the Sea Skua?
https://www.mbda-systems.com/product/sea-venom-anl/
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3247
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
Sea Skua was sold in a canister version, but to my knowledge only Kuwait bought it. Which was a surprise as the Sea Skua was by far the most sensible (and in all probability most effective) anti ship missile for small craft out there. I suspect that MBDA will only develop a canister version if someone pony's up the cash to pay for it up front, can't see them developing one on company funds. A VL Sea Venom is I suspect in the realms of fantasy. If you've got the space for a VL, you've got the space for a larger canister missile like NSM.jonas wrote:Can't find a great deal of info on that, but they do seem to suggest they have that option. Under 'maritime superiortiy' download sea venom data sheet, see very last sentence.
https://www.mbda-systems.com/product/sea-venom-anl/
I'd be astonished if the RN doesn't pick the Harpoon II, II+ or II-ER. Anything else would make no sense. A comparatively straightforward upgrade, combat systems will work, canister rails already exist and are mounted on ships, contractual relationship is already there (and thats a big deal), weapons depots equipped to deal with it. etc etc etc. The only real question is which version? Which would be dependent on whether the RN goes for new builds or a re-build of their existing stocks (which would depend on their current condition).Tempest414 wrote:Still think RBS 15 Mk-3 would be a good stop gap as this could give both T-45 and T-31 a anti ship and land attack capability out to 300km
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5624
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
I agree with what you say and RBS-15 is not going to happen I just like the idea that RBS-15 would allow sea and land attack out to 300 km it would be a big capability jump for T-45 and T-31
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5597
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
I'm afraid SPEAR3 has some overlap with SeaVenom. As I like to see SPEAR3 in ExLS as UK-lead small-but-mutiple ASM capability, I think it is better to focus on SPEAR3.
On the Harpoon replacement, I agree Harpoon Blk II+ is highly possible. But, as I understand, it lacks stealth capability as well as terminal agility, maneuver to avoid (simple) CIWS hit. Isn't it worth considering? And, as such, how about NSMs?
So-called Perseus is, even in current plan, "a decade beyond". And we all know, super-sonic ASM is very very technically challenging. Assuming no delay in its development is just irresponsible point of view. So, the interim SSM will be RN's "sole SSM" at least for 15 years. As replacing it with Perseus will also take at least a half a decade, at least for 20 years the SSM will be there. I'm afraid even longer. So, it is NOT interim, it is replacement.
Anyway, I think Harpoon II+ and NSM will be the good candidates.
On the Harpoon replacement, I agree Harpoon Blk II+ is highly possible. But, as I understand, it lacks stealth capability as well as terminal agility, maneuver to avoid (simple) CIWS hit. Isn't it worth considering? And, as such, how about NSMs?
So-called Perseus is, even in current plan, "a decade beyond". And we all know, super-sonic ASM is very very technically challenging. Assuming no delay in its development is just irresponsible point of view. So, the interim SSM will be RN's "sole SSM" at least for 15 years. As replacing it with Perseus will also take at least a half a decade, at least for 20 years the SSM will be there. I'm afraid even longer. So, it is NOT interim, it is replacement.
Anyway, I think Harpoon II+ and NSM will be the good candidates.
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
SPEAR3 and SeaVenom are very different weapons, they have totally different guidance methods, very different ranges, and one has a far bigger warhead.
Importantly SeaVenom can be launched in a complex environment because the operator gets a video feed from the missile to reduce misidentification events.
Importantly SeaVenom can be launched in a complex environment because the operator gets a video feed from the missile to reduce misidentification events.
@LandSharkUK
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5597
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
Uhm, not so sure. 50 kg vs 100 kg, range is both 100 vs 150 km, warhead differs but only by twice or so. Guidance do differ, but having imaging guidance version of SPEAR3 will be easy (with current imaging analysis technologies' rapid improvements) ? My point is, does it worth developing BOTH "VL-SeaVenom" and "VL-SPEAR3" ? I think VL-SPEAR3 will be more interesting...shark bait wrote:SPEAR3 and SeaVenom are very different weapons, they have totally different guidance methods, very different ranges, and one has a far bigger warhead.
Importantly SeaVenom can be launched in a complex environment because the operator gets a video feed from the missile to reduce misidentification events.
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
Although the following article is now a few months old, I can't see that it has been posted on here. It's a long read but does show the complexity of the situation as a whole. Part 3 [future issues to resolve] is interesting :-
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/c ... 107102.htm
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/c ... 107102.htm
-
- Retired Site Admin
- Posts: 2657
- Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
Sea Venom is what range, sorry? I've only ever seen 20km listed for it. Has there been new information?donald_of_tokyo wrote:range is both 100 vs 150 km
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
MBDA list the range of Sea Venom as 20+ Km but I cannot see it being as much as stated above. Looking at their website though it is amazing how many missile systems the group has in production covering a multitude of roles.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5597
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
Thanks. Sorry I mistaken the range.
But I do feel 20 km is not enough. For example, CAMM can reach 40 km easily for a slow moving target like helicopter. You do not need high kinetic energy to engage slow targets, and modern SAM can use fuel efficient ballistic tragectory.
May be it has longer range, as noted as 20 km”+”?
But I do feel 20 km is not enough. For example, CAMM can reach 40 km easily for a slow moving target like helicopter. You do not need high kinetic energy to engage slow targets, and modern SAM can use fuel efficient ballistic tragectory.
May be it has longer range, as noted as 20 km”+”?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5597
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
20 km is well above the horizon.
Also SeaVenom uses 2-way datalink. Is it over the horizon capable?
Also, the helicopter need to spot the enemy, and this cannot be over the horizon.
Also SeaVenom uses 2-way datalink. Is it over the horizon capable?
Also, the helicopter need to spot the enemy, and this cannot be over the horizon.
-
- Retired Site Admin
- Posts: 2657
- Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
Only if you're facing a single enemy with absolutely no support.jimthelad wrote:Range of SAM's is irrelevant if you are below the radar horizon.
The moment they have any AEW, ranging craft, high mounted radar, air support...
It feels like a "bully" missile. Worthwhile only against those who don't come ready for a fight, like the 1991 naval "battles" with the Iraqi navy. Worthwhile in the inventory, but hardly a game changer.
It's surprising it's not longer ranged, given larger missiles have been fitted on helos.
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
Expect the range to be much more than 20km, just like Sea Skua was. There is no way the RN would put a manned helicopter that close.
@LandSharkUK
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
Remember what its intended targets are, the same as Sea Skua, FACs and other small craft, not Escort sized Warships. Its effective range is supposed to be greater than Sea Skua and has a more effective form of guidance compared to the SARH (I think that is the right acronym) of the former. LMM is great for Light craft like those being used by the IRG in the Gulf at the moment. Sea Venom is not in the same class as weapons like Exocet or Harpoon, as can be carried by larger helicopters like the Sea King, but it is much better than Hellfire used by some navies on platforms like the SH-60.
Re: RN anti-ship missiles
Sharing our latest piece here. Article not by me, credits go to Yannick Smaldore. Apparently, "ThinkDefence" liked it.
Will the French-British FC/ASW Missile Program Survive a Hard Brexit ?
Will the French-British FC/ASW Missile Program Survive a Hard Brexit ?
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... rd-brexit/In March, MBDA announced the end of the Key Review on the Future Cruise/Anti-Ship Weapon program. In June, the company unveiled scale models of different multipurpose missiles that could be linked to the FC/ASW.
Europe’s leading missile producer, however, will be facing challenges in the coming months and years, casting shadows on the future of the entire program.