Ground Based Air Defence

[Little J]

Quick thought, what about using laser guided SNEB's or HYDRA's for drone defence? Surely a better solution to using Land / Sea Ceptors?

[tomuk]

Quick thought, what about using laser guided SNEB's or HYDRA's for drone defence? Surely a better solution to using Land / Sea Ceptors?

And CVR7 if the guidance kit had happened.

You've got Martlet too from the same stable as Starstreak.

[pko100]

Interesting thread on this subject

Potentially another case of selective memory - I cann't remember Sir Bernard or any senior management in MoD making any fuss when the Networked Enabled Air Defence and Surveillance (NEADS) project was scrapped as part of the re-balancing the budget cuts activity and replaced by the very limited Sky Sabre deployment in the Falklands.

NEADS would have delivered a coherent programme providing C-UAS, CRAM, VSHORAD and SHORAD capabilities and ending the famine or feast approach that usually happens.

[RunningStrong]

Quick thought, what about using laser guided SNEB's or HYDRA's for drone defence? Surely a better solution to using Land / Sea Ceptors?

In a swarm scenario you would struggle to track and lock on multiple targets using laser guidance. If each missile has independent seeker then it's more expensive but you have a better swarm capability.

[Little J]

Very true, but in a swarm scenario do you have enough of your more expensive (and bigger) missiles? Multiple guidance systems could be one option. Maybe the cheap Coyote based ASRAAM system could have the SNEB/HYDRA/CVR7 missiles too, leaving Sky Sabre to the bigger aircraft?

[new guy]

Very true, but in a swarm scenario do you have enough of your more expensive (and bigger) missiles? Multiple guidance systems could be one option. Maybe the cheap Coyote based ASRAAM system could have the SNEB/HYDRA/CVR7 missiles too, leaving Sky Sabre to the bigger aircraft?

ASRAAM is CAMM.

[pko100]

Very true, but in a swarm scenario do you have enough of your more expensive (and bigger) missiles? Multiple guidance systems could be one option. Maybe the cheap Coyote based ASRAAM system could have the SNEB/HYDRA/CVR7 missiles too, leaving Sky Sabre to the bigger aircraft?

ASRAAM is CAMM.

ASRAAM block 6 has been engineered to take the benefits of the modular open architecture design developed for CAMM, so they have parts in common but significant differences like the seeker and soft launch pack.

The missiles used in Ukraine are probably near end of life ASRAAM pre block 6 missiles. In an exercise last year, the RAF fired over 50 ASRAAMs in an exercise instead of throwing them away.

[new guy]

Very true, but in a swarm scenario do you have enough of your more expensive (and bigger) missiles? Multiple guidance systems could be one option. Maybe the cheap Coyote based ASRAAM system could have the SNEB/HYDRA/CVR7 missiles too, leaving Sky Sabre to the bigger aircraft?

ASRAAM is CAMM.

ASRAAM block 6 has been engineered to take the benefits of the modular open architecture design developed for CAMM, so they have parts in common but significant differences like the seeker and soft launch pack.

The missiles used in Ukraine are probably near end of life ASRAAM pre block 6 missiles. In an exercise last year, the RAF fired over 50 ASRAAMs in an exercise instead of throwing them away.

Yeah, the only reason used ASRAAM was because we were disposing a bunch of them. It has no advantage in cost or utility over CAMM and in many ways suchh as the ones you have listed they the same. A better way for me to have phrased it would be
CAMM is Ground ASRAAM. CAMM was developed from ASRAAM after all.

[Little J]

ASRAAM is CAMM.

I was referring to the vehicle configuration rather than the missile, I should have made that clearer

[new guy]

ASRAAM is CAMM.

I was referring to the vehicle configuration rather than the missile, I should have made that clearer

fair enough

[Markam]

I noticed something last year from BAE (could not see it in previous posts); a land based Bofors 40mm on a 8x8 Truck (eg the same truck used by Archer) or ATV, same gun as the ones being put on the Type 31.

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/land ... naval-gun/

I assume it is designed primarily for anti drone, using the 3P ammo:



Navylookout did a detailed article on the gun for naval use;

https://www.navylookout.com/in-focus-th ... -frigates/

An interesting idea to be sure and it would share ammo.

[NickC]

Surprised France deploying UK missile, though it is built by French company, Thales in N.I.

[mr.fred]

The missile in service with France in the MANPADS role is Mistral, which is heat-seeking. Startreak (and Martlet) are command to line of sight guided and as such somewhat more capable against drones. So possibly that?

[Ron5]

The missile in service with France in the MANPADS role is Mistral, which is heat-seeking. Startreak (and Martlet) are command to line of sight guided and as such somewhat more capable against drones. So possibly that?

Martlet is a Navy air to ground missile. I think you mean LMM.

Very similar missiles tho.

[new guy]

Martlet is a Navy air to ground missile. I think you mean LMM.

Very similar missiles tho.

No. One and the same. Marlet is just it's designation.

[mr.fred]

Martlet is a Navy air to ground missile. I think you mean LMM.

I meant Martlet.

Very similar missiles tho.

So similar as to be identical. It's like pulling someone up for calling a particular aircraft a Lightning and saying "Actually it's a JSF"

Thinking on it for a second further, why not also pull me up for calling it Starstreak when it's HVM?

[Ron5]

Martlet is a Navy name for a Navy air to ground missile in Navy service. LMM is the name the Army uses for its surface to air missile. Please keep up.

[mr.fred]

Martlet is a Navy name for a Navy air to ground missile in Navy service. LMM is the name the Army uses for its surface to air missile. Please keep up.

It's the same missile.
If you're going to be that petty you should also have picked up that Starstreak is not the name that the Army uses either.

[Ron5]

Martlet is a Navy name for a Navy air to ground missile in Navy service. LMM is the name the Army uses for its surface to air missile. Please keep up.

It's the same missile.
If you're going to be that petty you should also have picked up that Starstreak is not the name that the Army uses either.

Actually you called it "Startreak" so a double no, no.

[Caribbean]

It's the Lightweight Multirole Missile. The RN calls it Martlet.
So far demonstrated in surface-to-air, air-to-surface, surface-to-surface and air-to-air modes.
All the same missile, using the same laser-beam riding guidance tech as Starstreak. Other guidance methods have been proposed

[mr.fred]

Actually you called it "Startreak" so a double no, no.

So I did. A typographical error that is probably more egregious than calling a missile by a name rather than an initialisation that describes the same item.

Does any of that alter the reasoning for deploying UK MANPADS to defend the French Olympics in place of French ones?
While the article calls it Starstreak they probably mean the Lightweight Multiple Launcher which can launch either HVM or LMM (Starstreak or Martlet) and both benefit from the beam rider CLOS guidance system. Of the two missiles, Martlet is more likely to be used since its proximity fused explosive warhead is more likely to hit small drones and the large tungsten darts of Starstreak are more likely to pose a collateral damage risk if they miss (or even if they hit). Martlet could be set to self-destruct to render it into small, high-drag low-mass fragments, while the Starstreak darts are rather dense and likely to keep going with some energy even when self-destructed.

[Timmymagic]

Martlet is a Navy name for a Navy air to ground missile in Navy service. LMM is the name the Army uses for its surface to air missile. Please keep up.

It's the same missile.
If you're going to be that petty you should also have picked up that Starstreak is not the name that the Army uses either.

Just to be clear....Martlet is not a missile. LMM is the missile.

Martlet refers to the Wildcat/LMM capability according the Navy...i.e. the system as a whole. A Wildcat armed with LMM becomes Martlet...obviously the names hark back to the Grumman F4F fighter names in RN service in WW2...

However, they have made mistakes themselves on this in PR/Social Media posts...

[mr.fred]

Martlet refers to the Wildcat/LMM capability according the Navy...i.e. the system as a whole. A Wildcat armed with LMM becomes Martlet...obviously the names hark back to the Grumman F4F fighter names in RN service in WW2...

First time I've seen that claim anywhere.
The manufacturer seems to think that the missile is called Martlet:
https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/united-k ... any-domain
And it's widely used.
What I take from that is that making the distinction is a jargon thing and adds nothing to the discussion. If it is even a distinction used anywhere.
It would be a cute distinction though.

[Timmymagic]

Martlet refers to the Wildcat/LMM capability according the Navy...i.e. the system as a whole. A Wildcat armed with LMM becomes Martlet...obviously the names hark back to the Grumman F4F fighter names in RN service in WW2...

First time I've seen that claim anywhere.
The manufacturer seems to think that the missile is called Martlet:
https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/united-k ... any-domain
And it's widely used.
What I take from that is that making the distinction is a jargon thing and adds nothing to the discussion. If it is even a distinction used anywhere.
It would be a cute distinction though.

It wouldn't be the first time that a naming convention goes awry...

MBDA Spear being called Spear 3 is the most obvious example...

[tomuk]

Martlet refers to the Wildcat/LMM capability according the Navy...i.e. the system as a whole. A Wildcat armed with LMM becomes Martlet...obviously the names hark back to the Grumman F4F fighter names in RN service in WW2...

First time I've seen that claim anywhere.
The manufacturer seems to think that the missile is called Martlet:
https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/united-k ... any-domain
And it's widely used.
What I take from that is that making the distinction is a jargon thing and adds nothing to the discussion. If it is even a distinction used anywhere.
It would be a cute distinction though.

It wouldn't be the first time that a naming convention goes awry...

MBDA Spear being called Spear 3 is the most obvious example...

You mean the missile that has been developed to meet Select Precision Effects At Range Capability 3 requirement.

It isn't unusual for unofficial or development names to stick.

Outside of the military world as an example you have the range of old Rover Cars, P4, P5, P6 and SD1. The were sold as Rover 110, Rover 3500, Rover 2000TC and Rover 3500 Vitesse but the use of their development names was and still is common.

Another is just the incorrect reference to Del Boys yellow three wheeler in OFAH as a Robin Reliant when it really is a Reliant Regal Supervan III.